With the Obama Administration preparing to ramp up pressure on Pakistan, two former top US officials have said this policy of “stick” should accompany “carrot” too, arguing that Washington can’t afford to do away with Islamabad at this point of time.
“Given the distrust in the relationship, the United States may be tempted to escalate its indirect conflict with Pakistan over Afghanistan, break any pretense of cooperation, and instead seek to contain the Pakistan-based insurgency to prevent it from operating in Afghanistan, India, or elsewhere,” said Stephen Hadley and John D Podesta in article in July-August issue of the Foreign Affairs magazine.
“Proposals for ramping up pressure on Pakistan include increasing the drone strikes, conducting US Special Forces operations in the country, cutting Islamabad off from international financial resources, labeling Pakistan a state sponsor of terror, and imposing sanctions,” they wrote.
“But ending cooperation with Islamabad would considerably undermine US interests in the country. And given the resiliency of the Taliban insurgency and the inability of the Afghan government to support itself, such a break is unlikely to achieve US goals in Afghanistan, either,” wrote Hadley and Podesta.
While Hadley was the National Security Advisor under the US President George W. Bush, Podesta was the White House Chief of Staff under President Bill Clinton, from 1998 until 2001.
“The United States should thus attempt to de-escalate tensions with Pakistan and restore security and political cooperation.
Washington should maintain the ability to act unilaterally in cases in which the United States’ immediate security is at risk or if renewed cooperation with Islamabad fails. But this approach will prove too costly – for both the United States and Pakistan – if pursued over the long term,” they wrote.
