In recent years, analysts and Policymakers in DC have developed intellectual inertia concerning Pakistan. Nevertheless, they have continued to put forward analysis and policy commentaries based on realities that were true in the 1990s in Pakistan but are a million miles away from things on the ground today in Pakistan. Therefore, it is in the US interest that the most powerful empire on Earth employs the best intellectual capital in decision-making for South Asia and especially Pakistan.
US South Asia Policy is critical with China being the principal peer competitor of the United States in the current great power politics.
Historically US and Pakistan have enjoyed an excellent relationship, especially between the security establishment of both countries. Pakistan was instrumental in the defeat of the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, which resulted in Unites States’ Unipolarity.
Read more: Senate Elections – Welcome to Pakistan Politics!
Pakistanis paid the highest price in blood and sweat in the Afghan war
This relationship started soon after the birth of Pakistan on 20th Oct 1947. Liaqat Ali Khan visited the United States from 3rd May 1950 to 26th May 1950 and met Harry Truman. Pakistan signed the mutual defense agreement in 1954, was an essential member of the Central Treaty Organization (CENTO) and the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) from its adoption in 1954–to 55, and was an important United States ally during the Cold war. The relationship blossomed between 1958-and 1971 when General Ayyub and General Yahya were in power.
Pakistan even refused to join the 1962 Indo-China war, which could have led to Pakistan gaining some territory or the entire Kashmir valley. History suggests this is probably the costliest strategic mistake made by Ayub khan. Some argue that Ayub khan did not join the war as he did not want to upset the US-Pakistan relationship. Relationships again blossomed during General Zia and General Musharraf’s rule in Pakistan. President Eisenhower, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton, and George W Bush visited Pakistan in Pakistan’s 75-year history. However, relationships with democratic governments were never as good as with Military rulers overall.
Pakistan lost East Pakistan in 1971, and the Soviet Union-backed India prevailed
This defeat sprawled is anti-Americanism in Pakistan. Anti-Americanism worsened further with Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto’s removal and execution, the Pressler amendment, and Pakistan’s nuclear tests before 9/11. After 9/11, despite Pakistan declaring a major non-NATO Ally, there were many incidents where this relationship became complicated. Such incidents include the Mumbai attacks, the Raymond Davis incident, the death of OBL and the Salala incident, and differences in the Afghan war. More recently, Imran Khan’s government failed to establish a working relationship with the United States with the phone-call controversy, which never happened to the term “Absolutely not” coined by Imran Khan.
Western media portrays Pakistan as a highly backward, conservative Islamic country full of terrorists. It is a place where bombs go off 24/7. It is a place where media freedom, women’s rights, and education for girls does not exist. Pakistan’s military establishment is a rogue entity with nuclear weapons that must be taught some lesson. Western media also portrays Imran Khan as a clean-shaven Mulla full of anti-Americanism, and the list goes on.
These analysts comfortably brush over Pakistan’s cosmopolitan cities and its rich media, including social media. They skip over the fact that children of most affluent families study in western universities. They completely ignore the vibrant and growing private education sector in Pakistan. Pakistan produces roughly 32,000 doctors each year, and 40% of those end up abroad and some in the West. Pakistan is one of few 56 Muslim countries where elections take place regularly in some shape or form. It is also true that gender equalities exist in Pakistan’s education system, and roughly 22 million children of school-going age are out of school, out of which 44% are boys, and 56% are girls.
These analysts have not visited Pakistan for decades, where 64% of Pakistanis are younger than 30, and 29% are between 15 and 29. These kids have grown up in a global information age, with most of them having some internet access via mobile phones.
Read more: Pakistani politics in crises?
Comparing Pakistan with the most modern western states instead of its peers reflects this intellectual inertia and bias.
Hence a very bleak picture is painted
The United States’ clipping of Pakistan’s interests with its strategic partnership with India, which is deemed an existential threat by most Pakistanis, will prove to be a mistake in the greater geopolitical game in the region.
Unites states have never developed broad-based people-to-people relationships with Pakistanis. However, a broad-based relation can occur in exchange programs, cultural events, enough scholarships for higher education, US universities building relationships with their counterparts, and US media organizations interacting with local Pakistani broadcasters.
Such a people-to-people relationship will prove the most critical safeguard of US interests in the region.
Currently, United States’ ingress in Pakistani society is limited to specific individuals who had cut deals with the military establishment and the mullahs for their endeavors repeatedly in the past and lacked any credibility whatsoever in the public eye.
When such individuals or entities are given airtime or positions in the think tanks in DC, the US appears in collusion with such individuals with no credibility in the public eye. Such positioning does not serve the US interest well.
Read more: Applying game theory to Pakistan’s politics
Similarly, whatever are factors behind the current regime change in Pakistan, any efforts to replace Imran khan with the opposition parties will not deliver any lasting results. These political parties are already discredited due to corruption and cronyism. Now, this notion of being an American puppet will sow widespread discontent in the public, resulting in dangerous political turmoil in Pakistan.
The way forward
In the same vein, banking on Pakistan’s military without public or popular support in this global information age will force it to play a double game again, as alleged against Musharraf.
If there is a consensus that China is a peer competitor to the US in DC, then ignoring Pakistan does not suit long-term US interest in that region. On the other hand, if the noose is made so tight around Pakistan’s neck that it implodes, the first country affected by this mess will be India in the region, detrimental to long-term US strategic interests.
Pakistanis have sacrificed with blood and sweat for US strategic interests in the past. Pakistanis can play the most critical interlocutor in safeguarding future US interests in the region. However, this time around, the US must have a people-to-people relationship in the strategic interest of both the United States and Pakistan. Relying on the corrupt politician, generals, or discredited pro-American lobby in Pakistan will not deliver any tangible results for the foreseeable future.
The author is a Physician residing in the United States and a Faculty member at Brown University in Rhode Island. The views expressed in the article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Global Village Space.Â