The Mirage of US-Pak Relations: Indian Façade

By Shreyas D Deshmukh

November 27, 2014  

In January 2014 US-Pak strategic dialogue resumed after a gap of three years. Then Pakistan National Security and Foreign Affairs advisor Sartaz Aziz remarked, “There’s a strong perception in Pakistan that a lot of pressure is exerted on Pakistan on issue of concern to India.”[i] Pakistan Army Chief Gen Raheel Sharif was in the US from 16 Nov 2014 for a week-long visit with a similar agenda on the table. The events of the last eleven months have changed the perception of Indian media and strategic community. It seems Indians are looking at the emerging US-Pak relations from Pakistani prism. It has come out recently, when the report on ‘Progress Towards Security and Stability in Afghanistan 2014’ was published by US Department of Defence (DOD), in which it has been mentioned that, “Afghan and Indian focused militants continue to operate from Pakistan territory to the detriment of Afghan and regional stability. Pakistan uses these proxy forces to hedge against the loss of influence in Afghanistan and to counter India’s superior military.”[ii] There has been a huge hue and cry in Pakistan on this report and subsequently the US ambassador was summoned; on the other side India applauded this report. This episode has been concluded as the shifting US stand over Pakistan and moving towards India. There are some other actions taken by US also leading towards this conclusion including overtly acknowledging Lashkar-e-Taiba’s (LeT) hand behind the attack on Indian Consulate in Herat, putting Jamat-ud-Dawa (JuD) in Black List [iii], supporting Indian developmental initiatives in Afghanistan and now the ongoing investigations against Robin Raphel.[iv] Are these events about Pakistan's apprehensions towards US-India relations related? If not, what are the milieu of these episodes and will there be any repercussions?

In 2012 a DOD report said, “Pakistan’s continued acceptance of sanctuaries for Afghan-focused insurgents […] continue to undermine the security of Afghanistan and pose an enduring threat to U.S., Coalition, and Afghan forces”.[v] A similar line appears in a report of 2013. The 2014 report only differs in terms of more critical words and admits that India centric terrorist groups also operate side by side with Afghan focused terrorist organizations. Further, the same report tries to naturalise Pakistan’s actions by acknowledging Indian influence in Afghanistan and says, “Although stability in Afghanistan is in the interest of Pakistan, Pakistan also seeks sufficient Pashtun representation in the Afghan government to prevent Pashtun discontent along the Afghan-Pakistan border and limit India’s influence.”[vi] Former Special Representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan (SRAP) James Dobbines has also avowed that “Pakistan’s concerns (about Indian Influence in Afghanistan) aren’t groundless. They are simply exaggerated.”[vii] Now just acknowledging it in this particular report that Pakistan is supporting these proxies doesn’t make any difference. It’s a fact recognised in other reports as well, like the 9/11 report explains where the State Department knowingly neglected this fact even when the Department’s acting counterterrorism coordinator advised Secretary Albright to designate Pakistan as a state sponsor of Terrorism.[viii]

Another welcome decision taken by US is Black Listing JuD, formerly known as LeT, in June 2014. This pronouncement came after the attack on Indian Consulate in Herat in May 2014. The US State department said that they had credible information about LeT’s hand behind this assault. Even then Indian analysts looked at it from the Pakistani perspective and thought the US was taking a pro-Indian stance while the JuD chief tweeted "US allegations and [their] timing are precisely due to 'strategic partnership' with India in Afghanistan; against Pakistan."[ix] In Dec 2008 the UN added four JuD leaders in the banned list including Hafeez Saeed. The US greeted this decision because these four leaders were already in the US Treasury Department Sanctions list[x]. But still JuD is functioning openly in Pakistan under a different banner called ‘Falah-e-Insaniyat Foundation’ and it has been allocated a fund of nearly PKR 60 million for a year by (Pakistan) Punjab government[xi]. They are operating Internally Displaced Person (IDP) camps for the people who are displaced because of on-going operation Zarb-e-Azb in North Waziristan Area (NWA) and recruiting people for radical activities from those camps.[xii]

In the last three reports published by the US DOD on Afghanistan, US praised India’s role in development of Afghanistan but took a very cautious stand on Indian help to Afghanistan’s security-related matters. Rather, it gives the impression that US does not want India’s active involvement in these issues despite the Afghan Government needing such support [xiii]. This stand has been taken by US policymakers keeping Pakistani concerns in mind and it has been iterated by diplomats like James Dobbins frequently through their statements, one of which is mentioned above. Recently in an interview while replying to the statement ‘there is sense in Pakistan that the US is handing over the keys of Afghanistan to India when withdrawal gets underway by end of 2014,’ US ambassador to Pakistan Mr Richard Olson repeated the same retort given by James Dobbins and said, “India-Afghanistan relationship characterised by development assistance and small security assistance program. The concern here in Pakistan is over expressed.”[xiv] Interestingly, later a similar question was posed to SRAP Dan Feldman who declined to answer in particular.[xv] This shows the US consistency in expecting and accepting India’s role in Afghanistan keeping Pakistani subjectivity in mind. 

The ongoing investigation of former state department official and advisor on Pakistan-related issues Robin Raphel, who was famous in India and Pakistan for her anti-Indian stance, is an internal issue of America. She is under investigation for counter intelligence charges, it doesn’t have to do with her views about India in the past; although if the charges are proved it may affect US-Pak relations in the future.

After looking at the above analyses, it cannot be said that US is pleasing India but definitely there is some degree of inclination in American policies towards New Delhi. The answers to which can be found in the past as well as in the current evolving international system. Regarding the US-Pak relations, former CIA official and advisor to US Presidents on Afghanistan and Pakistan Bruce Riedel accepted that, “The truth is America has not been a reliable ally of Pakistan and certainly not a reliable ally of Pakistan democracy.”[xvi] This explains that the American policy makers are themselves in a dilemma as to what kind of relation they want to pursue with Pakistan which always exploits this benefit of doubt. While the US is leaving Afghanistan and the Afghan government seems to be surviving therefore the optimism on its high. Indeed the US has to maintain supportive combat role in the Afghanistan and Pakistan was advocating for it since long time but as per now there is no change in the scheduled withdrawal plan. For the time being it can be assumed that Pakistan’s importance could have reduced for the US and this thing has happened in the past as well. Putting in the words of former Deputy Secretary of State Mr. Richard Armitage, “we didn't have a policy for Pakistan; we had a policy with Pakistan directed against something else.”[xvii]

US has always had a good affinity with military rulers in Pakistan. Now the democratically elected Nawaz Sharif government is in power and given the impression of the previous tenure of Nawaz Sharif and his relations with the Clinton administration, questions will be raised as to how he is going to deal with them. If US attempts direct engagement with Pakistani army, it can further strain the civil-military relations in Pakistan. When Pakistan COAS Gen Raheel Sharif was in the US for the ‘Strategic Dialogue’, SRAP Feldman gave a statement in which he said US has a strong relationship with the civilian government but also wants good relations with the Pakistan army. This shows that the US is dealing with the Pakistani civilian government and Military leadership at different pace which could hamper US-Pak relations. In recent times, Pak-China relations have been on its peak and the US would like to prevent Pak from going under the China’s fold and to avert this, US has continued its aid to Pakistan giving stress on social development programs.

In current circumstances, US might need India’s moral and diplomatic support on different fronts. In this case, the US has to convince the new government in India that they are taking into account the Indian concerns as well. Considering this merging evolutionary change in the US policies, it could be concluded that it won’t need much time to take a revolutionary ‘U’ turn if the situation arises (or it will be engineered soon) in the region. This is just a supposition to talk about the changing attitude of US towards these two nuclear powers. While looking at the long term implications including emergence of more radical forces in the form of Khorasani’s in Af-Pak region, it seems US will continue with the same policies which they have followed in the past. Further India wants to pursue its interest in the region which lies in the stability and annihilation of radicalism; it is only possible with the help of US and Pakistan. Even then, if Pakistan and India are looking at the aforementioned events as US’ pro-India stance, this is merely a coincidence because both India and the US are working towards the same goal of achieving stability and prosperity of the region.

The author is Research Assistant at CLAWS. Views expressed are personal.

References 

[i] Remarks at the U.S.-Pakistan Strategic Dialogue by Sartaz Aziz and Secretary John Kerry, 27 Jan 2014

http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2014/01/220646.htm, Accessed on 13 Nov 2014

[ii] “Report on Progress Towards Security and Stability in Afghanistan-2014”, DOD USA, October 2014, , P. 95

[iii] “US blacklists Pakistan's Jamaat-ud-Dawa”, Al-Jazeera, 26 June 2014, http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia/2014/06/us-blacklists-pakistani-islamic-charity-20146261127191358, Accessed on 10 Nov 2014

[iv] “Pakistan lobbyist Robin Raphel under lens for alleged spying”, Times of India, 7 November 2014, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/Pakistan-lobbyist-Robin-Raphel-under-lens-for-alleged-spying/articleshow/45073087.cms

[v] “Report on Progress Towards Security and Stability in Afghanistan-2012”, DOD USA, December 2012, P. 145

[vi] DOD USA 2014, P. 95

[vii] “US acknowledges Pakistan’s fears of Indian presence in Afghanistan”, Dawn, 7 Aug 2013, http://www.dawn.com/news/1034778, Accessed on 8 Nov 2014

[viii] National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, ‘The 9/11 Commission Report’, P. 139 http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report.pdf, Accessed on 8 Nov 2014

[ix] “US blacklists Pakistan's Jamaat-ud-Dawa”, Al-Jazeera, 26 June 2014, http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia/2014/06/us-blacklists-pakistani-islamic-charity-20146261127191358, Accessed on 10 Nov 2014

[x] “Jamaat-ud-Dawa, LeT leaders added to U.N. banned list”, Reuters, 11 Dec 2008, http://in.reuters.com/article/2008/12/11/idINIndia-36967820081211, Acceded on 7 Nov 2014

[xi] “Pakistan's Punjab Government allocates funds for JuD centre”, The Hindu, 18 June 2013, http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/south-asia/pakistans-punjab-government-allocates-funds-for-jud-centre/article4826052.ece, Accessed on 5 Nov 2014

[xii] SiddiqiTaha, “Footprints: Extremist bodies run IDP relief efforts”, Dawn, 4 Jul 2014, http://www.dawn.com/news/1116927, Accessed on 5 Jul 2014

[xiii] “Viewpoint: India risks destabilising Afghanistan”, BBC, 6 May 2014, http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-27258566, Accessed on 10 Nov 2014

[xiv] Amb. Richard Olson’s interview, Daily Motion, http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1bs0q4_waqas-rafique-interviews-us-ambassador-to-pakistan-richard-olson_news, Accessed on 12 Nov 2014

[xv] Mr. Dan Feldman’s Interview, Daily Motion, http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x28y8vc_us-srap-mr-dan-feldman-interview-with-waqas-rafique-capital-tv_news, Accessed on 12 Nov 2014

[xvi] Riedel Bruce. (2011). ‘Deadly Embrace’. Washington D.C.- Brookings Institution’s Press. P. 120

[xvii] “We need to go beyond post-98 sanctions: Bush official”, The Hindu, 18 June 2001, http://www.thehindu.com/thehindu/2001/06/18/stories/01180002, Accessed on 6 Nov 2014

- See more at: http://www.claws.in/1291/the-mirage-of-us-pak-relations-indian-fa%C3%A7ade-shreyas-d-deshmukh.html#sthash.ZnviYe9p.dpuf