punjabics.com


At the receiving end of Trump



BY ARIF NIZAMI

Need for cool introspection

Our security and foreign policy mandarins were in for a rude shock on New Year’s Day. Finally, the mercurial and acerbic US president through a signature early morning tweet had formally put Pakistan on notice.

At 4 am on Monday Trump tweeted that the US has given Pakistan more than 33 billion dollars in aid over the last 15 years, “but they have given us nothing but lies and deceit”. Giving a ‘no more’ warning to Islamabad rather than the previous ‘do more’, with a single tweet the US president incrementally raised the ante.

Much to the chagrin of our policymakers, they belatedly realized that the proverbial has finally hit the fan. Last August Trump enunciating his South Asia policy, had warned Pakistan to shut down terrorist safe havens on its soil, failing which he cautioned, Islamabad should be ready to face the consequences. Since then there has been a bevy of stern warnings emanating from senior members of the administration.

Only a few days ago the US vice president Mike Pence during a surprise visit to Afghanistan in a terse admonition – perhaps the harshest since 9/11- said that the days of providing safe havens to terrorists by Pakistan were over. According to him, “Trump has now put Pakistan on notice.”
The US administration’s latest move to completely shut down security assistance for Islamabad should not have come as a big surprise for our policymakers. This includes money owed to Pakistan for services rendered under the CSF (coalition support fund). According to fresh estimates by this move, Islamabad will be deprived of 2 billion dollars of military assistance.

Thankfully Pakistan’s reaction to America’s Gung-ho diplomacy has been somewhat muted. Unlike in the past we have not rushed to shut down the NATO supply route to Afghanistan through Pakistan.

Of course, our military and civilian spokesmen are sticking to their usual oft-repeated mantra, that we have done nothing wrong, insisting that we are a victim of terrorism and not its perpetrator. We contend that rather than providing safe havens to the militants we are rooting them out without making any distinctions.

We lament that as a consequence of a US-India nexus we are being rubbed on the wrong side, and that the US is blaming Pakistan for its consistent failures in Afghanistan. It is obvious that in the graveyard of empires – where the British while playing the Great Game were severely mauled and more recently the Soviet forces had to withdraw in ignominy – the US is fighting the longest war in its history.

It is but natural that the Trump administration is conveniently blaming Pakistan for its consistent failures on the ground in Afghanistan. Unless the Taliban are militarily in retreat, talks for transition to any kind of consensual broad-based government will be meaningless.

Thankfully Pakistan’s reaction to America’s Gung-ho diplomacy has been somewhat muted. Unlike in the past we have not rushed to shut down the NATO supply route to Afghanistan through Pakistan.

Previously Islamabad was tasked to bring the Taliban to the negotiating table. All such moves failed partly owing to the ground realities in Afghanistan and partly because Washington’s perception that the ISI (Inter Services Intelligence Agency) was playing a double game – hunting with the hounds and running with the hares.

According to a US watchdog SIGAR (Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction), the Afghan Taliban as of August last year – roughly when Trump enunciating his new South Asia policy launched his salvo against Pakistan – controlled 13 percent of the 407 districts of Afghanistan. Roughly 33 percent of Afghan territory was under Taliban control or influence compared with 11 percent in February.

Obviously as the security situation which is much beyond the capacity of the Afghan forces has deteriorated so has Pakistan’s credibility with Washington.
While most of the political parties have with one voice lamented the US moves against Pakistan, the PML-N chief, former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif chose to go out on a limb. Like it has become his norm since his ouster, he implicitly blamed the khaki policy makers for the current impasse.

In his presser after his return from a still mysterious trip from Saudi Arabia, he wondered loudly why the world did not take Pakistan seriously. He underscored, “the need to examine our character and actions with sincerity.” According to him even his patriotism has been, questioned for calling a spade a spade.

It is hard to disagree with Sharif’s narrative. But coming from him at this juncture sounded rather odd.

How can a person who has been thrice prime minister, completely delink himself from the security and foreign policies of the past decades? During the four years of his tenure that only ended last July he jealously kept the portfolio of foreign affairs with himself.

The PML-N government at the federal level and in the Punjab still rules the roost. Sharif could simply ask his handpicked Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi to convince the military leadership to follow the party chief’s sane advice.

Actually, ground realities are somewhat different. The so-called NAP (National Action) that was formulated three years ago after developing complete consensus between the military and civilian leadership, still remains largely unimplemented.

In fact, there was active resistance from the Punjab government to deployment of paramilitary forces to weed out terrorists holed in the province. Only after a lot of prodding the Chief Minister Punjab Mian Shahbaz Sharif relented.

At one time the Sharif government was willing to sit with the Taliban for a negotiated settlement. When the head of the TTP (Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan) Hakimullah Mehsud was killed in North Waziristan in November 2013 in a drone attack the Taliban pulled the plug on the charade of peace talks.

At the time then Interior Minister Nisar Ali khan famously lamented that the drone attack was on peace. Actually, Sharif and his PML-N outfit historically has remained not part of the solution but part of the problem.
The former US ambassador to the UN, Afghanistan and Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad in an article in the National Interest magazine ominously titled, “it’s time to end Pakistan’s double game” has advised the US administration to engage people of Pakistan through Nawaz Sharif.

According to him Sharif in his latest statement has called for abandoning “self-deception” by Pakistan. Khalilzad who is a vocal critic of Islamabad’s alleged support for the jihadists and the Haqqani network considers the former Prime Minister important as ‘his family dominates the largest province Punjab and his brother most likely will be the next prime minister’.

But mea culpa is his advice to the Trump administration, “to consider how to help mobilize civilian opponents of support for terror (in Pakistan) against the military supporters.”

Rather than falling prey to the hawkish elements in the establishment and the section of the media Pakistan has given a measured response in the face of Washington’s bullying tactics. But also unlike the past this time bullying by the US carries a price tag too.

Hence it is axiomatic that Pakistan makes sincere efforts to develop a Modus vivendi with the Trump administration. Of course, maintaining our self-respect and paying a price for it is important.

However, we should not only weed out terrorists using our territory for adventures in the neighbourhood but also be seen and recognized for doing so. Right now, there is a wide credibility gap that needs to be filled. We simply cannot afford further damage to our international standing even with some of our friends.

Arif Nizami

Source: Pakistan Today, JANUARY 7, 2018


Trump-Modi nexus worries Pakistan

Baqir Sajjad Syed | Syed Irfan Raza

ISLAMABAD: The Fore¬ign Office on Wednesday was worried by the recent Indo-US joint statement and expressed the concern that it could add to tensions between Pakistan and India.

“The joint statement is singularly unhelpful in achieving the objective of strategic stability and durable peace in the South Asian region. By failing to address key sources of tension and instability in the region, the statement aggravates an already tense situation,” the FO said in response to the Indo-US joint statement, titled ‘Prosperity Through Partnership’ that was issued on Tuesday after President Donald Trump’s meeting with Prime Minister Narendra Modi at the White House.

The FO is concerned about the statement’s strong language on terrorist attacks that India alleges originated from Pakistan, and about the US not raising the issue of human rights violations in India-held Kashmir (IHK) and the US sale of high-tech military hardware to India.

The statement had noted: “The leaders called on Pakistan to ensure that its territory is not used to launch terrorist attacks on other countries. They further called on Pakistan to expeditiously bring to justice the perpetrators of the 26/11 Mumbai, Pathankot, and other cross-border terrorist attacks perpetrated by Pakistan-based groups.”

The latest statement is believed to contain the strongest wording so far on alleged cross-border incidents and “Pakistan-based groups” as compared to joint statements issued by the two countries in the past, although all carried similar messages.

The US had, ahead of the Trump-Modi meeting, listed Hizbul Mujahideen leader Syed Salahuddin as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist, a move hailed by India as evidence of US cooperation against terrorism.

Syed Mohammed Yusuf Shah, or Syed Salahuddin, was born and raised in Soibugh, Budgam, in the Kashmir valley.

Hizbul Mujahideen leader Syed Salahuddin listed global terrorist; Nisar claims US now speaking India’s language

He was influenced by the Jamaat-i-Islami during his time at university and became a member of its chapter in Jammu and Kashmir.

In 1987, Yusuf Shah decided to contest the J&K assembly election on the ticket of the Muslim United Front. He came second after Ghulam Mohiuddin Shah of the moderate National Conference won the seat and was arrested and put in jail for his violent agitations.

After his arrest for violent protests and release in 1989, he joined the Hizbul Mujahideen, founded by Mohammad Ahsan Dar alias “Master”, who later parted ways with the organization. Salahuddin took over as chief in 1990 and then adopted his current name after Salahuddin Ayubi, the 12th century Muslim military leader who fought in the crusades.

The pronouncements are particularly worrisome for Pakistan given that the Trump administration is in the final phase of formulating its South Asia policy and the indication from this statement is that the US could be inching closer to the Indian position on alleged cross-border incidents.

“Pakistan has been the primary victim of terrorism in the region. Pakistan’s contributions and sacrifices in fighting terrorism are unmatched. No country has sacrificed as much as Pakistan, not only in material resources but in lives,” FO said.

The FO further underscored that Pakistan was making steady progress “in eliminating terrorists and their networks from our soil without discrimination”. It reiterated the commitment to “bring the fight against terrorism to its logical conclusion by eliminating this scourge from our soil.”

Pakistan, the FO said, expected the international community to unequivocally stand with it in this fight against terrorism.

The FO recalled that India, which was seeking to appropriate a leadership role in the fight against terror”, was behind terrorism in Pakistan by supporting the Tehreek-e-Taliban (TTP) “as a proxy”.

Without mentioning Salahuddin’s designation, the FO said US move was unacceptable.

“Any attempt to equate the peaceful indigenous Kashimiri struggle with terrorism, and to designate individuals supporting the right to self determination as terrorists is unacceptable,” it said.

The FO regretted that President Trump did not use his meeting with PM Modi to nudge him to make peace with its neighbour. It said it was “missed opportunity” for pushing India to “alter its policies inimical to peace in the region” and end “persistent gross human rights violations in Kashmir and state backed persecution of religious minorities in India”.

Pakistan, it recalled, firmly believed in the legitimacy of the Kashmir cause and supported Kashmiris struggle, but was at the same time “ready and committed to resolve all outstanding disputes, especially Jammu & Kashmir, with India through peaceful means and in accordance with UN Security Council resolutions”.

Defence cooperation

The Indo-US joint re-emphasised the growing strategic convergence between the two countries particularly maritime collaboration; and the US offer to sell Guardian drones to India. US had also renewed its support for Indian candidature for Nuclear Suppliers Group and other export control cartels; and UN Security Council.

FO said Pakistan was “deeply concerned on the sale of advanced military technologies to India”. It observed that sale of high-tech military hardware “accentuates military imbalances in the region and undermines strategic stability in South Asia”. It noted that such encouragements from the US “emboldens India to adopt aggressive military doctrines and even contemplate military adventurism”.

The statement added that “transfers of modern military hardware and technologies as well as repeated exceptions made for India have dis-incentivized India to engage in efforts to establish a strategic restraint regime and a durable security architecture in the region”

Nisar concerned

On Tuesday, Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan also expressed the apprehension that the White House had started “speaking India’s language”.

“It seems that after Modi’s recent visit to the White House, the blood of Kashmiris is not at all important to the US, and international laws relating to human rights do not apply to Kashmir,” the interior minister said in a statement.

Accusing the Indian government of serious human rights violations in IHK, and of trying to paint “freedom fighters as terrorists”, Nisar said: “Indian acts should concern every principled nation.”

He said that deliberately overlooking the worst kind of state terrorism in IHK had not only adversely impacted the values of justice and international principles, but also exposed the double standards of powers who claim to champion human rights and democratic values.

The minister said the Pakistani government would not compromise on the rights of Kashmiris, and that the struggle would continue until they received justice as defined in United Nations’ resolutions.

He said the nation was united in sending a message of solidarity to Kashmir, and remained firmly committed to providing Kashmir diplomatic, political and moral support.

Source: Dawn, June 29th, 2017

Indo-US-Afghan nexus and Pakistan

Good governance and an effective justice system will go a long way in pulling Pakistan out of multiple crises including those
related to the Indo-US-Afghan nexus

Moonis Ahmar

Addressing a gathering at the Vivekananda International Foundation in New Delhi on October 25, Afghan President Ashraf Ghani ruled out his country’s participation in China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) unless Kabul is given access to Wagah crossing on the Indo-Pak border for its trade with New Delhi. He threatened to block Pakistan’s access to Central Asia if his country’s demand for a land entry via Pakistan for trade with India is not granted. Earlier, the Afghan President lauded Donald Trump’s new policy on South Asia as a ‘game changer’ and welcomed India’s new role in Afghanistan.

The possibility of Indo-US-Afghan nexus is not superficial but real as American tilt towards India and Afghanistan is not a new phenomenon. Since quite long, particularly after Trump’s election as president, growing Indo-US-Afghan understanding on dealing with what they perceive terrorist safe havens in the tribal areas of Pakistan tends to raise serious concerns in Islamabad.

Indo-US nexus is also talked about in terms of growing defence cooperation and dealing with China and Pakistan. But, if US-Indo-Afghan nexus is in offing, it would mean three major implications for Pakistan. First, deepening of strategic pressure on Pakistan as its two major neighbours and a global superpower will coordinate their policies to further limit time, space and options for Islamabad.

After concluding his week-long visit to Europe, Middle East and South Asia, US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson made it clear that, “Pakistan is a key partner for the stability of the region. We have a long history of positive partnership with Pakistan, but Pakistan should do more to eradicate militants and terrorists operating within its country.”

Indo-US-Afghan nexus would further deepen Pakistan’s dependence on China and to lesser extent on Russia for meeting its defence needs. In an interview to Arab News on October 9, Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi made it clear that his country will diversify the sources of its defence needs instead of remaining dependent on the United States by seeking Chinese, Russian and European sources of defence equipment.

It is yet to be seen how far and to what extent the military establishment of Pakistan can distance itself from the United States. Since early 1950s till the recent past, military to military relations between Pakistan and the US remained on a strong footing as Islamabad, albeit phases of rupture, remained a major recipient of American military aid and training.

The Afghan allegations against Pakistan continue unabated despite the goodwill which was created as a result of the visit of Chief of Army Staff to Kabul last month and the recent four-tier talks among Afghanistan, China, Pakistan and the United States in Oman

Furthermore, it is not only the matter of Pak-US defence cooperation since the day of alliances till the post-9/11 Pakistan’s tilt towards American led war on terror, the interests of civilian elites including bureaucracy and politicians also clicked with Washington as America provided them ‘safe haven’ in the form of good quality of life and better opportunities for them and their children. And it is not only the United States which promises a ‘safe haven’ to the elites of Pakistan, but it is the entire West which provides the elites of Pakistan, like many of the counterparts in the third world countries, opportunities for a better present and future life.

In view of the ground realities, it is rightly asked by those who question the rationale of periodic assertions by Pakistani political, bureaucratic and military circles about their defiance with the US the contradiction in theory and practice of their so-called anti-US and anti-West rhetoric. Third, age-old American influence in Pakistan means that the US has access to the individuals and institutions involved in formulating and designing what the Prime Minister, Foreign Minister and Chief of Army Staff assert a policy of not acquiescing to American pressure of ‘doing more’ to eradicate ‘safe havens’ of alleged terrorist networks in Pakistan.

In a hard hitting speech which he delivered in the Senate of Pakistan in a briefing session on October 26, Foreign Minister Khawaja Asif made it clear that, “we have not succumbed to the threat made by Trump from Fort Myer. We stood tall and will keep the posture before any power of the world. We are ready to help them, but will not become their proxy.”

One can appreciate what the Foreign Minister stated in his Senate briefing about Pakistan not becoming proxy of the US and his severe criticism on the past regimes who used to hand over suspects to the United States for dollars, but how far the present regime of Pakistan, no matter how defiant it is, can restore respect, sovereignty and integrity is yet to be seen.

In view of strategic consensus which exists between India, United States and Afghanistan on the alleged existence of ‘safe havens’ of terrorist networks in Pakistan, and Islamabad’s denial of American-Indian and Afghan allegations, there is a remote possibility of any transformation in the existing standoff between Pakistan on the one hand and Washington-New Delhi and Kabul on the other.

Surprisingly, the Afghan allegations against Pakistan continue unabated despite the goodwill which was created as a result of the visit of Chief of Army Staff to Kabul last month and the recent holding of four tier talks among Afghanistan, China, Pakistan and the United States in Muscat, Oman. Kabul’s hard line stance on Pakistan has become more visible after Tillerson’s visit to Afghanistan and the holding of talks between the Afghan President Ashraf Ghani and Indian Prime Minister Narandra Modi. It means that the pressure on Pakistan by the three countries that want Islamabad to follow their line of action on Afghanistan and regional security concerns particularly on terrorism is deepening.

For Pakistan, it is like a devil and a deep blue like situation: sandwiched between unfriendly India and Afghanistan and unabated American pressure to weed out what it calls the infrastructure of terrorist and militant groups, the only viable option is to put its own house in order by focusing of human and social development; eradication of corruption, nepotism, extremism, intolerance, radicalisation, militancy, violence and terrorism from society. Good governance, effective justice system and the rule of law will also go a long way in pulling Pakistan out of multiple crisis like economic, political and the crisis situation as far as the Indo-US-Afghan nexus is concerned.

Source: Daily Times, November 3rd 2017

Indo-US nexus ‘a threat to Pak security, CPEC’

Maqbool Malik

Islamabad - The deepening Indo-US nexus is posing new challenges to Pakistan’s national security and a threat to the multi-billion dollars China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) project which Beijing and Islamabad consider as a game-changer.

India is opening up its market to the US in lieu of high tech weaponry which Pakistan says would adversely affect the strategic balance in the region and the most serious concern to Islamabad is the threat of fourth and fifth generation warfare that is ‘non-kinetic’ warfare from India aiming at destabilizing Pakistan.

It was out of these challenges that Pakistan armed forces had taken the responsibility of securing the CPEC project.

The CPEC has pushed New Delhi and Washington to come closer and that is why the US is also now speaking the language of India about the multi-billion dollars project.

Analysts see the recent statement of US Secretary of Defence James Mattis about the CPEC project, which essentially aims at the uplifting economic plight of the people of various regions, in connecting with the changing scenario in the region.

The analysts viewing the CPEC project of strategic nature concede that India and the US believe that Pakistan has crossed the red line, therefore, it should be destabilized and isolated. What is that red line which they think Pakistan had crossed by contributing to the China-funded CPEC ?

Background discussions with defence and security experts revealed that the US wanted to contain growing influence of China, but Pakistan by giving China access to Arabian Sea through its deep-sea Gwadar port has annoyed not only the US but also India and that is why both are trying to forge a strategic partnership.

Leading defence analyst Lt-Genl (retd) Talat Masood agreed that as a consequence of the CPEC , there are new challenges to Pakistan’s national security . He viewed the Indo-US closeness as the main challenge, and hoped that Pakistan was taking appropriate measures to balance the situation.

He was of the view that India’s unabated attempts to destabilize Pakistan through dissident elements in Balochistan and Sindh as part of its fourth generation warfare strategy is a serious threat to Pakistan’s national security .

Gen Masood said that since Pakistan has been successfully countering India’s conventional warfare strategy, India has come up with the fourth generation warfare strategy, going beyond the conventional or kinetic warfare.

Pakistan and China on their parts are also taking appropriate steps to address new challenges to Pakistan’s national security in the wake of the CPEC . Some analysts believed that in view of the new scenario, when India has joined hands with the USagainst Pakistan and China, Pakistan needs to revisit its diplomacy.

Renowned defence analysts Senator Lt-Gen (retd) Abdul Qayyum also called for reinvigorated diplomacy by Pakistan to address the new challenges. He supported Pakistan’s engagement with the US as a positive development.

He also called for deepening of Pakistan’s diplomatic relations with China, Russia, and D-8 member countries to balance out the situation. He also called for highlighting human rights violations in the Indian occupied Kashmir.

Gen Qayyum was clear about India’s design in Pakistan and its attempts against the CPEC . “The arrest of a senior officer of the Indian intelligence agency RAW from Balochistan is an undeniable proof of India’s unabated attempts in destabilizing Pakistan”, Senator Qayyum said.

Source: The Nation, October 23, 2017

Pak-US relations under the Trump administration

BY HASSAN SHAHJEHAN

There are more than just the obvious players involved

Pak-US relations are always influenced by the US “South Asian Policy”. Starting from the era of the Cold War, when the US needed Pakistan to play a role against the spread of communism, it stood with Pakistan by providing it with military and economic support. And when US interests diverged with Pakistan, it adopted a different approach. For example, in the event of Pakistan’s efforts for nuclear weapon, the US slammed economic sanctions on Pakistan. Now, under the Trump administration, the US policy towards Pakistan will be influenced by five factors:

1) US relations with China.
2) US Relations with India.
3) US policy on Afghanistan.
4) US relations with Russia.
5) Pakistan’s relations with China and Russia.
Different scenarios in these factors would influence the US policy towards Pakistan.

The US relations with China will affect its policy towards Pakistan. If the US-China relations soar, it will disturb the Pak-US Relations. Trump has said that he would use “One-China Policy” as leverage to sort out the trade-related issues with China. Also, he emphasised on adopting a protectionist policy towards China. If the US follows such an approach towards China, it will complicate US-Sino relations. In that case, the US would need India as a counter-weight against China. It would translate into an increase in Indian leverage on the US. And India would use it against Pakistan, emphasising on the hard-on approach on Pakistan, leaving both Pakistan and India to decide their issues bilaterally with no interference on the US. Such an approach was followed during US-India relations under Obama administration. In such a scenario, US would not be able to play its role in the resolution of Pak-India issues.

Secondly, India could use its leverage on the US against Pakistan in the context of India’s allegations of terrorism from across the border. If India exploits its leverage on the US, it implies that India would work on ‘isolating’ Pakistan by spreading a narrative that Pakistan supports anti-India elements within the country that is disturbing the regional peace. In such a scenario, the US might continue its policy of ‘do more’ to further disturb Pak-US relations. However, the Indian narrative against Pakistan holds no truth. Pakistan has successfully managed to defeat the terrorists after Operation Zarb-e-Azb, the fact accepted by the congressmen visiting the North Waziristan.

However, if the US-Sino relations do not turn sour, and the Trump administration engages with China on the basis of ‘commonalities of interests’, then that would have different implications for Pakistan. One commonality between the US and China with reference to Pakistan is that both the countries want peace in South Asia. China is engaged in extending its economic relations within the region, as is evidenced from its OBOR initiative. And the US has its own economic interests and political interests in the region. A peace in the region would mean economic opportunities, in terms of investments, consumer markets and the business linkages. In such a scenario, both the US and China can engage with India and Pakistan to make a conducive environment for peace-building between both the nations.

Then, there is the Afghan factor. Both China and the US want a peaceful Afghanistan. For China, its OBOR project, particularly CPEC’s success, depends on peace in Afghanistan as it is the only link connecting China with the rest of Central Asia through Pakistan. For peace in Afghanistan, peace in Pakistan is necessary, which in turn, depends on Pak-India relations. For the US, it needs to end its engagement in Afghanistan on a success note – establishing peace in Afghanistan. In this scenario, the commonalities of US-China interests will influence the US policy towards Pakistan. Trump has already stated that he would play its role in the resolution of Pak-India disputes. However, if the US fails to have any successes in bringing peace in Afghanistan, it would still carry on with its policy of ‘do more’, blaming Pakistan for its failures in Afghanistan. And any further US demands of acting against the Haqqani networks and Afghan Taliban would further disturb Pak-US Relations.

Pakistan is also reviving in economic terms. The economic atmosphere of the country has improved, as evidenced from the International improved rankings for Pakistan. MSCI ranked Pakistan from the ‘frontier’ state to the ‘emerging market’. The Economist in its report described Pakistan as fastest growing economy in the Muslim World. CPEC is transforming the infrastructure and connectivity of the country. It has made Pakistan an attractive destination for investment. Britain, France and Russia, other than China, have shown their willingness to be part of CPEC. In such an environment, the US cannot ignore Pakistan. Previously, the Pak-US relations were primarily based on military factors. Now, after CPEC and the growing opportunities in Pakistan, the US would engage Pakistan in economic sector. In this context, improving relations with Pakistan, and especially looking Pakistan in economic terms is in the interest of the US. If the US has its economic interests in Pakistan, it would work for making peace between Pakistan and India to gain the benefits of regional peace.

Lastly, Pakistan is building up its relations with Russia. On Afghanistan, Russia, China, Turkey and Pakistan have engaged themselves in bringing Afghan Taliban on the negotiating table to make way for peace in Afghanistan. If the US views the Russia-China-Turkey-Pakistan nexus not in terms of anti-American nexus, it has more reasons for the US to engage Pakistan. Two factors are important in this.

1. Peace in Afghanistan is in the interest of the US
2. US-Russia relations have better chances for improvement as evidenced from Trump’s speeches regarding Russia.
Taking advantage of the commonalities in their interests, all the above-mentioned states, with the involvement of the US can work for bringing regional stability and peace. In this sense, the Pak-US relations can have transformative effects as well. However, if the US views this nexus against it, it would complicate Pak-US relations with the US building up with India, and then India using its leverage on the US against Pakistan. Therefore, the Pak-US relations depend on the US relations with China, India, Russia and the US interests in Afghanistan.

Hassan Shahjehan

Source: Pakistan Today, JANUARY 25, 2017

Trump-Modi nexus & regional stability

Dr Muhammad Khan

THE “New India” vision of Prime Minister Modi and President Trump’s vision of “making America great again” have indeed added a new dimension in the bilateral relationship of India and United Sates. Declaring India as a major defence partner, the joint statement, issued after the Modi-Trump meeting, “pledged to deepen defence and security cooperation”. As a proof of this cooperation, United States announced sale of 22 ‘Sea Guardian Unmanned Aerial Systems’ to India, which dawdled since 2016. This defence sale, the first ever to India by US would cost $2 billion. Besides, US agreed to sell Boeing C-17 transport aircraft of worth $366 million to India. It is worth mentioning that as per the arms sale purchase data of Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) India has attained the status of world’s largest major arms importer from 2012 to 2016 with 13% of global arms imports. From 2007 to 2016, India has increased its arms imports by 43%. Surprisingly, US has been the leading supplier of the defence equipment to India, ‘signing contracts worth more than $15 billion since 2008. After the Modi-Trump meeting of June 26, 2017 both countries have decided to work together on ‘advanced defence equipment and technology at a level commensurate with that of the closest allies and partners’.

Understandably, U.S has to revive its defence industrial complex and create job opportunities for its nationals. Then, in order to introduce new technological developments in war munitions, the older ones have to be disposed-off and India offered itself as the end user of these weapons and equipment. Earlier, Trump visit of Saudi Arabia could fetch for US over $400 billion which included $110 billion for military equipment only. Qatar is purchasing is F-15 US aircraft worth 12 billion and UAE worth $1 billion military hardware. Whereas, these defence purchases would significantly sustain the falling US economy, the regional stability of these regions would be endangered to a greater level. The Middle Eastern region is already in turmoil and the new purchase would further destabilize it to the likes of its strategic planners. In South Asia, a region with two nuclear powers (India and Pakistan) and China in the immediate neighbourhood, the US strategic partnership with India may not augur well for the regional peace and stability. The Indo-US enhanced cooperation with major focus on defence and security related aspects may initiate a new beginning towards regional conflict.

In this regard, the US callousness towards the resolution of Kashmir dispute has indicated its preferences for India. Then, declaring Syed Salah-ud-Din, a native Kashmiri leader and freedom fighter, as a global terrorist is total US leaning towards India. This announcement is in fact, disrespect to International Law, UN Charter, UN resolutions on the issue and many international covenants on human rights. In this regard, characters of three recent US presidents (Clinton, Obama and Trump) are questionable. They all promised a US role for the resolution of this core dispute between Pakistan and India, but surrounded to Indian wishes.

Out of many aspects of Modi-Trump Joint statement, terrorism remained another point of focus. With a commitment to be and act, “Shoulder-to-Shoulder Against Terrorism”, there was a mention of Pakistan, both directly and indirectly. Whereas, as a rhetoric India has been accusing Pakistan of ‘cross-border terrorism’, the US leadership and particularly President Trump should have a sagacity, familiarity and needed audacity to speak truth, as who is doing terrorism against whom. Indian political leadership and military commander including NSA have been publically claiming destabilizing, bleeding and disintegrating Pakistan into parts through an organized network of terrorism.

Indeed, American President should not tell a lie and cheat the world after an open confession of terrorism inside Pakistan by Indian RAW, Jadhav being a very recent case in point. US should understand as to who is the beneficiary of Uri attack, Pathankot, Mumbai and earlier the attack on Indian parliament in 2001. Does, U.S has any justification of Indian state sponsored terrorism inside Pakistan, the massive human rights violations in IOK and negation of its own sponsored UN resolutions on Kashmir. United States must stop deceit and double standards in South Asia. The role of Pakistan against the terrorism is un-parallel, what India has done against global terrorism, except terrorising Pakistan and Kashmiris.

In fact, the new heights in Indo-US bilateral relationship with major focus on defence and security will pose a greater threat towards destabilization of South Asia in particular and Asia in general. Beijing and Islamabad are major focus of Indo-US strategic alliance; the former as a peer competitor and later as its supporter. Since US mainland is thousands of miles away from South Asian region, therefore, any conflict in this part of the world will have serious consequences towards regional and international peace and stability where India cannot remain unscathed. Therefore, India must shun its malevolent designs of destabilizing the region by massive purchases of US war munitions and threatening postures towards Pakistan and China. On its Pakistan must enhance its diplomatic clout in all major capitals to enlighten the international community about the consequences of Indo-US defence collaboration and emergence of possible conflicts in this region.

Source: Pakobserver.net,

US tough talk could push Pakistan closer to
Russia, China

By Kamran Yousaf

Officials are holding low expectations for Pakistan in Trump’s new Afghan policy. PHOTO: REUTERS

ISLAMABAD: As the US President Donald Trump’s administration finalised its long-awaited strategy for Afghanistan, Pakistan is bracing itself for ‘tough time.’

Ahead of the announcement of the much-talked about strategy that will not only cover Afghanistan but the wider South Asian region as well, authorities in Pakistan are not hopeful of any positives and are instead preparing contingency plans.

Two senior officials familiar with the plan have told The Express Tribunethat Pakistan is contemplating various options to offset any fallout from the new US strategy for Afghanistan.

Officials admitted that given the signals coming from Washington, Pakistan’s patience would certainly be tested in the coming months.

In the event of any extreme US measures, one official revealed, Pakistan would be left with “no option but to seek even deeper and enhanced cooperation” with China and Russia.

China and Pakistan have a historic relationship spanning many decades, but cooperation has seen an unprecedented upward trajectory since Beijing announced the ‘One Belt, One Road’ initiative a few years ago.

Meanwhile, Pakistan’s relationship with Russia has also moved past the bitter Cold War hostilities. The two countries seem to have buried their past differences and are looking to cement their ties economic, political, and defence ties.

“If the US does not take consider our legitimate concerns and just toe India’s line, then we will certainly move closer to China and Russia,” the official said bluntly while referring to Pakistan’s first “contingency plan.”

Trump is believed to have already reached an agreement on the new strategy after his meeting with top security aides over the weekend.

Although the new plan has not yet been announced, it is likely to seek tough measures against Pakistan to persuade it to break its alleged nexus with certain militant outfits including the Haqqani Network.

A series of recent developments including statements from senior Trump administration officials suggested that consensus was emerging in Washington to talk tough with Pakistan.

A report in ‘Foreign Policy’ magazine claimed that Trump was mulling cutting off all military aid to Pakistan because he believes “Washington is being ripped off by Islamabad”.

Pakistani officials, however, believe that the US approach seemed to be aimed at “keeping us on our toes and under pressure”.

“Given the signals we are getting, we don’t expect anything positive in the new Afghan strategy,” commented the official, who requested that his identity is withheld because of the sensitivity of the issue.

“Because of Trump’s lack of experience in dealing with delicate strategic and foreign policy issues, certain elements are taking advantage of his naivety,” the official said.

Pakistan also gave its input to the Trump administration for the new strategy to end the war in Afghanistan. Islamabad’s emphasis has been on avoiding the use of force while stressing the need for peace talks to end the stalemate in the war-torn country.

The range of options that the Trump administration has been looking at includes sending additional troops to Afghanistan. “What difference can 4,000 to 5,000 additional troops make,” asked another official.

But Pakistan’s main worry is that whether the US will take any radical steps to push the country to do more in the fight against terrorism.

Washington has been consistently saying that Pakistan must not allow its soil to be used against its neighbours. US CENTCOM chief General Joseph Votel, who was in Pakistan recently, repeated the same demand after meeting the country’s top civil and military leadership.

This was despite the fact that army chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa told the American general that more than financial or material assistance, “We seek acknowledgement of our decades-long contributions towards regional peace and stability”.

Policymakers both in Islamabad and Rawalpindi are also upset by Washington’s decision to declare Hizbul Mujahideen a terrorist outfit. The Foreign Office publically spoke about it, calling the move ‘unjustified’ and ‘disappointing’.

“The US considers Pakistan’s help as key for bringing peace in Afghanistan, and when you hurt the interests of your ally, it will certainly create misgivings,” the official said while questioning the wisdom behind the US decision.

Source: The Express Tribune, Published: August 21, 2017












web counter
Thank You!












Send email to nazeerkahut@punjabics.com with questions, comment or suggestions

Punjabics is a literary, non-profit and non-Political, non-affiliated organization

Punjabics.com @ Copyright 2008 - 2018 Punjabics.Com All Rights Reserved

Website Design & SEO by Webpagetime.com