|
Round The World
New Delhi, 26 October 2010
US-Pak Talks
NEED TO AUDIT AID
By Monish
Tourangbam
Research Scholar,
School of International Studies (JNU)
The 3rd round of the US-Pakistan
Strategic Dialogue ended with Washington
yet again opening its military aid coffer, albeit with some conditions attached.
But, it is not certain if those conditions would have enough pressure on the
Pakistani military to earnestly go after terrorism in all its facets.
In the absence of adequate external
auditing and definite yardsticks set, Pakistan’s military will just soak
in all these aid like a sponge without any tangible result. True, Pakistan is indispensable in America’s
counter-terrorism efforts and looking at the present scenario accentuated by
the recent devastating floods ravaging a large area of the beleaguered country,
international aid is important. The Pakistani people caught in the vortex of
escalating crises need more support than ever.
But the Pakistani Establishment,
particularly the strong military and its intelligence fixated on its archaic
anti-India thesis, has played a double game in its fight against terrorism to
the detriment of peace and stability in the region. As a result of Islamabad’s reluctance to fight certain terrorist groups
like the Afghan Taliban and the dreaded Haqqani network because of its myopic
interest and goals, the international forces in Afghanistan have faced the
brunt.
Besides, India
has repeatedly become a victim of terror plans hatched in and master-minded
from Pakistani soil by anti-India groups that have had the blessings of Pakistan’s
military intelligence. Thus, talks between Washington
and Islamabad do not fail to ruffle some
feathers in India’s
strategic circles.
The recent round of dialogue assumes
added significance as it comes on the eve of Obama’s much-awaited visit to India. During
the talks, the Obama Administration seemed to be extra cautious while dealing
with India-specific issues. And set to rest all speculation by announcing that Obama
would not be visiting Pakistan
during the upcoming tour.
This apart, there are enough
concerns and issues on the platter for the India visit with debates raging over
the Nuclear Liability Bill, high-tech transfer, out-sourcing etc. As such, with
a long term perspective of Indo-US ties, the US Administration would not want
to unnecessarily jeopardize the Presidential visit by shooting controversial
bites on issues concerning India
and Pakistan.
If the Pakistani
attempt, as quite evident, was to somehow convince Washington to intervene in matters
pertaining to the India-Pakistan dispute, then they obviously came back
empty-handed. During the dialogue, the US was categorical that the Indo-Pak
issues need to be resolved bilaterally. The US
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton indicated to journalists that a civilian
nuclear deal with Pakistan
was not on the radar of the Obama Administration.
Needless to say, the Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood
Qureshi re-iterated his rehearsed line that he would continue to persistently pursue
the civilian nuclear deal case and the Kashmir
issue. Islamabad
desires a sort of parity with the India-US nuclear deal, a culmination of long
negotiations and dialogues. Recall, New
Delhi had to take arduous diplomatic
pains to get pass the 46 nation Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) waiver and a safe
pass from the US Congress. Washington seems to
be in no mood to consider such a grand venture with Pakistan in the near future.
Moreover, the
nuclear deal with the US, the
NSG waiver and the numerous nuclear deals India
has signed with other countries is a vindication of India’s clean record when it comes
to the responsibility with which it has maintained its nuclear expertise. Pakistan, on the other hand, has a shoddy record
when it comes to non-proliferation, with the father of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons programme, Abdul
Qadeer Khan, disclosing selling nuclear technology to countries like Iran, North Korea
and Libya.
Additionally, concerns have been
expressed that the conditions in Pakistan are not conducive for the
safety and security of its nuclear weapons, with fear mounting of the weapons
falling into terrorists’ hands.
However it is also a fact that Pakistan has
time and again served as the frontline State for the US’s engagement in the region due
to its geo-strategic location. Be it against communism or terrorism. Islamabad is an indispensable part of Washington’s
campaign in Afghanistan,
much depending on how the Pakistani army fights the “terror womb” on its western
border. Concerns
have mounted since Obama’s decision to begin withdrawing troops from Afghanistan by
July 2011.
There has been visible and rising
anti-Americanism in Pakistan
amid the increasing drone attacks in militant hideouts within the country. The
Pakistan army has often been found wanting in its commitment to fight groups
that do not pose a direct threat to the State, and this is exactly where the
Obama Administration needs to convince the Pakistani Establishment.
This time around, Washington has
tied some strings to the aid being given to Islamabad. This could be a good start if the
conditions set are duly followed through. But, if they turn out to be mere lip
services, then it would just embolden the Pakistani military to keep juicing
the Americans and renegade on its responsibilities. At the end of the 3rd
US-Pakistan Strategic Dialogue, Secretary of State Clinton announced a
five-year, $2 billion military aid package to Pakistan that would increase
current financing for weapons purchases by about one-third.
But the aid carrot came along with some sticks as well. The Obama
Administration while extending the aid made it categorical that it wanted an
honest and full-fledged action against all groups’ under-mining US
counter-terrorism efforts in the region. News of the aid package poured in as Washington made a strong
decision to cut-off assistance to individual Pakistani
military units reportedly responsible for human rights abuses, including the
summary execution of alleged insurgents.
The suspension of funding was issued in accordance with the
so-called Leahy Amendment (after Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont),
which bars US
military assistance to units committing abuses. This could be a good precedent
to build on to make the Pakistani military aware that the US coffers can be
opened only if certain standards are maintained and results are seen on the
ground.
The question is: Can we expect any major change of strategy
from the Pakistanis? If we go with experience, very little can be expected from
Pakistan’s
military. History tells us that India
will always remain the enemy No.1 for Pakistan’s military and that aid
will continue to be sucked into the system without much result. Over-dependence
on these entities in the past has led to the strengthening of fundamentalism and
jihadi groups in the region.
Importantly, Pakistan’s
military and intelligence seem in no mood to sacrifice the friendship of groups
that could increase its clout in any future make-up of Afghanistan. It
all boils down to how well the Obama Administration employs its stick while it
gives the carrot to Pakistan.
As also how it builds its options in countering terrorism where Pakistan is
seen as the most important ally yet not a totally reliable partner. ----- INFA
(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)
|
Archives 
