After 9/11, Pakistan
rendered unconditional support to the US forces for undertaking operations in
Afghanistan. Since then, it’s a common perception that the former President
Pervaiz Musharraf buckled down under US pressure and compromised on national
security. While the decision would always be termed controversial, there is no
doubt that those days USA’s unilateralism was at its peak, there was a strong demand
in USA to avenge 9/11, that UN and the entire international community was
backing USA and India had already offered all out support to the USA for action
against the Taliban.
Now after over 10 years,
the Americans in general are sick of war on terror, their economy is sliding
down at a fast pace and USA no longer enjoys the kind of moral support to
continue operations in Afghanistan or to open up a new front against Pakistan.
As such, Pakistani leadership is under least pressure as compared to what Musharraf
faced ten years back. However, notwithstanding the leverage the Pakistani
leadership now enjoys, it must refrain from rhetoric which some of our
politicians are resorting to for self projection. It is time for the political
leadership to be the architects of Pakistan’s foreign policy, especially
vis-a-vis USA, and they must ensure that the decisions on the PCNS
recommendations are taken in the best national interest keeping the bigger
picture in mind, giving due cognizance to the internal situation, the regional
scenario and the international environment. A few aspects which we normally
hesitate to discuss on the media but must be given due consideration while
taking decisions on future Pak-US relations, are covered in the succeeding
paragraphs.
USA HAS ALREADY GIVEN ITS
EXIT PLAN FROM AFGHANISTAN AND COMMITTED TO WITHDRAWAL OF ITS FORCES BY 2014.
THOUGH DOUBTS DO EXIST ABOUT THEIR SINCERITY, PAKISTAN MUST PROVIDE WHATEVER
FACILITIES ARE NEEDED FOR THE PURPOSE AND MUST NEVER GIVE AN EXCUSE TO THE AMERICANS
TO PROLONG THEIR STAY IN AFGHANISTAN DUE TO NON-AVAILABILITY OF SUPPLY OR
WITHDRAWAL ROUTES. PAKISTAN MAY EVEN SEEK AND WELCOME UN’S ROLE IN THIS REGARD.
Pakistan enjoys immense geo-strategic
importance as a gate-way to Central Asia and beyond. Accordingly, Balochistan, today, has gained a centre stage as a future
‘international strategic corridor’, a development which Pakistan can exploit to
her advantage. Pakistan’s unwillingness to oblige may result into foreign
sponsored surge in Independent Balochistan movement, having serious
ramifications for Pakistan’s integrity.
USA has developed a strategic
partnership with India and vying to carve out a role for her in Afghanistan, a
major reason of recent animosity between Pakistan and USA. In my view, however,
this fear is ill-founded as, I am sure, Indian leadership is not that naive so
as to take the risk of directly confronting the Taliban and face the consequences.
With India in, if they do, the endgame in Afghanistan would surely be a
far-fetched dream. The Americans, as well as the Indians, know it.
THE PARLIAMENTARIANS MUST
BE CLEAR ABOUT THE STATUS OF ISAF AND US FORCES OPERATING IN AFGHANISTAN,
BECAUSE IN GENERAL PERCEPTION THEY MAY BE CONSIDERED AS OCCUPATION FORCES,
WHEREAS, THE HARD REALITY IS THAT THESE FORCES ARE MANDATED BY UN AND FULLY
SUPPORTED BY THE LEGITIMATE AFGHAN GOVERNMENT. SECONDLY, EVEN IF THE PAKISTANI
MASSES PERCEIVE THE ISAF / US AS OCCUPATION FORCES, DO THE MAJORITY OF AFGHANS
ALSO FEEL THE SAME WAY AS WE MUST REMAIN RELEVANT TO THE AFGHAN PEOPLE IN THE
ENDGAME? IN ANY CASE, AFGHANISTAN IS NOT A PAKISTANI SATELLITE AND HAS THE
RIGHT TO TAKE ITS OWN DECISIONS.
In the third week of November 2011, an
Afghan Jirga comprising 2000 representatives agreed on strategic partnership
with United States. Unfortunately, the jirga did not demand withdrawal of US
forces from Afghanistan as a pre-condition and instead demanded that the USA
must side with Afghanistan if a third country tried to attack it. We should have no doubt as to what was meant
by the ‘third country’. This is the kind of hostility we have earned in the
last ten years because of our role in Afghanistan, a strategy which needs to be
reversed.
The parliamentarians must also take
cognizance of the fact that in Pakistan’s chequered history, it’s probably the
first time that US Administration is inclined to deal with the political
leadership instead of the military establishment. As such, while peoples’
perceptions may influence but should never dictate the decision-making, which
must be based on prudence, realism and in the best national interest.
WHILE FINALIZING THE CONTOURS OF OUR
FUTURE RELATIONS WITH THE USA, WE MUST ALSO KEEP IN MIND THE ROLE IT PLAYS IN
PAKISTAN’S ECONOMY AND THE INFLUENCE IT HAS ON INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL
INSTITUTIONS.
And finally, since foreign policy flows
from internal dynamics, in these defining moments, WE AS A NATION HAVE TO
DECIDE ONCE AND FOR ALL WHETHER TO REMAIN RELEVANT TO THE INTERNATIONAL
COMMUNITY OR BE ISOLATED, GIVEN USA’S LEVERAGE THE WORLD OVER. For making the
right choice, rhetoric apart, we must critically deliberate on the factors that
impinge on our sovereignty and have put us in a state we are in. In this
regard, the media must play a very positive role to educate and not agitate the
masses, without fear of reprisals from the terrorists. In my considered view,
we have no choice but to put our own house in order if we are to face the external
challenges up front. An internally destabilized, religiously polarized,
ethnically divided, economically unviable and foreign aid dependent nation, led
by inapt / corrupt leadership, has to relinquish its sovereignty and that is
the issue we need to tackle at priority and if we can do that, the others,
including USA, would automatically start respecting our sovereignty.
THUS, BARRING RECOMMENDATIONS ON
FOREIGN SPIES AND PROVISION OF BASES WHICH SHOULD NOT EVEN BE CONSIDERED AS
OPTIONS, DECISIONS ON THE REMAINING, INCLUDING THE REOPENING OF SUPPLY ROUTES
MAY BE TAKEN IN THE LARGER NATIONAL INTEREST, AS PER DICTATES OF THE GROUND
REALITIES AND WITHOUT FEAR OF US’S UNILATERALISM OR INTIMIDATION BY THE
TERRORISTS. SHYING AWAY FROM TAKING DECISIONS AT THIS CRITICAL STAGE, AS SOME
OPPOSITION PARTIES ARE RESORTING TO ON ONE PRETEXT OR ANOTHER, WOULD BE
EXTREMELY DETRIMENTAL TO OUR NATIONAL CAUSE.
No comments:
Post a Comment