Successful visit

This week past the focus of Pakistani media’s attention was on Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s four-day scheduled visit to the United States and his meetings with several Obama administration senior officials culminating in a meeting with the US President himself.

Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif had prepared for the visit and sought input from the military (chief of army staff and DG ISI) the Interior Minister, Sartaj Aziz and Tariq Fatemi (from the Foreign Office) in a meeting on 15th October. The Americans too prepared for the Obama-Sharif meeting by engaging the Prime Minister and his team in a three-hour meeting on the day he arrived in Washington DC with US Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel, National Security Advisor Susan Rice, Director CIA John Brennan and Special Representative on Afghanistan Pakistan James Dobbins.

Since the completion of the visit analysts as well as opposition parties are engaged in rating the visit with many in the former group declaring it as setting the groundwork for a co-operation that would extend beyond 2014 when US troop withdrawal would become effective that may have serious security implications for the world in general and Pakistan in particular (with US troop withdrawal from Afghanistan via Pakistan proceeding without any hitches). Since 9/11, Pakistan has been viewed only in Afghanistan’s context by the US, reflected by the creation in January 2009 of the post of United States Special Envoy for Afghanistan Pakistan held by the deceased Holbrooke till 13th December 2010. The United Kingdom followed suit and in May 2011 created the post of UK Special Representative to Afghanistan Pakistan reminiscent of the British media’s epithet of ‘poodle’ for the then British Prime Minister Tony Blair for following the US dictates.

One word that comes to mind when discussing US-Pakistan relationship is its transactional nature or in other words it is based on give and take. The US gives money to Pakistan, and even 66 years after Pakistan gained independence the need for foreign financing for balance of payment as well as budgetary support has not diminished; and instead has risen to alarming proportions. But the US support has been overwhelmingly in support of the military (around 17 billion dollars in contrast to around 5 billion dollars as civilian aid) and while this naturally served US interests, yet to many analysts aid skewed in favour of the military was a reflection of our security concerns vis-a-vis India and an indication of the considerable, to many pervasive, political power that the military establishment continues to enjoy. And in this context, it is essential to note that the 1.6 billion dollars to be released just before the Obama-Sharif meeting were mainly for the military.

Be that as it may, the statement by President Obama endorsing Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s focus on ending conflict within South Asia as a means to enhance funds allocations for development in the region must be appreciated as it indicates that the two leaders were rhetorically at least on the same page with respect to the need to fuel development. Obama also mentioned loadshedding in this country and stated that he appreciated politically challenging decisions taken to reform the sector. The US is engaged in our energy sector and is supporting several mega generation projects that are currently being implemented. Local analysts may disagree as the current electricity tariffs include (i) general sales tax; (ii) withholding tax for industry and commerce which renders our products uncompetitive in the region; and (iii) receivables continue to mount and the transmission and distribution losses are well above even the regional levels indicating that the higher tariffs are to be paid by those who already pay their bills for inefficiencies within the sector. Two out of a total of five working groups to be established under the decision to resume strategic dialogue between the two countries relating to the economy are economy and finance and energy.

Transactional relationship requires Pakistan to give something in return for financial assistance. In US-Pakistan context, the US list of demands are mainly focused on security-related matters; more specifically the US continues to urge Pakistan to “do more” and not provide sanctuaries to the Afghan Taliban that allows them to recoup their losses and reengage with the US-led Nato forces, a charge that now Pakistan has begun to make against the Pakistani Taliban being provided sanctuaries in Afghanistan and their frequent bloody forays in our territory. There are reports that Nawaz Sharif took the US President into confidence with respect to his intent to begin negotiations with the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) after the last All-Party Conference gave him the mandate to do so.

Pakistan also wants a key role in Afghanistan’s future after Karzai, a role that is being opposed by Karzai. Pakistan’s trump card is its influence with the Afghan Taliban and its full support for talks that would lead to a peaceful transition of power in the forthcoming Afghan presidential elections. However, the statement issued after the Obama-Sharif meeting did not go into specifics and merely stated that the two leaders reaffirm that a peaceful, stable, independent and united Afghanistan is in the interest of the region. The modalities of an agreement would no doubt be discussed in the defence consultative group. And the two remaining working groups would be law enforcement and counter terrorism as well as Security, Strategic Stability and Non-Proliferation. Pakistan requires support to strengthen its internal security to deal with terrorism; however, one would assume that the latter working group is to ease US concerns in our possible role in proliferation.

The US has demanded the release of Dr Shakil Afridi who was instrumental in determining Osama bin Laden’s location in Abbottabad enabling the US to launch a successful operation to kill him and the Pakistani Premier raised the issue of Dr Aafia Siddiqui’s release. The US took the moral high ground in the former case and dismissed the verdict given by our court by stating that the Doctor provided support to locate a terrorist and insisted that it could not release Dr Aafia Siddiqui as she had been convicted of attempting to kill US soldiers.

However, the Muslim world, including Pakistan, accuses the US of double standards; for example violation of human rights through its CIA-operated drone strikes which, recently, Amnesty International has termed as war crimes. The Prime Minister raised the issue but a report backed by documents carried by a US daily showed again (the first time was by WikiLeaks) that the civilian government and the military establishment were on board with respect to US drone strikes. The Foreign Office has clarified that “whatever understanding there may or may not have been in the past, the present government has been very clear regarding its policy on the issue.” It is, however, unclear whether the US will abandon a policy that Obama had declared a ‘necessary evil’ given the withdrawal of our civilian government’s endorsement but there are some Pakistani military commanders who are on record as having stated that drone strikes are useful as they target foreign as well as our home-grown terrorists.

So was the Sharif visit to the US a success? One would have to respond in the affirmative as all issues were discussed though there was, as expected no breakthroughs. In diplomatic circles the start of talks or the resumption of dialogue marks the success of a visit and the fact that all contentious issues were discussed reflects the fact that there was no pussyfooting by our Premier but, at the same time, there was no Ahmedinejad-type posturing that would have pleased many in this country but not achieved any positive results for the country.