CURRENT } TNS Dr. Shahid Wazir Khan Former Civil Servant (PAAS) Director KIPS CSS » esa comprehensive look into history & recent geo-political and strategic developments Highlights the hucdles and offers solutions tothe issues fe Provides an insight into future ny KIPS NY = puBlication Augments the candidate's performance in Essay and IRPAKISTAN’S RELATIONS WITH THE UNITED STATES Introduetion ‘The United States established diplomatic relations with Pakistan following the country’s creation in 1947. Both have a broad multi-faceted partnership in areas ranging from education to energy to trade and investment to security. Pakistan-US relations in the last six decades have been unstable and moved in a cyclical pattern with recurrent ups and downs, with frequent alternating episodes of close partnership and sharp friction—reflecting engagement and estrangement in global and regional geopolitics. United States has, historically, used Pakistan as a scapegoat to gain its own national security interests and has always abandoned Pakistan to deal with the mess on its own, as being witnessed throughout War against terror. The same remains the case as Trump administration highlighted its policy towards Pakistan. Pakistan and US do not share a profound and strategic relationship. Mutual trust deficit has been the main bottleneck, where US keep harping the mantra of ‘DO more’ without acknowledging the efforts and sacrifices of Pakistan in War against Terrorism. Additionally, it blames Pakistan of playing a “double game’ where on one hand itis getting financial support from US to fight terrorism and on the other hand targeting selected terrorists and patronizing the others. Moreover, Pakistan and United-states do not see eyé to eye on many issues in regional and global context, Growing Indo-US relatioris are also effecting the Pak-US relations. Pakistan has concerns with US policy of drone attacks and sees it as a total violation of its state sovereignty. ——— PAKISTAN-US RELATIONS: HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE ee The US remains one of the first countries to have established diplomatic ties with Pakistan, During the initial years, Pakistan had the options of building allegiance with Soviet Union or United States. Pakistan opted for the US. In early 1950s, many officials from Pakistan such as Pakistan's first PM, commander-in-chief Ayub Khan, foreign minister Zafrullah Khan, foreign secretary Ikramullah, finance minister Ghulam Muhammad, defence secretary Sikander Mirza and special envoy Mir Laiq Ali visited US, aiming to receive financial aids from the country. In 1954, Pakistan grew closer to US, joining in defense agreement SEATO, which was an alliance against, communism. In 1955, Pakistan joined an alliance, the Baghdad Pact, formed between Britain, Turkey, tran, Iraq, which was later called CENTO; it further augmented Pakistan's tilt towards US. In 1956, President Dwight Eisenhower requested PM Suhrawardy to lease Peshawar Ait Station to the American Army for keeping an eye on Soviet Union and its ballistic missile programme. The request was granted by the prime minister. With the military government of Gen Ayub Khan, Pakistan grew even closer to US. First US base opened at Badaber near Peshawar. Also, the aid from the US started to flow into Pakistan, U2 flights originating from Badaber gained lot of information about Soviet activities across the border. In May 1960, the USSR shot Uz reconnaissance plane of US down over Russian soil; it had taken off from Badaber. The incidence brought lorof ‘embarrassment both for Pakistan and the US. The USSR. also warned Pakistan 80 (WKIPS PUBLICATIONSChapter Pakistan's Relations with The United Stat T Tn 1965 war, Pak-US relations suffered a setback when US placed an arms embafgo On both Pakistan and India, knowing well that Pakistan was totally dependent on US arms and Inia digit tise,any US arms. The Soviets speeded up arms supplies to India, Pakistan gated ait etigrity by using US supplied F-86 Sabers and F-104 Star fighters. King Zahir of. Hedhsnety of Pakistan's Wester borders, allowing Pakistan to remove it troops eis’ Spélied her airfields to Pakistan Air force. China moved her troops close “Inj19708, Be ing, first into NAM. friends with So military ai etrayed by the US decided to move away from US block. ned Movement) then in OIC and finally started making jets slarted setting up steel mills in Pakistan and supplied some ed on the road to socialism under Bhutto. US believed that Pakistan he other side, US grew hostile to Pakistan. Bhutto openly challenged US in his speeches, {n 1971, Civil war erupted in Pakistan. India invaded Pakistan. Massive bloodshed was supe id by Inc alistan asked.her old time ally US for help. After 25 years declassified, nests revealed that U8 deliberately wanted to break Pakistan to appease India. It was the Symi jaw thereby stopping aid to countries pursuing nuclear fall lations, During 1979, Tranianrevolation, US lst a staunch «one 1979 ,al80, SANE invading Afghanistan. It was a check mate for US as. coinmunism expanded ja, Aighanistan. During 1980s, Pak-US friendship started again as US badly needed an ally in the ,region., Pakistan became a front line state in war against com! ‘sm..US.took lenient view of Pakistan's nuclear program & restored its aid. Pak received 4.2 billion. 1n/i989-98,-BovietS\ were fixially ‘defeated triggering a massive reaction all over the ‘world-which-finally resulted-in-fall‘of communism. US emerged as the sole super pawer. Once agiii,’ Pakistan was ignored by US and relations suddenly become cold, Zia-ul-Haq was killed in ‘a plaiie crash) whieh imainy in Pakistan’ believe was a work of CLA. In decade of 1990s, US again closéd'its eyes on Pakistan 8 "it iio longer needed it. India became the blue eyed ‘baby. Nuclear sanctiGnis were'agaifiniposed Ont Pakistan and aid was stopped. Ini 1996, Betazir Bhiitto visited United States and requested president Clinton to lift the embargoes on Pakistan dnd laufich a joint operation to eradicate militancy from the region. As a reaction to Bhutto's proposal, Brown amendment, which provided for the delivery of $368 millio# of military equipment purchased but not received by Pakistan before the imposition of Pressler amendment sanctions in 1990, was passed; however, the sanctions on arms were not lifted. In 1998, India exploded nuclear device, adding on to Pakistan’s security concerns. World kept silent. Pakistan responded by testing its own nuclear weapons. India was deterred, but the US imposed sanctions on Pakistan, President Clinton imposed sanctions under Glenn amendment on India as well as Pakistan. Glenn amendinent included suspension of aid, including economic development assistance. {t was yet another betrayal by the US. {n 1999- 2000, Gen Pervaiz Musharraf toppled Nawaz Sharif's government, prompting the Western condemnation and regional isolation and plunging into a serious finaneial crisis. In 2001, 9/14 again pushed US to seek its old ally Pakistan. Like always, Pakistan agreed. Then people in Pakistan saw a 4th betrayal in the making as US assured India that it 81 ‘bi KIPS PUBLICATIONS:Pakistan's Relations w ith The United States Chapter-11 would help India fight “terrorism” in Kashmir—a veiled threat that Pakistan would suffer same fate as Afghanistan. When one studies the history, one finds that Pakistan was always there when the US needed her, but US had never reciprocated Re ations after-September 11 After the September 11 attacks in 2001 in the United States, Pakistan once again became a key ally in the war on terror with the United States, In 2001, U.S. President George W. Bush strongly encouraged Pakistan government to join the U.S. war on terror. Prior to the September 11 attacks in 2001, Pakistan was the key supporter of the Taliban in Afghanistan, as part of their “strategic depth” objective viz-a-viz India. After 9/u1, Pakistan, led by General Pervez Musharraf, reversed the course under pressure from the United States and joined the "War on Terror" as a U.S ally. Having failed to convince the Taliban to hand over Osama Bin Laden and other members of Al-Qaeda, Pakistan provided the U.S. a number of military airports and bases for its attack on Afghanistan, along with other logistical support. Since 2001, Pakistan has arrested over six hundred Al-Qaeda members and handed them over to the United States: seiiior USS. officers have been lavish in their praise of Pakistani efforts in public while expressing their concern that not enough was being done in private. However, General Musharraf was strongly supported by the Bush administration—a common theme throughout Pakistan's rélations with the U.S. has been the U.S. support of military dictators to the detriment of deinoéricy'in Pakistan. ” i In’ return for their support, Pakistan had sanctions lifted and has received aboiit $20 billion in U.S. aid since 2001, primarily military. In 2004, President George W Bush désignited Pakistan as a major non-NATO ally, making it eligible, among other things, ‘to’ puithase advanced American military technology. . B wll 2005 onwards: Bumpy Road of Relations ae In 2005, US was dissatisfied over Pakistan's performance in war on terror due to increased insurgency along Pak- Afghan border. It started drone attacks in Pakistan territory violating its sovereignty. Drones led to huge collateral damage and death of innocent cWilians leading to more resentment among the tribal people. Militancy spread in length anid bredatit'US Pressurized the Pakistan to “Do more”, demanding action against groups like the Haqqani Network. E ‘When Obama took over in January 2008, one of his first orders of business was a brief on the Afghan situation. He was. briefed on President Bush’s authorization of enhanced operations. Reportedly, he expressed surprise at why such facilitation was not being-flly exploited. He ordered an immediate increase in the frequency of drone attacks’ ‘This’ fas remained the principal plank of the US strategy to counter al Qaeda and ‘Taliban groups lodged in the mountainous recesses of the Pak-Afghan border. It has also subsequently been propésed as the main undetlying strategy for the counter-terrorism (CTR) approach by Vice Président Biden as an alternate to the counter-insurgency (COIN) campaign in Afghanistan’ For Pakistan, since 2008, the drone attacks have acquired a differént dimension: its blowback aiid retalidtéry suicide bomb blasts by militant organizations have risen in propottion, causing widespread death and destruction in the major cities of Pakistan. US time to time accused Pakistan of giving safe-haven to the Taliban and for-not Conducting the military operation sincerely. In order to increase pressure, US stétted 82 ‘W KIPS PUBLICATIONS,Chapter-11 Pakistan's Relations with The United States Temanding Pakistan to Do More and showed fis displeasure over Pak performance almost constantly. ~ In October 2009, the U.S. Congress approved $7.5 billion of non-military aid, (Kerry Lugar bill) to Pakistan over the next five years. But the disbursement of aid was made conditional to Pakistan's performance. Various other humiliating terms were also included in the bill, In 2010, US again demanded Pakistan to launch an operation against Haqqani group (in North Waziristan) responsible for dangerous attacks on American forces. 7 2011 saw a new low in already fragile Pak-US relations. In the beginning of 2011, Raymond Davis, a CIA agent in Pakistan killed two Pakistani men in Lahore, claiming that they came to rob him. Davis was taken into custody for killing civilians; however, American officals claimed that he was entitled to diplomatic immunity and must be released immediately. Raymond Davis was later acquitted of the murder charges and was sent to United States. In the May of 2011, Osama bin Laden was killed in an operation conducted by US Navy Seals in Abbottabad, Pakistan. President Barrack Obama claimed that the information pertaining to the operation conducted in Abbottabad was not shared with Pakistan Army. However, 151 claimed that the operation was conducted jointly, a claim which was blatantly denied by President Asif Ali Zardari. - Since the war on terror started in 2001, Pakistan received an estimated amount of $20 billion from United States; however, in the wake of OBL's raid, US withheld $800 million of aid to Pakistan, US-Pakistan relations plummeted again when 24 Pakistani soldiers died in an air strike by the US Army. Afghan and US officials claimed that the firing was a result of the attack Jaunched from the Pakistani side of the border; however, the Pakistani ‘military and goverament denied the claims. As a result ofthe attack, Pakistani government ordered US army to evacuate Salala air base which was being used to launch offensive on Taliban and militants, Moreover, the government also halted Nato supplies for United Sates. ‘All of these events led to further deterioration of Pak-US relations. : Since the beginning of 2012, various political parties along with the military command of the country, met and held discussions on restoring Nato supplies. Diplomats from United States also tried to reduce the friction. Pakistan, on July 3, agreed to reopen key supply routes into ‘Afghanistan ending a biter stand-off after US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said she ‘was sorry for the loss of life in a botched air raid. Following years of poor inter-governmental relations, the two countries began to cooperate more closely. The countries witnessed warming of relations, and increased security cooperation. United States through drone missiles killed several of Pakistan's most wanted militants who were hiding in a remote region close to the Afghan border in November 2014. The Pakistani in June 2014 started Zarb-e-Azb operation against militants in North Waziristan. In the words of Lt. Gen. Joseph Anderson, it “fractured” the Haqqani Network—long accused by the United States of having a safe harbor in Pakistan. The United States then captured and transferred a senior Taliban commander, Latif Mehsud, to Pakistan, which had been seeking his arrest. Following an unprecedented two-week-long visit by COAS Gen. Raheel Sharif, Rep. Adam Schiffstated that US-Pakistani relations were on the upswing following several tense years of dysfunction, Pakistan further killed senior Al-Qaeda leader Adnan el Shukrijumah— Jong wanted by the United States, The U.S. resumed Military and Economic Aid to Pakistan, releasing more than $1.6 billion, However in December 2014, Congress restricted 83 KIPS PUBLICATIONSPakistan’s-Relations with The United States Chapter-41 Tost U.S. military aid to Pakistan in FY 2015 funded through the State and Defense Department unless the administration certified that Pakistan was taking steps to end support for the Haqqani Network and other such groups. In 2015, State Department requested $26: military aid through Foreign Military Financing to Pakistan for F¥2016. Defense Department requests at estimated $1.3 billion in military aid to Pakistan through the Coalition Support Funds for FY 2016. On February 1, 2016, US government has proposed US $860 million in aid for Pakistan during the 2016-17 fiscal year, including $265 million for military hardware in addition to counterinsurgeney funds. However, in July 2017, Pentagon said that the United States would not make the remaining military reimbursements to Pakistan for fiscal year 2016 because Defence Secretary Jim Mattis cannot certify that Islamabad has taken sufficient action against the Haqqani network. Pakistan's ambassador in Washington, Aziz Ahmed Chaudhary, pointed out that the restriction would affect “the funds that are a reimbursement of the expenses incurred by the country towards achieving our common goals in the fight against terrorism.” The reimbursement “is not an assistance”, he added. ‘The 2016 US National Defence Authorisation Act required the defence secretary to certify that Pakistan had taken sufficient action against the Haqqani network but had taken away the authority to issue a national intetest waiver, previously issued to Pakistan. However, Pakistan had already received $550m of the $g00m reimbursement the country was authorised in 2016. million in That said, history does provide at least one rule that has applied equally well since the first treaty inked between Pakistan and the United States in 1954: both sides have always used each other for their own narrow, tactical purposes. When those purposes have overlapped, cooperation was possible. When they did not, frustration and estrangement ensued. The future is likely to promise more of the same. RECENT SCENARIO: DETERIORATING TIES In August 2017, the US President Donald Trump highilighted his administration's policy towards Afghanistan (and Pakistan). He called upon Pakistan to demonstrate its commitment to civilisation, order and to peace and identified the country a safe haven for “agents of chaos, violence and terror”. These were perhaps the harshest remarks uttered against Pakistan by any US president over the course of their 70-year relationship. Even former president Obama was not so harsh when he announced the detection and elimination of Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad. But President Trump was blatant in saying that the next pillar of their new strategy was to change the approach in how to deal with Pakistan. He said that the US could no longer be silent about Pakistan's safe havens for terrorist organisations, the Taliban and other groups that pose a threat to the region and beyond. He alleged that for its part, Pakistan often gives safe haven to agents of chaos, violence and terror. He made it clear that the key point of his new strategy was to win the war in Afghanistan, and if Pakistan wanted to remain an ally, it would have to help the US achieve that objective. ‘Though, he mentioned about Pakistan's sacrifices in the war on terror, but said that Pakistan has also sheltered the same organisations that try every single day to kill the US soldiers. According to him, the US has been paying Pakistan billions and billions of dollars, but 84 ‘WKIPS PUBLICATIONSChapter-11 Pakistan's Relations with The United States Pakistan is housing the very terrorists that the US Is fighting, He threatened that no partnership can survive a country's harbouring of militants and terrorists who target US service members and officials. Warning Pakistan to change its policy or face America’s wrath, President Trump said that another critical part of his. strategy was to further develop its strategic partnership with India, a key security and economic partner of the US. He added insult to injury by urging India to play a greater role in Afghanistan, ignoring Pakistan's fears that India might use its growing influence there to stir trouble in Pakistan. Pakistan expressed its disappointment over the disregard for its sacrifices, but vowed to continue participating in global counterterrorism efforts. In reaction to the new US policy, the Foreign Office in Islamabad said no country in the world had done more against terrorism than Pakistan, which also was its biggest victim. The cabinet decided to convene a meeting of the National Security Committee to formulate a detailed rejoinder. The statement reiterated that Pakistan did not allow the use of its territory against any country. It said: “Instead of relying on the false narrative of safe havens, the US needs to work with Pakistan to eradicate terrorism.” It noted that threat to peace and security could not be isolated from the complex interplay of geopolitics, continued existence of festering disputes and pursuit of hegemonic policies. The opposition parties denounced the new US policy, with Pakistan Tehreck-i-Insaf chief Imran Khan saying that Pakistan was being made a scapegoat for US failures in Afghanistan. AREAS OF BILATERAL COOPERATION ‘Among others, the following areas have considerable importance: Bilateral Economic Relations The US is Pakistan’s largest export destination. In FY 2016 (July 2015 - June 2016), Pakistan exported $3.7 billion to the United States in 2015 and imported. $1.897 billion, Moreover, it is estimated that at least 500,000 members of the*Pakistani diaspora reside in the United States. The United States has consistently been’ one of the top sources of foreign direct investment (FDI) to Pakistan, with cumulative U.S. FDI in Pakistan in calendar year 2015 at almost $400 million, including $38 million in new investment. In May 2014, following PM Sharif's 2013 visit to Washington, the U.S. and Pakistan established a Joint Action Plan to expand bilateral trade and investment over five years. In June 2016 the United States and Pakistan organized the fourth U.S.-Pakistan Business Opportunities Conference, the first in New York City, to explore commercial opportunities and expand business-to-business linkages. Major U.S. investments are concentrated in fast-moving consumer goods, construction, chemicals, energy, transportation, and communications. U. S. Civilian Assistance to Pakistan Since 2009, the U.S. government has committed over $6 billion in civilian assistance to Pakistan, which includes over $1 billion in emergency humanitarian assistance in response to conflict and disasters like the 2010 floods. U.S. civilian assistance to Pakistan is focused on five priority areas: energy; economic growth, including agriculture; community stabilization of underdeveloped areas vulnerable to violent extremism; education; and health. The US. implements programs with Pakistani partners when appropriate, including the government of Pakistan, civil society, and private sector actors, to increase local capacity and promote sustainability of efforts. To date, U.S. contributions have benefitted over 28 million Pakistanis through adding over 2,400 megawatts to Pakistan's electricity grid with infrastructure upgrades, 85 “Y KIPS PUBLICATIONS,Pakistan's Relations with The United States Chapter-11 ‘abilitation, aud policy consultation; led to the launch of the Pakistan Private Investment Initiative (PPTL), which will provide seed funding to small- and medium-sized enterprises in Pakistan; built or reconstructed nearly 1,000 schools; and funded nearly 1,100 kilometers of roads in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pakistan-U.S. Security Cooperation US. security assistance to Pakistan is focused on strengthening the counterterrorism (CT) and counterinsurgency (COIN) capabilities of the Pakistan security forces, and promoting closer security ties and interoperability with the United States. U.S. security assistance has directly supported Pakistan's CT operations in the FATA. Foreign Military Financing (FMF) ($255 million in FY 2016) promotes the development of Pakistan's long-term COIN/CT capabilities and improves Pakistan's ability to participate in maritime security operations and counter-maritime piracy. International Military Education and Training (IMET) assistance to Pakistan ($5 million in FY 2016) enhances the professionalism of Pakistan's ‘military and strengthens long-term military relationships between Pakistan and the Ur RESERVATIONS OF PAKISTAN VIS-A-VIS U.S ‘Do More” Mantra Since 2005 the US has been pressurizing Pakistan to ‘do more’ against the militant groups. The United States has been accusing Pakistan of not doing enough against the Haqqani militants, Pakistan denies all such allegations. United States continued to harp its “do more” mantra throughout 2017 too, and is expected to continue in future as well, as highlighted in ‘Trump administration's new policy towards Afghanistan and Pakistan. On May 25, 2016 State Department Spokesman Mark Toner said “We have been very clear-eyed and very clear in our interaction with Pakistan where we've believed that they need to do more to root out terrorists, who find safe havens on some of their territory, and we're going to continue to do that”. In August 2016, the US State Department Spokesperson Elizabeth Trudeair said: “We have consistently raised our concerns to the highest level of the Government of Pakistan on the need to deny safe haven to extremists. We have pressed the Government of Pakistan to follow up on their expressed commitment, their stated commitment, to not discriminate among terror groups regardless of their agenda or afiilia ~ In July 2017, an annual report by the US State Department yielded a familiar result on Pakistan’s counterterrorism record. It acknowledged some successes, but mentioned that Pakistan has allowed externally focused militant networks to flourish. {t was the first report to be compiled by the Trump administration. It suggested that the US is, indeed, heading towards taking a harder line against Pakistan its alleged support for militancy, More recently, in August 2017, Trump administration's new policy towards Afghanistan and Pakistan also reflected the same Drone Attacks Pakistan sees drone attacks as a blatant violation of its sovereignty. American drone operation called “operation haymaker” is seen with suspicion all around the globe, and does not enjoy credibility. There have been 424 drone attacks in Pakistan from 2004-2016, according to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism. There have been at least 2,500-3,000 casualties reported in drone strikes, of which at least 350-420 are suspected to be civilians. The first drone strike in Pakistan was carried out in 2004 to kill Taliban commander Naik Muhammad, according to data available with the Bureau of Investigative Journalism report (BIJ). 86 ‘W KIPS PUBLICATIONSChapter-1t Pakistan's Relations with The United States ‘Over the last 13 years, more than 65 per cent of drone strikes were carried out in North Waziristan, Other areas hit by strikes include South Waziristan, Orakzai Agency, Bajaur, Bannu, Hangu, Khyber Agency and other parts of the Federally Administered Tribal Areas. The greatest number of drone strikes on Pakistani soil, 128, were carried out in 2010, during US President Barack Obama's second year of presidency. Most drones were dispatched from US bases in Afghanistan, ~ “The downwards trajectory in Pak-US relations is steepening rather than flattening out. Although shaky prior to the drone strike that killed Taliban leader Mullah Mansoor in March 2016, it was that action which has precipitated a sudden slide. A red line was crossed for the Pakistan government, and an apparently unwritten agreement violated — namely that drone strikes would be limited to the tribal areas whereas Mullah Mansoor was killed 60 miles inside Balochistan. a 7 Drone strikes in Pakistan 2004-2016 SELEESSER EERE US Wavering Approach towards Pakistan US's pursuit of coercive policy against Pakistan is one of the main reservations of Pakistan vis-i-vis United States. The United States has always been acting upon a wavering approach towards Pakistan; it has intensified in the post-Osama scenario. In this respect, clear~ cut paradoxes could not only be noted in the same statements of the US high officials, but also those of others who contradict each other regarding Pakistan. - Confused in its goals, America has also been shifting Afghan war to Pakistan, and after leaving Afghanistan, it wants to totally entangle this country in an all-out war with the Taliban and Al Qaeda-related fighters. In this context, without bothering for internal backlash and rapidly growing resentment against America, drone attacks continue inside Pakistan coupled with the threat of high-value targets in this country—and infiltration of highly-trained militants from Afghanistan, who attack on Pakistan's security forces. ‘Americans must think that if they throw Pakistan in anarchy by exporting Afghan war, a vast territory from Afghanistan to the Indian-Held Kashmir will be radicalized because non- state actors like Al Qaeda are likely to develop links with each other, also shifting Afghan war to India. Thus American dream to strengthen India-making it market for the west will badly be jeopardised. Such a drastic phenomenon is likely to sabotage the US regional and global interests, giving a greater setback to especially American economy which is already facing severe financial crisis, Nonetheless after abandoning its wavering approach towards Pakistan, the US must follow a clear and realistic strategy towards Islamabad by stabilising the latter through more economic and military aid as a stable Pakistan is essential for American interests in connection with Afghanistan and India. 87 ¢ KIPS PUBLICATIONS,Pakistan's Relations with The United States Chapter-t1 U.S's intrusive and meddlesome role in internal alfairs of Pakistan With the intensification of Pakistan's economic dependence, the 1. has been able to intervene decisively in Pakistan's internal affairs, even to dictate the choice of ministers and allocation of major portfolios in the government. After 1952-1953, Pakistan passed under the tutelage of the U.S. During the 1950s, with U.S. military aid and expansion of the military and its, newly forged (direct) links with the Pentagon and the U.S. establishment, the army was greatly strengthened and began to have much weight in the nation’s affairs. Parallel with this, Pakistan's military Commander-in-Chief, Ayub Khan’s ambitions grew. U.S is blamed for planning unsetting Khawaja Nizamud din’s government in 1953. U.S continued to exploit Pakistan's financial dependence by interfering in its internal affairs throughout early decades of its inception. Sale of F-16s Pakistan has another resentment vis-a-vis United States and that is regarding the stalled deal of F-16 jets. Initially, the $700 million deal for eight F-16 multi-role fighters, was to be partially financed through the U.S. Foreign Military Financing (FMF) programme, but the Congress disallowed subsidizing the sale. The subsidizing was disallowed over concern that Pakistan had not done enough to end the dreaded Haqqani network's terror sanctuaries on its soil as well as fears over Islamabad’s nuclear programme. Pakistan, which expected to get the fighters at the subsidized rate of $270 million, was subsequently, asked by the U.S. administration to make the full payment for the eight aircraft from its national resources. Pakistani authorities, however, were adamant that the offer must come without any preconditions. U.S- Indian Close Defense Ties Pakistan sees Indian defense ties with US with suspicion. In August 2016, the India-US Strategic and Commercial Dialogue were held in Delhi and the Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement was signed in Washington,, one of four so-called foundational pacts the US signs with defense partners. On 29% august 2016, India and the US signed an important agreement that_will make the two nations logistical allies and enable both the militaries to use each other's assets and bases for repair and replenishment of supplies. Earlier in 2015 US signed the civil defense deal with India. This growing strategic relation with India without acknowledging the regional stabilities and is upsetting the regional balance of power, adding on to Pakistan's security concerns. Moreover, the US is continuing to back India’s entry into the NSG, in violation of NPT-1968. Further, President Trump said that a critical part of his new strategy towards Pakistan was to further develop its strategic partnership with India, a key security and economic partner of the US. He added insult to injury by urging India to play a greater role in Afghanistan, ignoring Pakistan's fears that India might use its growing influence there to stir trouble in Pakistan WHY IS THERE LACK OF PROFUNDITY IN PAK-US RELATIONS ‘Trust Deficit ‘Trust deficit in bilateral relations of Pakistan and US has existed since the beginning. ‘There is lack of coordination and intelligence sharing between. US calls Pakistan an ally in war against terrorism, but did not take Pakistan into confidence regarding key operations on Pakistan’s soil including operation to kill Osama Bin Laden. 88 \W KIPS PUBLICATIONSChapter-11 Pakistan's Relations with The United States Transactional, Not Strategic Ties: Single Issue Oriented Ties Mutual relations are based on broad based agendas for long lasting bond. But regrettably, in case of Pak-US relations it has been a story of intense engagement followed by total estrangement. There is no consistency in US policy towards Pakistan. It uses Pakistan to achieve a certain interest and then isolates it after achieving the very purpose. The relationship has not been a strategic one by any means. Sartaj Aziz is not far from the mark when he says thet the US “abandons us when it doesn’t need our help". Pakistan-US relations have always been transactional and always tempered by whatever the US has on its to-do list no matter we like it or not. America continues to operate a doctrine of unilateral exceptionalism and expects the rest of the world to be at least complicit with that. Pakistan now finds itself between the proverbial rock and a hard place — damned if we do and damned if we don't. Arresting the slide in relations ig not going to be easy, and another incident such as that which killed Mullah Mansoor could be mortal to more than the intended target. Clash of Interests in Various Cases Washington continues to ignore Islamabad’ strategic interests. The US is stuck to its stubborn position and ruled out any mediation between India and Pakistan on the Kashmir issue, which is, indeed, a negation of President Obama's commitment during his pre-White House campaign to help resoh issue. One wonders why the US continues to propagate that the real threat to Pakistan is from the extremists within its borders and not posed by India. This Tine of thinking forces Pakistan to suspect US motives, especially when the superpower ignores the deployment of bulk of Indian war machine on its eastern borders. ~ While Pakistan enjoys a deep strategic partnership with its Chinese friends, based on sincerity, mutual teust and free of coercion or strings, the cosmetic dialogue with the US is more of a game of chess clouded under suspicion and mistrust. US sees growing Pak-China relations fs an attempt at containing India. China has invested $47billion in Pakistan under CPEC. India has shown open contempt for CPEC, and American support for India in this regard is a clear spectacle of clash of interests between Pakistan and US. TOWARDS COMPREHENSIVE PAK-US RELATIONS: WAY FORWARD ‘Suggestions for Pakistan Pakistan can change, or at least soften, the negative Washington consensus. To do so, Pakistan will need to adopt a clear agenda, develop a coherent narrative, exercise diplomatic patience and display the political resilience required to defend its national interests. Islamabad Should first identify those core interests on which it cannot compromise: Indian hegemony; conventional and nuclear deterrence; Kashmiri self-determination; strategic relations with China, Then it should identify those US ‘demands’ which can be accommodated without compromising Pakistan's vital interests, such as action against terrorism; @ negotiated peace it ‘Afghonistan; avoidance of war with India; nuclear not~proliferation. Third, Pakistan should press for acceptance of its own objectives. The US ean accommodate at Jeast some of these without compromising its strategic interests: protection of Kashmiri human rights; elimination of Indian-Afghan sponsored terrorism in Pakistan; equal treatment on civil nuclear cooperation; access to advanced technologies; economic development. Pakistan should play an effective role to convince U.S and Afghanistan for serious dialogue to bring durable and sustainable peace in the region. Pakistan should abandon its WD KIPS PUBLICATIONSPakistan's Relations with The United States Chopter-11° policy of distinguishing between good and bad Taliban, as it has already harmed its national interests. It should shun all covert and overt support for Afghan Taliban and should openly denounce support for every brand of violence. It should focus on economic interdependence and should seek economic depth in Afghanista tead of strategic depth, Pakistan should go for soft power and should tap on geographical proximity Suggestions for United States The United States should be thinking hard about how to help create a more stable situation in Pakistan, a nation that is a friend and partner, but with whom the US has significant differences over the past decades. 1 The US can and should be make sure that its working to strengthen national ties with India must be done in a way that is not threatening to Pakistan. Thus, the first best option to help achieve stability in South Asia is to encourage India to try to resolve differences with its neighbor. Washington's role could include top-level official visits to both capitals; offering unofficial “Track 2” negotiating programs; and explicitly making peace and stability in South Asia a U.S. strategic interest. The Trump administration should increase military assistance to Pakistan in the counterterrorism fight on the Afghan-Pakistani border. A long source of frustration for U.S. military planners has been Pakistani support for'the Afghan Taliban, Developing @ package of counterterrorism incentives for Pakistan that requires a deal of their reducing and eventually dropping support for insurgents within Afghanistan is key. Such incentives could include more robust intelligence sharing; better surveillance and strike technology, and joint operations. Washington's efforts to sell weapons, surveillance, and intelligence systems to Islamabad have been uneven to say the least. Setting out a coherent, reliable pipeline of military assistance and sales would be very helpful. ‘The US must be at pains to increase soft-power support in Pakistan. US should try to reach out to Pakistani people to win their minds and hearts. US should uproot grievances of Pakistani people to win their hearts and minds through greater people to people contacts. When the United States and NATO led relief efforts following the massive earthquake in Pakistan in 2005, it had a significant and positive impact on America’s image in the country. Providing more financial aid tied to education, medicine, and humanitarian projects could help. The US' focus on eradicating terrorism has always failed to address the circumstances that drive people to extremism in the first place. Using aid to strengthen democratic stability, create opportunities for citizens, and increase investments to grow the economy will translate into long-term benefits that help minimize incentives to turn to extremism. US should understand Pakistan's sensitivities and genuine security concerns vis-a-vis India. US should stop all covert CIA activities in Pakistan, CIA is often blamed for meddling in internal affairs of Pakistan, US should stop making Pakistan a convenient scapegoat to hide is failures in Afghanistan, US should acknowledge Pakistan's extraordinary efforts in war against terrorism and should understand Pakistan security sensitivities. US should continue to support military operations through financial assistance and military aid, 90 WKIPS PUBLICATIONSChapter-11 Pakistan's Relations with The United States 70, US should work for intensive intelligence sharing with Pakistan. 11. US should stop meddling with Pakistan’s internal affairs and should respect Pakistan's integrity and sovereignty. FUTURE PROSPECTS OF THE RELATIONSHIP As aforementioned, Trump in his new policy reserved his strongest cr Pakistan, Yet given the uncertainties surrounding Trump and his team one can hardly analyze what can be the future of Pakistan-US relations. As a realistic assessment, the US policy towards Pakistan during the last decade is hardly expected to change. Pakistan has already been under pressure over its counterterrorism policy~especially its alleged support fo the Afghan Taliban-and for hosting groups like JeM and LeT that have been accused of carrying out attacks against India. So counterterrorism operations will be reviewed persistently. Also, the economic and ‘military aid to Pakistan will be made conditional. As under the Obama administration, Pakistan will for sure be asked to 'do more’ from the Congress, which is empowered by Republican Administration. ‘After new policy announcement, there is the implicit US threat of expanding action against the Afghan Taliban insurgents to the Pakistani border regions. There is also a possibility tdrone strikes targeting alleged terrorist hideouts in the settled areas close to the tribal areas. That wil surly make things difficult for Pakistani authorities to win public support for cooperation with the United States. 1 Further, the rise of China and the security situation in Afghanistan are likely to remain the prisms through’ which a Trump ‘Administration will view Pakistan and adapt its” strategic interests in South Asia. In those cases, Pakistan-US relationship is most likely to continde on the course set under the Obama administration. The new administration. may choose to follow an India-first policy. So Pakistan can expect increased pressure to clamp down on anti-India militant groups. Also there will be less support in Washington for continued civilian and military assistance for Pakistan exemplified by Republican Congressmen like Ted PoeandDanaRohrabacher. SSS Despite burgeoning US-India strategic relations, Pakistan still matters for the Trump Administration. There are many reasons for this. Firstly, one could hardly expect the bilization of the region without involving Pakistan. To bring stability in South Asia and Afghanistan, Trump administration ought to have a balanced approach to its relations with both Pakistan and India. It has to make sure that its strategic partnership with India must not hurt Pakistan. Secondly, according to a few analysts, Trump would prefer business relations with the ‘countries. This business-like thinking could force Trump to value the trade routes being established under the CPEC. Pakistan will be an important trade route of the future, and the new administration has the opportunity to become partners in the regional connectivity. This will certainly be consistent with the US policy of interconnecting South Asia and Central Asia while keeping Afghanistan and Pakistan at the centre, In her visit to the Subcontinent in July, ‘2011, the then US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton urged Pakistan to consider her proposal for a ‘New Silk Road’ that would connect. Pakistan, India and Afghanistan with Central Asia. FINAL ANALYSIS The recently announced Trump Administration policy shows that the US will be getting tough on Pakistan. ‘The toughening stance on Pakistan may have serious repercussions for an 1 IPS PUBLICATIONSPakistan's Relations with The United States Chapter-11 already troubled relationship between Islamabad and Washington. Trump has declared that the US will strive for an ‘honourable’ resolution to the Afghan war. But his strategy can neither win the war nor result in peace. ‘A complicated, but vital relationship — an assessment offered by the US State Department— is an apt description of the state of Pak-US relations. The factors that will determine the substance and direction of Pakistan-US relations in the coming years are: issues of terrorism, Afghanistan, nuclear proliferation, US-China relations and US-India relations. In principle, the positions of the two countries on terrorism are similar. Both are opposed to terrorism in any form and manifestation. Pakistan has suffered far more than the US at the hands of terrorism, in terms of material destruction and loss of precious human lives. ‘A-rocky Pakistan-US relationship is not in the interest of either country, so perhaps both sides need to acknowledge the shortcomings in their respective approaches. Where the US is concerned, the almost casual disregard of Pakistan's intensive counterterrorism and counter insurgency efforts is a continuing problem. In order to keep Pakistan bridled, the US coined ‘do more mantra’, kept leveling unsubstantiated allegations, resorted to coercive diplomacy and subjected it to drone strikes. It made Pakistan a convenient scapegoat to hide its failures. Pak-US relations, which remained lukewarm because of bossy and mistrustful attitude of American officials and their outright leaning toward India and Afghanistan, nosedived in after the incidents of Raymond Davis and stealth attack in. Abbottabad, Admiral Mullen’s diatribe describing Haqqani network as the ‘veritable arm’ of ISI, and brutal Salala attack. In utter frustration, Pakistan was forced to close Shamsi airbase, block NATO supply routes for over seven months and cease military cooperation. These steps—meant to impress upon the US to respect Pakistan’s sovereignty and to treat Pakistan as an ally rather than a target—further widened the trust gap and brought Pak- US relations to a near-breaking point. Death of Mullah Mansoor, in a drone strike on 22" May 2016, inside Pakistan's territory, while he was crossing it from Iran to Afghanistan, further deteriorated Pak-US relations. And Trump's tirade against Pakistan It is unfortunate, therefore, that there have been misunderstandings between the two countries. These misunderstandings have arisen because of policy differences between the two governments in fighting terrorism and other issues. It also shows that the two sides have not been able to convey to each other convincingly their respective points of view on the subject Trump administration offers new opportunities to the two sides to understand each other's point of view and better coordinate their respective anti-terrorism policies. From the perspective of Pakistan, Pakistan has been seeking a civil nuclear deal like the one US concluded with India and considers it imperative for restoring balance in the region. It wants this agreement to overcome the energy crisis it_is facing. Pakistan wants to have a balanced relationship with the US and not a discriminatory one. It expects from the US to restrain rather than encourage Indian meddlesome role in Pakistan using Afghan soil, Pakistan was not given an improved US trade access for its textile exports. It is crucial for Pakistan's economy to restore its declining industrial sector through trade access which is more effective than aid. 92 ‘od KIPS PUBLICATIONS,