Context

Without a doubt, Pakistan is entering a precariously delicate stage. On the surface, relations with India and US have stabilized, and Afghan reconciliation is making progress. However, hidden from public and media attention, a dangerous phase may have already commenced.

Two key simultaneous developments have come to light in this regard. One of them is the change in Pakistan’s threat perception: away from external and towards internal threats. The second one being the escalating US drone strikes against those militants Pakistan defines as good Taliban, resulting in the elimination of Mullah Nazir recently.

This leads to two emerging scenarios with both carrying dangerous implications.

Analysis

Firstly, in view of the smoothening Afghan reconciliation, Pakistan may have changed its position on the good Taliban. The reasoning being, some of these factions may become a liability in the future. Secondly, irrespective of the Pakistan’s stance on this matter, US has now decided to go after both the good and bad Taliban that attack coalition forces across the border in Afghanistan.

If the former is true, then Pakistan can expect reprisals from different brands of extremists that are loosely affiliated. The Jan 8th attack on the Indian side of the disputed LOC could be to circumvent and distract attention away from FATA. The anomaly being, it was India that first carried out the strike on January 6th against a Pakistani post. Nonetheless, this prospect poses a bad omen for election-related activities in Pakistan.

In the lateral scenario, the present tension between Pakistan and India fit the construct as well. However, Afghan reconciliation process will be impacted more in this case.

Next few days and weeks will be crucial to see which way the pendulum swings. In PoliTact’s previous projection, we had estimated that events support the argument that US and Pakistan are colluding on a new approach.

Consider this, Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar had claimed in November 2012 that the military and intelligence ties between US and Pakistan were now fully restored. These were severely damaged in 2011 in the aftermath of the Raymond Davis incident, Operation Geronimo, and Salala tragedy.

PoliTact further believes this restoration was based on certain conditions and red lines that US and Pakistan agreed on. From the Pakistan side, this may have involved agreeing to conduct joint operations. While on the US part, it may have meant more say for Pakistan in conducting the drone strikes.

When it comes to good and bad Taliban, Pakistan has already shown its acquiescence towards a terrorist label for the Haqqani network and thus to pressure them towards negotiations. This change is what created space for Pakistan to get involved in the Afghan reconciliation. US may have also offered capability assistance to Pakistan to go after the bad Taliban, the TTP affiliated groups.

This security cooperation from Pakistan resulted in the American decision to pay $688 million from the Coalition Support Fund.

The post Pakistan’s Threat Perception, Drone Strikes, And LOC Attacks appeared first on Politact.

Context

A sea change in the approach to Afghan conflict is coming to the fore. From primarily a military method, matters evolved to a strategy that involved fighting and talking at the same time. Now, NATO and US have thanked Pakistan for letting go of some high profile Taliban in detention, and for facilitating the Afghan-led peace process. Previously, Pakistan was blamed for not doing enough to crack down on Afghan Taliban residing in FATA.

On the other hand, the Taliban have claimed that the released prisoners are no longer important to the movement. Moreover, they declared, the peace process cannot move forward until the NATO forces withdraw. Meanwhile, after being labeled a terrorist outfit, Haqqani network recently asserted if Mullah Omar approves to move forward with the peace process, it would also follow suit.

The change in NATO strategy does not mean it is without options. While Pakistan has remained the focus of attention, recent events have pointed to the suspicious regional role Karzai government is increasingly playing, especially in FATA and Balochistan. However, while speaking at the Center for a New American Security, Leon Panetta reiterated the US position on November 20,

“Look, in many ways, the success in Afghanistan is dependent on having a Pakistan that is willing to confront terrorism on its side of the border and prevent (militant) safe havens,” the secretary commented.

Analysis

Afghanistan, Tribal Areas And Balochistan

During the US election campaign, President Obama stayed away from discussing Afghanistan in detail. Ever since Pakistan declared its acquiesce towards a terrorist label for Haqqani network, the harsher criticism from the American side has ceased. There is another noteworthy change in the region that came about in the aftermath of Malala incident. The US acknowledged that the perpetrator of the attack, Mowlana Fazlullah, was indeed hiding in the North East Afghanistan as claimed by Pakistan. Reportedly, an unnamed US official told The Washington Post “Finding Fazlullah is not a priority because he is not affiliated with al Qaeda or with insurgents targeting the US and Afghan interests.”

In other words, the US conveyed it is concerned about the Haqqanis, not the Fazlullahs. The Americans reciprocated Pakistan in kind. The major reason cited by Pakistan for not acting against Afghan Taliban is that it does not target them.

Earlier in August, Pakistan Interior Minister Rehman Malik had alleged that elements within the Afghan government were likely supporting Fazlullah. He told Reuters “I think some of the elements (of the Afghan government) there are supporters. Maybe state actors, maybe non-state actors.” The logic in the accusation is that same as that leveled against Pakistan for its role in Afghanistan.

Nonetheless, the point being that Pakistan is being destabilized from Afghanistan with the active support of Karzai government while NATO forces have intentionally decided to look the other way. This obviously does not bode well for Pak-Afghan relations and the envisioned economic integration of the region.

The Afghan role in the deteriorating situation of Balochistan has also come under focus. In March, Pakistan’s Interior Minister claimed that President Karzai had admitted some inference in Balochistan was taking place from Afghanistan. “President Karzai has promised to stop infiltration of militants from Afghanistan into Pakistan,” Rehman Malik told reporters.

Speaking to Pakistan’s Senate in August, Malik presented the recruitment and training process for those conducting terror-related activities in Balochistan. He elaborated that after receiving basic training in about 45 training camps, brainwashed youngsters are sent to Afghanistan to obtain advance training. For proof, he showed official letters written by the Afghan government to fund and support the activities of Brahmdagh Bugti and his followers.

Afghanistan And India

Another aspect of Pakistan’s concern with Afghanistan has to do with the nature of its ties with India.
President Karzai visited India for five days in mid-November. The two countries previously signed a strategic agreement in 2011 and India has already committed 2 billion in assistance for Afghanistan. During the visit, Karzai was not just seeking more investments, but also testing Indian limits in enhancing the capacity of Afghan security forces. As far as Pakistan is concerned, training of Afghan military forces by India is an extremely sensitive matter.

It is not clear what the US intentions are in regards to India’s military role in Afghanistan. Although India itself is wary of its military involvement, US has encouraged it to take on a more active role once NATO’s begins to limit its military presence in Afghanistan beyond 2014. There is obviously a risk that in addition to the proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan may also become a theater for tussles between India and Pakistan. In the wider politics of Middle East, the NATO and US tilt has thus far been in favor of Sunni groups. This stance is unlikely to change as long as Iran remains a bone of contention.

Afghanistan, Pakistan, And Iran

Although India has abided with western sanctions on Iran and in restricting economic affairs with the country, Afghanistan and Pakistan have continued to deal with it. The insistence of Afghanistan and Pakistan on diversifying economic and energy relations with Iran are few of the other complicating factors when it comes to US-Pakistan relations and the future of Afghanistan. While talking to a private TV channel at the D8 Summit in Islamabad, Ahmedinejad emphasized how Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan can solve many of the regional problems themselves, and foreign presence was the reason for the perpetuating conflict. While Afghanistan has signed an agreement with US allowing it’s military to remain there beyond 2014, Iran has alleged that US bases are being used to destabilize Iran and Pakistan.

(Iranian President also noted that Iran was ready to assist Pakistan in building the infrastructure for the controversial gas pipeline project.)

The Durand Line

Afghanistan also continues to play with Pakistan’s sensitivities when it comes to the Durand Line. The country went in to an uproar when Mark Grossman presented the US position on the issue. In an interview on Afghan TV on October 21, he stated: “Our policy is that border is the international border.”

While talking to reporters in Kandahar on October 23, the new US Ambassador to Afghanistan James Cunningham reiterated “The United States, as many other countries, have long recognized the Durand Line as the boundary between Afghanistan and Pakistan.”

Other commentary that surrounded the debate pointed to the fact that Pakistan’s alarm about Afghan intentions is not that out of place. In all three countries: Pakistan, Afghanistan and India, there are those who want to undo history.

While Pakistan is blamed for the cross-border attacks emanating from Waziristan, what has emerged is that the Afghans and NATO forces are equally at fault for the out of control provinces of Kunar and Nuristan. The security forces of Pakistan have repeatedly suffered under deadly attacks in Bajuar, Swat and Dir, from militants linked to Fazlullah faction. There are fears Taliban resurgence may once again be occurring in the area.

In response to inaction by NATO and Afghan forces, Pakistan is carrying out shelling across the border against the militants. However, Afghans claim the bombardment is causing civilian causalities.

A Senator from Kunar, Rafullah Haidari, commented in September “On the fourth day of Eid, tribal elders held a meeting at the provincial governor’s office and decided to declare Jihad against Pakistan’s invasion into Kunar province. The residents of Kunar are registering their names to defend their soil.”

Conclusion

While millions of Afghans are still in Pakistan, and while it has ruthlessly blamed the country for all that ails it, recent events shed light on the contagious role Afghanistan is willing to play in the region, including in FATA and Balochistan. As the Afghan led peace process moves forward, the nation is likely to use this leverage more and more against Pakistan.

The post Mounting Concerns Regarding Afghanistan’s Regional Motives appeared first on Politact.

Context

In the aftermath of the US Operation Geronimo that took out Osama Bin Laden, PoliTact has been monitoring the dynamics of China-US relations closely, especially as it relates to Pakistan. A number of high-level talks have also taken place between Pakistan and China, and China and the US. Moreover, we have noted one peculiar trend in the upsurge of attacks against the assets of the Pakistan Navy and beefing up of the naval capabilities of India. As the US adopts an aggressive posture towards Pakistan, it has also actively engaged Chinese political and military leadership. This article examines the dramatically altered security environment of South Asia since the unilateral US Osama operation.

Analysis

Pakistan China Relations

In the wake of the US Osama operation, President Zardari visited Russia on May 12 and Prime Minister Gilani’s traveled to China on May 17. Both trips signified Pakistan’s attempt to strengthen its relationships with the two key powers in the aftermath of US Osama operation.

Pakistan stated that Gillani’s trip to China would give fresh momentum to enhancing ties between Islamabad and Beijing. According to Pakistan’s Ambassador to China Masood Ahmed Khan, “One of the major targets of Prime Minister Gillani’s visit to China is to cement economic ties between our two countries.”

Pakistan has faced mounting international criticism following the discovery and eliminations of Osama Bin Laden on its soil. In these tense times, China has been steadfast in its backing, announcing “unswerving” support for Islamabad’s anti-terrorism efforts. “Pakistan has made very important contributions to international counter terrorism cooperation as well as great sacrifices,” said China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman, Jiang Yu, as Gillani commenced his trip to the country. “Indeed Pakistan is the victim of terrorism,” Yu added.

This is in addition to reports in Pakistan’s media indicating that China has warned an attack on Pakistan would be considered an attack on China, and that this was conveyed to the US during the recently concluded US-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue in Washington. If these reports are indeed correct, this would be the first time China has made such a linkage and it dramatically changes the geopolitics of the region and beyond.

The following key developments were also reported in the media since Gilani’s visit to China and carry wide-ranging implications:

• Pakistan and India would be offered full membership during the June 15 Shanghai Cooperation Conference Organization (SCO) summit meeting being held in Astana. Afghanistan is also likely to be given an Observer Status, for which it has applied against the wishes of the US. These developments are being interpreted as a move away from the South and Central Asian region – away from the NATO alliance and into the domain of a China-Russia dominated SCO.
• Statements from Pakistani officials revealed that China has agreed to take control of a key Pakistani port. According to reports, Pakistan expressed hopes that Beijing may also assist in building a naval outpost there. Pakistani Defense Minister Chaudhry Mukhtar appreciated the government of China’s decision to run the Gawadar port in Baluchistan, but said he would be even more thankful “if a naval base is constructed at the site of Gwadar for Pakistan.” The defense chief’s statement came after his trip to China, where he accompanied Prime Minister Gillani. However, China later clarified that it has not committed to construct a naval base.
• China will immediately supply fifty JF-17 Thunder jets to Pakistan, a Pakistani official stated. ‘We [Pakistan] will get these planes in weeks,’ he told reporters, adding that a formal deal to that effect will soon be signed. The official further said that China and Pakistan are already co-manufacturing the JF-17, but these fifty jets would be armed with more state-of-the-art avionics. According to the official, the war jets will be fully funded by Beijing and will help enhance Islamabad’s defense and improve the tactical capabilities of its air force.

The attack on Pakistan’s naval facilities followed these developments on May 22nd. A key question has now been raised: why are Pakistani Navy personnel and assets being attacked. Up to six gunmen attacked the heavily guarded PNS Mehran Base close to Shahrah-e-Faisal in Karachi on May 22nd killing 13 people, wounding 16 others and destroying at least two navy P-3C Orion maritime patrol aircrafts. Additionally, two Navy busses were also attacked in Karachi on April 26th, killing four people and injuring 56. The Pakistan Taliban (TTP) subsequently claimed responsibility for the attacks.

US-China Relations

US-China relations remained quite tense last year, particularly military to military relations. The United States has wanted to engage China in a comprehensive dialogue to gauge its strategic intent and to avoid potential mishaps, the possibility of which exists in the tense Korean Peninsula and increasingly in Pakistan. China’s defense budget escalated between 1999 and 2009 and is reported to be at $78bn in 2010, while US has the world’s largest military budget at around $700bn.

However, since last year, the US has actively and assertively engaged the Chinese leadership, represented by Obama’s visit to India and Asia pacific in November 2010. The Chinese president also visited the US in January of this year. The agenda for the summit included global trade imbalances, currency valuation, Iran’s nuclear program, global climate change, clean energy and North Korea.

Since the Osama operation, the top political and military leadership of the two countries have had a number of meetings. No doubt on the forefront of these leaders mind was the unilateral US Osama operation in Pakistan, which has altered the security situation of the region. China will have to find a balance between increasing assistance to Pakistan, who have expressed a wish to be less dependent on the US, and enhancing cooperation with the US in the region – not a balancing act easily carried out. On the other hand, these meetings provide an opportunity for the US to observe the Chinese reaction to the events in Pakistan and the Middle East, where NATO is playing an active role in Libya.

Top US and Chinese military officials held talks in Washington on May 15 to exchange views on the ties between the two armed forces as well as regional and international issues. The meetings were headed by US Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mike Mullen and Chief of the General Staff of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA), Chen Bingde. Welcoming Bingde’s visit, Mullen said that enhancing the military-to-military relations serves both countries’ interests, since there is significant scope for them to work together on several regional and international issues. Bingde expressed China’s willingness to cooperate with the US to enhance military ties. The issues discussed during the talks included anti-piracy initiatives, cyber security, counter terrorism and the Korean nuclear crisis.

Meanwhile, while attending the prominent Asian security conference, Shangri-La Dialogue, Robert Gates vowed for a long-term presence in Southeast Asia, He stated on June 2nd that the US wasn’t attempting to “hold down” China and that he doubts Beijing intends to match America’s military strength. The comments appear to mimic statements made by the Chinese Minister of Defense Liang Guanglie after Chinese military tested of J-20 stealth fighter jet earlier in the year while Robert Gates was visiting China.

“We cannot call ourselves an advanced military country,” Liang told reporters. “The gap between us and advanced countries is at least two to three decades.”

Other reports indicate the relation between the US and China bordering on conflict. A strategy statement on cyber security issued by the White House last month stated that the US “would respond to hostile acts in cyberspace as we would to any other threat to our country.” A Chinese military analyst warned the Pentagon’s first official cyber strategy is highly dangerous, with likely consequences of weapons races and even armed conflicts between nations. Li Shuiseng, a researcher at the leading military science academy of the People’s Liberation Army, commented that the new strategy was “fundamentally an attempt of the US to maintain its unparalleled global military superiority.” It provides the US with a new pretext to flex its conventional military muscles, Li added.

Clearly, US-China relations continue to tread along a delicate balance between cooperation and confrontation. It was just in August 2010 when the US Commander for the Pacific region (PACOM) Admiral Robert Willard stated that increasing Chinese assertiveness in South China Sea is a cause for concern and the country would take steps to counter. He added:

“Our purpose there is to maintain security, when you consider the sea lines of communication that criss-cross this very strategic and important region of the ocean, they carry the majority of commerce for this part of the world,” he said, saying the U.S. Navy would work with “our partners in the region”.

The Indian Connection

China has clearly determined to strengthen its relationship with Pakistan and is indeed taking steps to deepen it and not everyone in the region is happy about it. Indian intelligence claims it now has credible proof that several hundred People’s Liberation Army engineers are working in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir. However, it is still trying to verify if these engineers are involved in some form of military construction such as bunkers, or merely there for civil projects. This is in direct conflict with China’s official denial that its military was present on the Pakistani side of Kashmir. Reportedly, US intelligence agencies had in the past informed India of China’s military presence in the area.

Indian Defense Minister A.K. Antony stated in an interview recently it views growing defense relations between Pakistan and China with “serious concern” and believes it should improve its own military capability to confront the challenge. The remarks followed reports that Beijing plans to speed up supply of fifty new JF-17 Thunder warplanes to Islamabad.

It was a strange coincidence that Russian manufacturer of MiG aircrafts delivered another batch of five carrier-based MiG-29K/KUB fighters to the Indian navy last month, just as two navy P-3C Orion maritime patrol aircrafts were destroyed in an attack in Pakistan. India and Russia signed a $1.5bn contract in March 2010 for the supply of 29 MiG-29K Fulcrum-D carrier-based warplanes to New Delhi.

An Indian cabinet meeting agreed this month to a deal of over $4bn to purchase military transport aircrafts from aerospace firm Boeing. According to officials, this was India’s biggest defense deal with a US contractor. The deal for C-17 Globemaster III aircrafts, meant for carrying heavy equipment, was approved during a government’s cabinet committee meeting on security matters, said a senior government official. The defense ministry refused to talk about the contract but the official, who requested to stay anonymous, told the media that the cabinet had given clearance to purchase 10 C-17 planes in what would be a government-to-government sale. In January 2009, India signed a $2.1 billion deal with Boeing to buy six maritime surveillance aircraft for its navy.

China’s rapidly-growing involvement in infrastructure schemes in Pakistani-controlled-Kashmir and in the backdrop of a perceived Islamabad-Beijing military nexus targeting India, the concerns of the Indian defense establishment have heightened. A series of high-level military briefings to Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh have focused on the urgent need to boost the country’s military infrastructure, operational logistics and strike capabilities on India’s border with China. As a result, India will now deploy light observation helicopters and spy drones along its border with China in an attempt to keep an eye on the accelerated maneuvers of the People’s Liberation Army. The construction of more than 5,500 permanent bunkers and defenses on the borders is also being sped up to make sure they are completed within 4-5 years.

According to think tank Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, India has been the world’s biggest importer of weapons for the last five years. The country has increased its military spending this year to 1.65 trillion rupees ($36 billion) from 1.47 trillion rupees last year.

The Future

There is clearly a concern in Washington about the advancing economic and military capabilities of China. On the other hand, the US unilateral Osama operation which the Pakistan army was unable to detect, must have created anxiety for both China and Iran on the extent of US military reach.

The news about the Chinese desire to create a naval base in Gwadar was widely interpreted in US media and think tanks as a tactic inline with the Chinese “String of Pearls” strategy. However, American analysts also concluded that such a move was more a reflection of Pakistan’s wish as oppose to any real intent by the Chinese, especially in view of the deteriorating law and order situation of Baluchistan. Nonetheless, the analysts conveniently overlooked the growing anti-Americanism in Pakistan. In other words, if it would be difficult for the Chinese to develop a naval based in Gwadar due to the law and order situation of Baluchistan, its has become equally difficult for the US to operate in Pakistan as a consequence of growing anti-American sentiments.

This talk of Chinese naval presence in Pakistan has some parallel to how the tussles of the regional and global players are playing out in Syria. The Russians and Iranians naval presence in Syria is clearly in the spotlight as the Syrian situation deteriorates. Iran stunned Israel in March by signing a naval cooperation pact with Syria, to build a Mediterranean naval base at a Syrian port. This Iran-Syria pact is in addition to a naval base the Russian’s are building at the Syrian port of Tartous. Israeli analysts predict that Iran-Syria-Russia cooperation is meant to counter the US sixth fleet in the eastern Mediterranean.

It is in this context, the Russian Foreign Ministry on Sunday issued a statement making it clear that it won’t leave any elements of American strategic infrastructure close to its borders unnoticed and will see such measures as a threat to its security. Russia has expressed serious concerns over an American warship that is now moving toward its shoreline in the Black Sea, whereas the US sees it as a vital aspect of its plans to build a missile defense system in Europe, which Moscow opposes. USS Monterey, a guided-missile cruiser, is now participating in joint annual military exercises the “Sea Breeze-2011” carried out by Ukraine and NATO off Russia’s shores.

None of the global powers want a direct confrontation at this point. These actors are adopting a strategy similar to how the Cold War was fought using proxies and client states. The US however, is increasingly shifting from a soft power approach to testing Russia and China and their strategic intent, especially as it relates to the allies of these countries.

The post The Geopolitics Of South Asia After US Osama Operation In Pakistan appeared first on Politact.

Context

If there is anything that best defines the premise of the third round of US-Pakistan strategic talks, it is the November mid-term elections in US. America would be willing to give Pakistan some room, including military and economic aid; provided it can give Obama administration a boost before the election. This boost can come in no other form than the North Waziristan operation. These talks will be taking place just before Obama’s visit to New Delhi and NATO summit in Lisbon on November 19th. Thus, not only who controls US Congress is at stake but also the future of NATO. This article looks at the significance of US-Pakistan talks in the context of current regional and global geopolitical realities.

Analysis

US-Pakistan

Clearly, the American administration is at a crossroad when it comes to its stance on Afghanistan. This has been reflected by recent resignations of senior US officials. Both Pakistan and US will join the talks with a great deal of anger at each other. Pakistan recently demonstrated the use of one of its significant leverage when it blocked the Torkham supply route. On the other hand, US showed it can test Pakistan’s nerves through cross border aerial incursions, to include drones, helicopters, and possibly ground troops.

At this juncture, both parties need each other desperately. In the post flood conditions, Pakistan’s geopolitical stance is difficult to maintain absent US financial aid, and US would be relying on this more than any other variable, to gain the cooperation it needs in Afghanistan. Equally, Pakistan understands it holds the keys to an amicable Afghan solution, and in implementation of either the military or political approach adopted by the US. However, both allies give the general perception that they can do without each others help.

Both parties have tried to minimize the key leverage of the other party, but not with much success. The regional approach to Afghanistan has lead to the inclusion of India, and lately Iran, but it has also complicated the American dilemma. It appears as if US is willing to sit with one group of enemies to deal with another set of adversaries, and while the rivals are aware of it.

Another way to understand the US-Pakistan talks is the distinction; US is still the sole super power with global interests, while Pakistan at best is in aspiring regional power. The future of US global eminence is at stake in Afghanistan and this raises the criticality of Pakistan in this equation.

European Dynamics

PoliTact has previously claimed that the future of Afghan war is inextricably linked to what happens in Europe. Particularly the role of Germany and France, and their relationship with Russia. The emerging economic realities there have reformed and stratified the threat perceptions of European countries, where France and Germany do not necessarily share NATO’s vision in Afghanistan and other hot spots. UK and other European countries have also recently announced cuts in their defense spending. These pressures are playing an instrumental role in speeding up the peace talks in Afghanistan.

The heads of states of NATO are meeting in Lisbon on November 19 to explore a new strategic concept, which can keep the alliance together. Meanwhile, Germany and Russia were hosted by France on October 18 and 19 at the Atlantic resort of Deauville, to discuss European Security, before the NATO meeting.

The India Factor

The Americans are not aloof to the changing dynamics in Europe, and President Obama is scheduled to visit India in the first week of November, just before the Lisbon meeting. The three-day visit is expected to be the longest overseas trip of President Obama. The unpredictability of traditional European support, is also causing US to increasingly turn to India.

This is not all, China’s posture towards US in the in the pacific realm has become more assertive. American traditional ally Australia, is also hedging its bet, and recently conducted military exercises with China. In addition, NATO’s only Muslim member, Turkey, conducted surprise aerial exercises with China in September. India provides a counterweight to China not only in the Pacific realm but also in South and Central Asia. However, the role of India in Central Asia would be complicated, as it would have to weigh its relations with both Russia and US. Balancing Russian and US affairs would also complicate future Indian relations with Europe.

Conclusion

Given these circumstances, PoliTact has concluded that US has raised the priority of the Afghan conflict while putting the Iran tension on the back burner. Whether Israel will take this maneuver quietly, is yet to be seen. Iran’s help in Afghanistan can complicate the role of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. However, it can also speed up Iran and Pakistan economic cooperation.

The survivability of NATO alliance is strategically more pertinent to the American national security than the risks posed by the extremists. Gauging from recent European behavior, the threats from extremists, no longer seem capable to hold the alliance together.

US-India strategic partnership is a muiti-president initiative and is unlikely to change due to the present situation. In the global context described above, Pakistan will take what it can from US, but in the longer term, it recognizes its interests mesh better with China than with US. The US-Pakistan relations are more a consequence of global politics and less so of what happens between the two. As the air gets tense between China and US, US-Pakistan relations are bound to deteriorate. In addition to the economic leverage, US will increasingly use its India leverage over Pakistan.

PoliTact believes that unless some key compromises are made in accepting the realistic positions and interests of both parties, US and Pakistan, the war in Afghanistan can extend with worsening consequences. From Pakistan’s perspective if peace talks with Haqqani network and Quetta Shura are making progress, the objective and need for North Waziristan operation changes. Given the economic recession, US no longer has the privilege of time. History informs that ultimately, the party possessing the advantage of time prevails.

Tell Us What You Think

 
Feedback@politact.com

The post US and Pakistan Strategic Dialogue, Round Three – The Regional and Global Context appeared first on Politact.