Overestimating ourselves


We’re no match for the US

The parliamentary recommendations for re-engagement with US, in the wake of Salala attack, realistically speaking reflect our chronic obsession with overestimating ourselves and playing to the gallery, rather than taking an objective approach in resolving our differences with the sole superpower of the world.

The recommendations authenticated by the parliament have pushed us into a blind alley by adding an element of rigidity to the whole process. Any concession on these recommendations by the government can easily be construed as an affront to the parliament by its detractors and also provide enough ammunition to the rightist elements – who are deadly against resuming Nato supplies at any cost – to put the government in the line of fire.

The issue should have been handled by the government through normal diplomatic channels by showing leadership in this hour of crisis rather than succumbing to the pressure exerted by the establishment and other vested interests. The architects of the recommendations wrongly believe that Pakistan is in an absolutely unassailable position to dictate terms to America in the ongoing process of recalibrating the scope and nature of relations.

Asking a superpower to apologise for the Salala attack, stop drone attacks and treat Pakistan at par with India in regards to transfer of civil nuclear technology, is tantamount to wishing for the moon. The first thing to be remembered is that our relationship with the US is of a tactical nature and whatever assistance the US has given to Pakistan ever since it joined the war on terror can at best be described as disdainful patronage.

The US has always remained skeptical about our commitment, persistently raising an accusing finger at us for allegedly playing a double game with them. The discovery and killing of OBL in Pakistan, despite our persistent and categorical denials, has dealt a severe blow to whatever credibility we had. The consequences of this episode are quite evident. The Obama administration is now saying that Ayman al-Zawahiri is also in Pakistan.

This permeating mistrust of us is probably the reason that despite the claim by Pakistan that it tipped the US about presence of OBL in Abbottabad, the latter did not take it into confidence about the operation and has also not sought Pakistan’s involvement in the ongoing dialogue with the Taliban. Another very pertinent factor is that the policies of the establishment centring on the concept of strategic depth and continued confrontation with India have failed and done immense damage to Pakistan internally as well as on the global level. All these factors have contributed to lessening our clout in dictating terms either in regards to solution of the Afghan conundrum or overall ambit of Pak-US relations.

The ban on Nato supplies through Pakistan might have created some difficulties for US and Nato forces but these hiccups are not strong enough to force the US to accept our demands. The US has already made alternate arrangements with Central Asian states and Russia to use their land route for those supplies in the eventuality of a dead-lock with Pakistan. It can and is also in a position to airlift those supplies, may be at a much higher cost but that avenue in any case is also available to it.

The US has made it clear that it would not stop drone attacks. It has resumed drone strikes after parliament’s approval of the recommendations daring Pakistan to do whatever it can to stop them. Are we in a position to down them? Certainly not! The imperial pride of US will also not allow it to tender an apology to a country which is no match for it.

There is also no way US would agree to treat Pakistan at par with India viz-a-viz transfer civilian nuclear technology. Our record on nuclear proliferation also precludes any such possibility and above all treating Pakistan at par with India is also inimical to US strategic interests in the region. It is a well known fact that the US is trying to prop up India as counterbalance to China in this region.

Similarly the elements who lend credence to the view that the US is going to pull out from Afghanistan as per the declared schedule also suffer from naiveté of the first order. The US has not built bases in Afghanistan to hand them over to the Afghan government. There are already indications that it might keep its military presence in Afghanistan till 2024. Even if the combatant troops are pulled out by 2014, which looks a remote possibility, there still would be thousands of non-combatants troops staying in Afghanistan.

It is true that America is now desperately looking to re-engage itself with the states of Indo-pacific region, which it had abandoned in the backdrop of the reverses suffered in Vietnam and left it open to China. There is a very strong wave of opinion in the America to assume that responsibility which it could not take up due to its military commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan. It however does not mean that Afghanistan will be out of its focus.

The purpose of catapulting India as a regional power and giving it an enhanced role in Afghanistan, much to the chagrin of Pakistan, is designed to protect US interests in Afghanistan and possibly keep the door open for active re-engagement, if necessitated by the turn of events. America and its allies are determined to refashion the world before any real threat to their dominance re-emerges. The Arab spring and the manifestation of imperialism through UN in Libya, amply testify to their prowess and designs. The move by the present government to build regional linkages represents a positive paradigm shift that ultimately will benefit Pakistan but any abrupt disconnect with USA or the adoption of a hard line approach is not advisable.

Pakistan while dealing with US must keep in mind the harm that the US can inflict on it, the emerging scenario in the region and its own vulnerabilities. We may think that we are an indispensable part of the American picture of the world but the harsh reality is that we are no more than a tiny detail in the much bigger and long term game plan. Pakistan, to remain relevant to the unfolding developments will have to act pragmatically and make a new beginning unstuck from the hangover of the past and the fear of the rightist and reactionary elements.


  1. Yes but we want to be the first nation suicide bomb. That should pollute the atmosphere atleast

  2. The trouble with us is our macho mind set. We are ruled by a set of bullies, who feel that they can strut around the stage and say boo to everyone. We have had clowns like Khursheed Kasuri,Shah Mahmood and the great Tsunami Khan who would like to take on the US. Well, let them. All we will get is a bloody nose and much more.

  3. Pakistan has two trump cards in the international game scenario. One is its geographic location and the other are its 'Terror Assets' such as Al-Qaeda, Haqqanis, Let, JeM and mentors of all these groups. Pakistan has overly misplayed and misused these cards. Pakistan may have got short term gains by using 'Assets' but it has maligned Pakistan and created difficulties for Pakistan in negotiating any sort of deals with other nations. Had Pakistan used its geographical location wisely, it could have brought immense economical and financial benefits to Pakistan. But Pakistan has behaved like 'dog in the manger' (neither I shall play nor let others play). In northern areas of the subcontinent it is said ' na khelna na khelne dena, khutti vich mootna.' My languange may not be good but it conveys truely what I want to say. It is a sort of blackmail which do not bring very pleasant results. Even now, this location can be very beneficial to Pakistan, politically as well as economically, if Pakistani establishment has the 'will' to move in that direction. Pakistan should do it.

    • well done………….well written and as an afghan it is my voice……..Pakistan has played with us by the name of Islam. We afghans were in difficult situation when soviet invaded our country and we sought refuge in a country which we belived our islamic neighbour but were unaware that they want STRATEGIC DEPTH. Their eye was on our natural resources and they wanted to conquer our country but now they can see the result. They destroyed both countries Afg and pak. I hope they have got lesson from our history( Alexander, British, Soviet ).

  4. Part of the porblem of this macho mindset arises from some false notions.the mth that one Pakistanis is equal to 100 Hindus is wrong and proved to be so many times.Instead of focusing on poverty health and creating jobs wasting resources on these myths is not going to help.

  5. Another US plant like Moeed Peerzada.Majority comments come from either such trash already in US or aspiring to get in US.Such 'namak harams' should be condemned including this columnist.

    • Madarsa educated pakistanis have lost the ability to listen to the sane vioces. To listen only sweet words, even if factually wrong, creates its own problems. I may be allowed to mention some of those sweet words:Pakistan is a nuclear power and hence a world power. we can teach a lesson to India and destroy it within hours. One day we will conquer India with blessings of Hafiz Saeed and make islamised completely. We can overpower Afghanistan and so create a strategic depth. We can also teach a lesson to America by not allowing Nato supplies to pass. No country on this earth can do any harm to pakistan because we have ISI, Taliban, Let , JeM and a powerful terror organisation DPC which no other country can match. Above all, we are soldiers of Allah and have been sent to conquer this world. Allah is with us and we can kill all Kafirs (non-believers of Islam) and rewarded with 72 virgins. Happy now? So, remain happy in the world of your own make-believe.

  6. Quote

    NATO is about to hold its largest summit ever, with representatives from 60 countries and international organizations. In Chicago, NATO will be spending over $40 million on a meeting to talk about how to do more with less. Even without a mind reader in attendance, it sounds like a greater waste of money than the General Services Administration get-together in Las Vegas.

    And NATO’s new raison d’etre sounds awful weak. “With the financial crisis in Europe, severe deficit reduction measures in the United States and increased pressure on defence budgets, NATO’s added value is to help countries work together,” announces the NATO website. “NATO has the capacity to connect forces and manage multinational projects.”

    In other words, NATO is repositioning itself as a combination party planner and life coach for the military-industrial complex. It will no longer identify a larger civilizational goal for the alliance. It will simply connect members and help them work together. Maybe the next NATO secretary general should be Mark Zuckerberg.


Comments are closed.