1st and 2nd Lecture

“Pakistan’s External Affairs”
 Venue: NOA Campus, Lahore.

 Instructor: Zahid Mehmood Zahid, PhD (IR).
 Contact: https://www.facebook.com/groups/144123599347978
Lecture by: Zahid Mehmood Zahid, PhD (IR) NDU, NOA Islamabad.
Syllabus: Pakistan's External Affairs & Global Issues
 Pakistan’s Foreign Policy (Theoretical aspects)

 Pakistan’s relations with:
 Afghanistan, (Afghan Issue – a wholistic picture)
 United States of America
 China & Turkey
 Globalization.
Foreign Policy Analysis;
 Study of the conduct & practice of states in int. arena.
 Who makes? (decision making structure)
 How makes? (decision making models)
 What influences the process? (Int. Ext. factors)
First Two Lecture Cover;
 Foreign Policy Defined

 Decision Making Models
 Pakistan FP, objectives, determinants
 Relations with Afghanistan, Afghan issue
 Relations with USA
How does a state safeguard its national interests in
international arena?
Lecture by: Zahid Mehmood Zahid, Politics & IR, UCP, Lahore.
General Objectives of Foreign Policy
 Maintaining the Territorial Integrity of the State

 Protection of the people
 Promotion of Economic Interests
 Protection of the diaspora
Core National Interests:
 Survival
 Economic Functionality
 Ideology & Values
Definition by different scholars
 “Systematic decision-making by constitutionally authorized
officials of the state” J. Rosenau
 “FP is the key element in the process by which a state translates

its broadly conceived goals & interests into concrete course of
action to attain these objectives and preserve interests.”
Padelford & Lincoln, 1962
 “FP consists of decisions and actions which involve relations

between states,” Joseph Framkel
 It is the combination of rules & regulations through which a
state establishes relations with other states.
 Foreign policy is not permanent, it keeps on changing.

Why?
 Because, in Int. relations there is no permanent enemy and

friends, but ….. the interest.
Who makes/decides the Foreign Policy?
 Ruling elite (PM/President, Foreign Ministry Cabinet)

 Bureaucracy (Foreign Service, ambassadors, etc)
 Pressure Groups (business, religious, social groups)
 Public Opinion
 Intelligence agencies
 Media
Stages in foreign policy decision making
 1Assessment of the Int. & domestic political environment.
 2 Goal setting.
 3 Determination of policy options.
 4 Decision making process.
 5 Implementation of a chosen policy option.

Factors influencing the Foreign Policy
External Factors; Internal Factors;

 A state’s position in global power  Military capabilities
structure  Economic capabilities
 Geographic Location  Regime type (type of govt.)
 International Perception  Public Opinion
 Leadership
 Quality of Diplomacy
 Role of Media and Think Tanks
Implementation of Foreign Policy
 Foreign policy is implemented through diplomacy:

1. Political methods,
2. Economic methods,
3. Military methods.
Political Methods:
Governments & its representatives (Ambassadors, envoys,
ministers) engage in talks with their counter-parts to convince
each other.
Economic Methods
 Promotion of mutual trade,
 Exploring favorable markets for the exports,
 Country’s products are showcased in international markets

(through expos).
 It boosts the agricultural & industrial growth of the state.

Military methods
 This is coercion - imposing your will on the other country.

(Gun-boat-diplomacy, With-or-against)
 Only a militarily strong power can undertake this method.
 This is utilized when, other peaceful means fail to bring any

change.
Graham Allison’s Foreign Policy
Decision Making Models
1- Rational Actor Model
1. Defining & analyze the problem

2. Prioritizing the Goal
3. Developing alternatives
4. Evaluating each alternatives
5. Selecting the best options
6. Execution of decision
2 - Organizational Process Model (OPM)
 Leadership cannot make decision solely on its own.
 OPM is best for satisfactory decision making.
 Decision making is done by qualified and professional

individuals.
3 - Bureaucratic Model.
 This model explains the relationship between Bureaucrats and

elite politicians.
 Key individuals in critical positions with great influence.
 They have different organizational positions and

commitments:
 They have different priorities.

The case of Iraq War
US President
George Bush
V. President
Dick Cheney
National Security
Secretary Defense Secretary of State
Advisor
Don. Rumsfield General Colin Powel
Lecture by: Zahid Mehmood Zahid, Politics & IR, UCP, Lahore. Condoleezza Rice
Guiding Principle of Pakistan’s FP
“Peace with all and enmity with none”

Q. A. M Ali Jinnah
 Friendship with all
 Mutual non-aggression
 Promotion of peace and prosperity
Pakistan’s FP Objectives
 Promoting Pakistan as a dynamic, progressive, moderate,
and democratic Islamic country. (a pragmatic corrective
measure to fix Image problem)
 Friendly relations with all/especially major powers, &
neighbors. (Zero conflict policy with neighbors – a new
realization, regional cooperation for economic well
being)
 National security & geo-strategic interests, including
Kashmir. (Internal & External)
 Eco. cooperation with the world. (Regional integration)
 Interests of Pakistanis abroad. (Economic dimension -

remittances)
 Regional and int. cooperation. (Afghanistan & global

Terrorism)
In a nutshell:
 Maintenance of territorial integrity
 Preservation of political independence
 Socio-economic development
 Improving position in global power structure.
Pak FP determinants
1. India/Afghanistan
2. Kashmir
3. Economy
4. Geography
5. Ideology
6. Public Opinion
Decision Making Structure & Process
 Prime Minister
 National Security Council
 Parliament
 Intelligence
 Interest groups
 Media
Pak-Afghan Relations
 Despite common culture, ethnicity, faith, history & geo-
political dilemmas, relation have been troublesome.
 Pak Afghan relations have always been at odds.
 Primarily because of ‘Durand Line’ issue.
 Afghanistan opposed Pakistan’s entry into UNO.
 July 26, 1949 – terminated all agreements with British

including ‘Durand Agreement’
Afghan claims:
Afghanistan descends into chaos in late 1970s
 In 1960s relations were at ease relatively.
 1970s Daud govt. supported ethno-nationalism.
 Afghanistan – in late 1978 descended into chaos – USSR invaded

Afghanistan in 1979.
 Pakistan supported Afghans in their war of liberation against USSR.
 Civil war, emergence of Taliban 1994, Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, 9/11

in 2001.
Post 9/11, Pak-Afghan relations.
 After 9/11, Pakistan Joined WoT against Taliban, supported

Bonn Process for new govt in Afghanistan.
 Political, Economic, Security, Health, & Educational support
to the Afghanistan. (1 Bil $, 6000 scholarships, hospitals,
universities, Int sharing)
 Advocated Afghan-led, Afghan-owned, Afghan-controlled)
of Afghan issue; but received blames (strategic depth) from
Afghanistan.
Stable Afghanistan - strategic depth for Pakistan
“We want to have strategic depth in Afghanistan, but that does

not imply controlling it. If we have a peaceful, stable and friendly
Afghanistan, automatically we will have our strategic depth
because our western border will be secure, and we will not be
looking at two fronts”.
Gen. Kayani, 2010
Complicating factors
 Sovereignty (trust deficit)
 Irredentism
 Regional competition (Indian question)
 Lack of political engagement
 Lack of trade & connectivity
 Absence of shared economic vision (CARs)
Solution
 Hold track 1 discussion (depends who controls Kabul)

 Hold track 2 discussion (acknowledge core issues)
 Pakhtun representation on Both sides
 Having controversy and dispute resolution mechanism
 Intelligence sharing
 Border management mechanism
 Good faith through domestic policies
 Anticipate spoilers and mitigate them
 investments
Peace-process prior to the Taliban’s Take over
 In 2018, US took a ‘U’ turn, changed military policy into a political
one.
 “It was impossible without Pakistani help,” Khalilzad
 WHY? … For the peace dividend.
 Peace and economic activities are associated with the peace &
stability in Afghanistan.
 Regional integration is the only way to achieve economic well-being

for Pakistan. (CPEC, CA etc)
Pakistan’s strategic anxieties
 A failed state (Afghanistan) will undermine stability of
Pakistan (eco, CPEC, refugees, weapons etc).
 Manoeuvring of the TTP by Indo-Afghan nexus.
 Collaboration between TTP & Afghan Taliban in future.

(ideological affinity)
 IS in Afghanistan
“Afghan Quagmire and the Possibility of Peace”
A country easy to take, difficult to hold
 One of the most Isolated & barren landscape. Yet all the super powers walk
into Afghanistan. WHY?
 A prey of its own geography & target of empires.
 It is a multi-ethnic society. (ethnic composition)
 The land of contradictions and surprises.
 School of militancy & Jihad, and Poppy Capital of the World.
 The most bombed, crushed, corrupted, and mined nation of the world.
Anatomy & Actors involved in the Conflict
 Domestic level: Persian/Pashtun, Modernity-Conservatism, Bad

governance, Drugs, Weapons, war lords, Overall war economy
in a failed state.
 Regional level: Afghanistan/Pakistan, India/Pakistan,

Iran/Saudia, Russia and China.
 Global Level: US/China, Russia/US, Iran/USA, Taliban/IS,
Peace process ended as a tragedy! Why?
 It was for ‘US departure’ not for ‘peace’.
 A ‘Grand Bargain’, b/w US & Taliban.
 Taliban secured Military, Diplomatic, & Political victories.
 1) legitimacy, 2) prisoner release, 3) US withdrawal are by

product
Why has this process failed in yielding a negotiated
settlement?
 US had emboldened Taliban against Afghan govt.
 Ashraf Ghani govt. (trump vs Biden …)
 US misread & lacked a coherent policy for Afghanistan.
Domestically:
 Trust deficit b/w Taliban and Afg Govt.
 Pakhtun vs Persians
 Western modernity versus traditionalism
 Shariah versus Secular Liberal Democracy
 Tribal revenge
The tale of America's Afghan engagement in FOUR
statements!
 "Go into Afghanistan, knock them (Al-Qaeda) down; no democracy promotion,
no nation building, no state-building." (Zbigniew Brzezinski, October 2001)
 "We are here (in Afghanistan) to promote democracy and Afghan state." (Bush,
Nov. 2006)
 "We will build Afghan state and its institutions, especially the Afghan National
Security Forces." (Obama, 2010)
 "We did not go to Afghanistan to nation-build. And it's the right and the
responsibility of Afghan people alone to decide their future, and how they want
to Lecture
runby:their country." (Biden July 9, 2021)
Zahid Mehmood Zahid, PhD (IR) NDU, NOA Islamabad.
No ideal solution but pragmatism can save Afghanistan
 A political arrangement based on “Power-Sharing”
 Disarm, Demobilize, Re-integrate (DDR)
 Security Incentives
 Amnesty Incentive
 Political incentive (Power-sharing under constitutional arrangement –

amending the constitution is expected)
Discussion
Q/A

1st and 2nd Lecture

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

1st and 2nd Lecture

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

“Pakistan’s External Affairs”

 Venue: NOA Campus, Lahore.

 Pakistan’s Foreign Policy (Theoretical aspects)

 Study of the conduct & practice of states in int. arena.

 Who makes? (decision making structure)

 How makes? (decision making models)

 What influences the process? (Int. Ext. factors)

 Foreign Policy Defined

 Maintaining the Territorial Integrity of the State

 “FP is the key element in the process by which a state translates

 “FP consists of decisions and actions which involve relations

 Foreign policy is not permanent, it keeps on changing.

 Because, in Int. relations there is no permanent enemy and

 Ruling elite (PM/President, Foreign Ministry Cabinet)

 1Assessment of the Int. & domestic political environment.

 3 Determination of policy options.

 4 Decision making process.

 5 Implementation of a chosen policy option.

External Factors; Internal Factors;

 Foreign policy is implemented through diplomacy:

 Promotion of mutual trade,

 Exploring favorable markets for the exports,

 Country’s products are showcased in international markets

 It boosts the agricultural & industrial growth of the state.

 This is coercion - imposing your will on the other country.

 Only a militarily strong power can undertake this method.

 This is utilized when, other peaceful means fail to bring any

1. Defining & analyze the problem

 Leadership cannot make decision solely on its own.

 OPM is best for satisfactory decision making.

 Decision making is done by qualified and professional

 This model explains the relationship between Bureaucrats and

 Key individuals in critical positions with great influence.

 They have different organizational positions and

 They have different priorities.

“Peace with all and enmity with none”

 Interests of Pakistanis abroad. (Economic dimension -

 Regional and int. cooperation. (Afghanistan & global

 Preservation of political independence

 Improving position in global power structure.

 Afghanistan opposed Pakistan’s entry into UNO.

 July 26, 1949 – terminated all agreements with British

 1970s Daud govt. supported ethno-nationalism.

 Afghanistan – in late 1978 descended into chaos – USSR invaded

 Pakistan supported Afghans in their war of liberation against USSR.

 Civil war, emergence of Taliban 1994, Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, 9/11

 After 9/11, Pakistan Joined WoT against Taliban, supported

“We want to have strategic depth in Afghanistan, but that does

 Hold track 1 discussion (depends who controls Kabul)

 WHY? … For the peace dividend.

 Regional integration is the only way to achieve economic well-being

 Manoeuvring of the TTP by Indo-Afghan nexus.

 Collaboration between TTP & Afghan Taliban in future.

 A prey of its own geography & target of empires.

 It is a multi-ethnic society. (ethnic composition)

 The land of contradictions and surprises.

 School of militancy & Jihad, and Poppy Capital of the World.

 Domestic level: Persian/Pashtun, Modernity-Conservatism, Bad

 Regional level: Afghanistan/Pakistan, India/Pakistan,

 Global Level: US/China, Russia/US, Iran/USA, Taliban/IS,

 A ‘Grand Bargain’, b/w US & Taliban.

 Taliban secured Military, Diplomatic, & Political victories.