Consensus, at last

On the implications of the recommendations

After a period of almost five months of tensions, finally a consensus has been reached on relations with the US and a conditional resumption of Nato supply routes through Pakistan. A unanimous agreement by all political parties in the Parliamentary Committee on National Security (PCNS) is no mean feat. Full marks to the chairperson of the committee Senator Raza Rabbani and his political bosses to achieve unanimity in a divided house.

Credit is also due to Nawaz Sharif for once again rising above narrow party interests for the sake of national consensus. In an overheated atmosphere of personal recriminations and attacks being hurled at each other between the PPP and the PML(N) during the past week, this is nothing short of a miracle.

The JUI(F) chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman also came around after a lengthy meeting with the president. Interestingly enough, the US ambassador to Pakistan Cameron Munter became so desperate for an agreement that he had to meet Nawaz and the Maulana rather than continuing to engage them in behind-the-scenes diplomacy.

The unanimous resolution adopted by the joint sitting of the parliament albeit full of platitudes is the most comprehensive document on foreign policy ever produced by a parliament of the country. Previously, it was only Zulfikar Ali Bhutto who as prime minister of a humiliated and dismembered Pakistan had the unanimous endorsement of the parliament to go to Simla in 1972for a peace deal with Indira Gandhi and engineer the return of 90,000 Pakistani prisoners of war (POWs).

Prime Minister Gilani, the quintessential consensus builder, addressing the joint session has proudly proclaimed that the sovereignty of Pakistan will not be violated by the US from now on. He disclosed that President Obama had assured him – when PM Gilani met him on the sidelines of the nuclear summit in Seoul last month – that the sovereignty and independence of Pakistan will be respected.

Whether the US President will be able to walk the talk and Pakistan will be in a position to implement the resolution in ‘letter and spirit’ is a conundrum facing most analysts. For instance, the resolution states that there will be no more drone attacks on our soil and this is good to placate the opposition but might be difficult to achieve in practical terms.

Drone attacks since the Salala incident have become fewer and far in between. But despite flawed rules of engagement resulting in scores of innocent civilian casualties, they still remain the most potent weapon in the hands of the US to kill high profile Afghan Taliban and Al-Qaeda targets in our badlands.

Given the Pakistani military’s understandable reluctance to launch a putsch in North Waziristan and a strict no-boots-on-the-ground policy, Washington entirely ruling out drone attacks sounds too good to be true. On the basis of credible human and electronic intel, the trigger-happy boys belonging to CIA’s Special Activities Division based in Orlando are bound to press the fire button.

According to secret diplomatic cables leaked by WikiLeaks last year, the COAS General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani not only tacitly agreed to drone flights but also requested the Americans to increase them in 2008. That was then. With the new rules of engagement and the Shamsi airbase vacated by the US after the Salala incident, it will be interesting to observe how the chips will fall now. With the stakes so high for the US in Afghanistan it is difficult too imagine that it will refrain from using this potent weapon in light of credible intel and the Pak military’s inaction.

A watershed in Islamabad’s relations with Washington was the killing of Osama bin Laden in his Abbottabad abode on May 2nd last year. This was the ultimate humiliation of the military and its premier intelligence agency the ISI as well as a serious breach of sovereignty by an ally.

It demonstrated the state of complete distrust between the US and its so-called major ally in the war on terror. Has anything changed in the past year? Probably relations have deteriorated on all counts. Merely resumption of humanitarian Nato supplies will not be able to repair the fractured relationship.

The PCNS has urged that Pakistan should actively pursue gas pipeline projects with Iran and Turkmenistan. Unfortunately, these projects will remain a pipedreams without Washington’s blessings. With Iran increasingly coming under more stringent sanctions, where is the money to build the pipeline going to come from? Under the threat of sanctions being applied, no foreign donor or even a consortium of Pakistani banks would touch the Iran-Pakistan gas project.

In the committee’s view, the US-India Civilian Nuclear Agreement, reached during George W Bush’s Republican administration, has significantly altered the strategic balance in the region. Therefore, it has urged that Pakistan should seek similar treatment from the US.

Judging by the budding strategic relationship between New Delhi and Washington, this is likely to remain a forlorn wish. India is fast acquiring the status of a mini-superpower being increasingly viewed as a counterweight to China’s growing military muscle in the region, both by Moscow and Washington. Recent acquisition of a nuclear powered submarine appropriately named Chakra from Moscow and America’s increased presence in Australia are meant to keep China at bay in the Indian Ocean.

Islamabad cannot expect to have the cake and eat it too. Frayed relations with Washington will require a lot of time to repair. Without changing our strategic paradigm, it might not be possible at all.

Expressing its anger at the US incursion in Bajaur earlier this year, Pakistan boycotted the Bonn conference. In the changed circumstances, Islamabad would expect to be invited to the Chicago summit on Afghanistan due next month. Hence coming weeks will determine whether Islamabad gets a place on the table determining the future of post-withdrawal.

The domestic fallout of the resolution of intent on foreign policy is not difficult to predict. The self styled Difa-e-Pakistan Council and its cohorts in the media are bound to cry ‘sellout’.

However, the hardliners in the PML(N) and JUI(F) will have a tough time criticising an agreement to which their party heads are signatories. The militants unhappy over a deal with Washington can step up their terrorist activities

Even the government might have bitten off more than it can chew. The military has got what it had wanted in order to do business with the US. However, it will be difficult to conduct day-to-day foreign policy and also keep the parliament completely on board. In order for such a regime to work, some kind of multi-party parliamentary overseeing system will have to be evolved.

The writer is Editor, Pakistan Today