It’s delays and parleys for now
Now you see it, now you don’t: now a breakthrough, now a deadlock! This is for now the state of Pakistan-US relations.
Latest troubles unfolded as Washington decided an apology to Salala is not on. The reasons lie between US politics and Washington’s belief that April 15 attacks in Kabul were supported by Pakistan since Haqqani group, which Pakistan supports, is responsible for the attack. Also more recently the new al-Qaeda chief Ayman al-Zawahiri’s video message taking responsibility for the kidnapping of the elderly American citizen few months ago from Lahore, has prompted the US Secretary of State to claim that Zawahiri is also based in Pakistan. Clearly, the Islamabad-Washington divide on these matters is growing wider.
Meanwhile, Pakistan’s contribution, in this current impasse, especially over the main stumbling block which is the apology issue, is that Islamabad advised Washington to hold back on apology because the government believed that if the apology came after the reset recommendations by the parliament, which was to include a demand for apology, it would earn the government political kudos.
Between Washington’s readiness to apologise and Islamabad’s decision to suggest delaying the apology, events like the end February burning of the Holy Quran by the US troops and April 15th attacks took place and complicated the matter. After his February 23rd apology to the Afghan people for the Quran burning, Washington refused to accede to Islamabad’s request to pre-pone the apology. Two apologies in a row, Washington decided weren’t politically viable. When Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani told her counterpart in London that Islamabad has changed its earlier position and they could now receive an apology, Secretary Clinton politely expressed Washington’s inability to do so.
The recent debate in Pakistan on terms of engagement with the US too was prolonged. That also complicated matters, created new issues and momentum in the re-engagement process was lost.
The issues of different approaches to dealing with the problem of terrorism and how to transition in Afghanistan and no less lack of trust, remains the hurdle in normalisation of Pakistan-US ties. Against this backdrop, the reset with the parliament’s involvement seems to have become inconsequential for the actual relationship.
Not surprising then that Pakistan’s ambassador to the US Sherry Rehman since her appointment has spent more time in Islamabad for consultations to sort out these pressing matters with the top political leadership and her American counterpart here. Tasked to untangle the deadlock, from Washington her statements repeatedly had assured the Obama Administration that the parliamentary debate will soon be over. To Islamabad, her message was also the same. But in Islamabad, the process and the politics seemed to have overtaken the objective and the goals of the core issue which was the Pakistan-US relations.
Several rounds of parleys at various official, diplomatic and political levels seem to have ended in a deadlock and patience is running thin at both ends. Washington is back to resorting to its old pressure tactics to make Pakistan yield to its demands.
Again there is a move in the US Congress to make aid to Pakistan conditional to re-opening of land routes for Nato and cooperation in counter-terrorism efforts with a long wish-list with a chorus of “do more”. Washington’s pressure on Islamabad for action against Hafiz Saeed and other militant groups in the country mounts. This has prompted another round of war of words with Pakistan rejecting such claims and seeking solid evidence. In a rare public reaction from Pakistan Army, the Corps Commander of Peshawar also hit back at the US the other day saying that the US was making Pakistan as a scapegoat to cover its own shortcomings in Afghanistan. The US government has now also clearly conveyed to Pakistan that it will not move any legislation to establish Reconstruction Opportunity Zones in FATA.
Curiously on top of all this it suddenly dawns on our Defence Minister, after a six-month blockade of Nato supplies, that Pakistan could face sanctions if routes not reopened! That it would be a violation of international conventions. This late awakening weakens Pakistan’s position unless of course the government is trying to use this as a pretext and a face-saver for reopening the routes given the warnings from the US. Also, this could be an attempt by the government to blunt criticism from the Opposition and to minimize the likely political-cost attached to lifting ban on Nato supplies with the general election less than a year away.
On the drone issue the US Administration has now made it loud and clear that drone strikes will continue and further intensify as it was linked to its national security. Hence Pakistan’s contention that these strikes are illegal, violate the international law and sovereignty has been rubbished. Pakistan needs to revisit its drone mantra and linking end to drone strikes to restoring Nato supplies. So this issue needs to be reframed taking a more realistic view.
Pakistan is unlikely to participate in the Chicago summit. The expected invitation to the President or the Prime Minister did not come. Between Washington’s heightened public complaints on Pakistan not doing enough on terrorism and Pakistan not opening the NATO supply routes, for now it seems to be a deadlocked situation. Despite the dialogue that has continued and various delegations visiting each other’s capitals, no breakthrough is imminent.
Pakistan-US relations for now seem to be caught between diplomacy and domestic political compulsions on both sides. Perhaps today the relations are at a worst point than where they were after the November 2011 Salala attack.
The writer is a senior journalist and has been a diplomatic correspondent for leading dailies. She can be reached at: qudssia@hotmail.com