What's new

Pakistan-US Relations: A Brief Overview

fatman17

PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
32,563
Reaction score
98
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Pakistan-US Relations: A Brief Overview



By Muhammad Jawad Hashmi -- (February 22, 2013)



The independence of Pakistan brought the subcontinent on the verge of new challenges. Being a newly born state, Pakistan was prone to multiple internal and external challenges including foreign policy vis-à-vis major powers. The choice for the time was limited in nature i.e. USSR and USA.

The history of Pak-US relations dates back to 20 October 1947. Primarily this relationship was grounded on economic and military assistance by US; the SEATO & CENTO signed by Pakistan and she become the second biggest receiver of economic and military assistance from US. But the Indo-Pak wars of 1965 and 1971 gave a clear message to the Pakistani leadership and a vivid understanding was developed in the Pakistan that US is not a reliable partner, as US did not supported Pakistan during the time of dire need.

Surprisingly, in 1979 US vested interest brought both countries closer to each other when the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan dragged the US to step in the war by using proxy agents. The mutual interest of both US and Pakistan led them to conclude joint policies to kick soviets back to home. In 1981, Pakistan and the United States agreed on a $3.2 billion military and economic assistance program aimed at helping Pakistan deal with the heightened threat to security in the region and its needs for economic development. The amazing historic fact is that whenever there are US interests in the region the relations becomes vigorous among Pakistan and US, but after the job gets done a mandatory break up in the relations is observed. The Cold war can be considered a best example of such relations as right after the withdrawal of soviet from Afghanistan and disintegration of the Soviets the Pak-Us relationship goes to lowest ebb.

The limited scoped foreign policy approach of Pakistan vis-a-vis India created hindrance in the development of social and economic dimension of Pakistan. Indian factor contributed ample motivation for Pakistan to boost-up the arm race in the region, nuclear stock piles, territorial disputes and alliance formation with the major players. Chinese factor in the formulation of foreign policy remained equally significant at times when the Chinese leadership is pronouncing that “Pakistan is as important for China as Beijing”. The incident of 9/11 proved to be a hallmark in the history of world. The direct impact of this incident enveloped the South Asian region into its sphere.

A notable phenomenon is that the attack on Afghanistan in the name of War on Terrorism and presence on international forces in shape of NATO, ISAF and US has not only highlighted the strategic importance of the region but dragged the region into limelight as ever before. The Pak-US relation took an up side down change as a result of prevailing regional situation. It is an open secret that Pakistan served as proxy trouper against the Soviets by supporting Anti-Soviet forces in the Afghanistan, which was primarily funded by United States of America. The 9/11 episode once again opened the gates for the west and particularly for the US to hunt the target as per their wish by chanting the slogan of “War on Terror”. Since Pakistan was left with a bottled neck option so she has no other choice but to node yes! As Pakistan showed off that she was with world not with terrorists.

Since the time Pakistan joined the US led War on Terror, it got a number of traditional & non-traditional security challenges to deal with. The political & economic turmoil is worsening the social setup, which is polluting the country’s over all environment. The drone attacks in the tribal areas of Pakistan are considered as a clear violation of a state’s sovereignty.

Osama Bin Laden was killed on May 2, 2011, by a US Special Forces Unit in the Abbottabad (a city having elite Army Training Academy). The wiki-leaks allegedly disclosed that Pakistani security services were tipping off Osama Bin Laden. This maneuver distrusted the Pak-US engagement on War on Terrorism. The Osama Bin Laden episode was another significant shift in the relations between Pakistan and US. The hunt of Osama Bin Laden from Abbottabad, right under the nose of Pakistani elite Military training center has crafted huge anxiety in the top military leadership. This event was quite shocking not only for military elite but for the lay man of this country.

The US has repeatedly committed a number of violations with reference to international law and norms. One of the significant episodes out of such violations is Indo-US nuclear deal. Which has been signed clearly violating the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. This has fueled an already prevailing conflicting environment in the region. The chances of upsurge in arm race in the South Asia are more imminent now. As Pakistan might follow the suit and try to go for a similar kind of deal in any other sympathizer state or ally from P5.

During the 2011, the US government suspended deferred high-level contacts with Pakistan after Raymond Davis incident occurred. Raymond Davis, a suspected secretive security outworker was on an American diplomatic mission in Pakistan when he gunshot two Pakistani natives and coined that it was in self-defense after the two tried to steal from him. Pakistan acted tough on Davis despite US demands for him to be freed because he enjoyed diplomatic immunity. The case of Raymond Davis showed the covert presence of American agents disguised in multiple covers in pursuit of their objectives. This gave the message to the Pakistani leadership that there is certainly a covert agenda involved behind such presence of CIA sponsored thespians.

In the same way, the statement of the Iranian officials disclosed the sensation that US is involved in spying the nuclear facilities of the Pakistan and there are clear evidence that US may go for the nuclear sabotage against Pakistan’s nuclear facilities in near future. This sounds factual when US leadership declares that we (US) have clandestine plans for the safety & security of Pakistani nuclear facilities, as there have been evidence that US conducted the simulation military exercises during last decade to secure the nuclear weapons of Pakistan during the state of instability/state failure.

Later on, the attack on Pakistan army’s Salala Check Post close to afghan border by the US air forces/NATO forces infuriated the Pakistan, as the deaths of the soldiers from Pakistan Army were considered as an alarming puzzle for the Pakistan as a whole. The blockade of the NATO supply at that moment was inevitable and Pakistan had to do it because of growing internal pressure. The situation of blockage of NATO supply was a unique experience in the history of Pak-US relations. As neither Pakistan nor US have witnessed a complex situation like that before. This stand off between US and Non-NATO ally took lot of time to resolve, as internal pressure from Pakistan was converted into a generous support in form of Defa-e-Pakistan movement.

The western presence, role of US and ISAF military has proven to be a safe heaven for India in the Afghanistan and it has created unrest for the Pakistan. The huge Indian involvement in Afghanistan supported by US and India has also offered to train the afghan forces after the 2014, this would further the existing security anxiety of Pakistan. This can be clearly understood by the words of an Indian scholar Sumit Ganguly, who believes Indo-Pak relation given the long history of discord and mistrust but Indian’s presence in Afghanistan has generated apprehend threat for Pakistan. And that is happening with the US support to Indian regional hegemonic agenda. Since India is playing the role of fifth largest aid donor to Afghanistan so her presence in the Afghanistan will drive Pakistan into a new security dilemma. This is because of the fact that Pakistan is engulfed by a two front war with traditional and non-traditional security challenges by State and Non-State-Actors. In such a situation, Pakistan is over burdened with economic load as it is allocating a huge amount of budget in the security and Defence matters. Security analysts believe that all such developments by India are backed by US and if US play a responsible role that Indian factor can be deteriorated from the Afghanistan.

The current scenario of the Pak-US relations reveals that there has been number of high intensity issues which may define the future nature of the relationship between Pakistan and United States of America. The war on terror has gifted the following bounties to Pakistan so far;

•Constant Drone Attacks
•Plenty of people have been killed by the Taliban (approximately 35,000) by American drone attacks (approximately 9000).
•Pakistan was blamed that she is supporting Haqqani Network through clandestine means, but Pakistan denied such linkages and support officially.
•Pakistan has approximately arrested over 500 terrorist and handed them over to the US. Even than the wish is to “Do More”
•As a result, Pakistan had sanctions lifted and has received about $10 billion in US aid since 2001.
•Pakistan was pronounced as major Non-NATO ally in 2004.
•Being Non-NATO ally of US in War on Terror and biggest recipient of US military assistance, Pakistan expects to receive approximately $20 billion.
•The Obama Leadership promised to triple non-military assistance to Pakistan to $1.5 billion per year over 10 years, and to tie military aid to progress in the fight against militants.
•However, in the upshot of the Osama Bin Laden episode, Pakistan Army annulled a $500 million training program and directed all 135 US instructors back to home.
The religious leadership in Pakistan doesn’t sound happy over such aid as they view this aid and cooperation from US as;

•A tool to pollute the Socio-political environment of Pakistan
•Weaken the Pakistani society by crafted the western culture
•Defame the religion and religious forces in the garb of aid by a hidden evil agenda
•To improve the soft image of the US by propaganda mean of the Media etc.
•To get benefit by geostrategic significance of the country by Us presence in the region and funding the state i.e. USAID
Since 2011, there is huge criticism and blame-game on each other regarding the stance over War on Terror, which has drifted the mutual cooperation into a stalemate at times. Furthermore, it can be said that the present decline in Pak-Us relations has primarily caused by Raymond Davis case, Black Operation (killing for Osama Bin Laden) and Salala Incident. The Pak-US relations are severely damaged and also at a crucial stage in the history of bilateral relations.

Keeping the context in mind it can be concluded that Pak-US relations have observed many ups and downs throughout the history but US policy makers managed to use Pakistan at the time of need, whereas Pakistan lacked such policies. They might have done it with Aid or trade, but the Pentagon has leant the art to tame and use Pakistan at times as per their vested interests.
Since the mutual cooperation between Pakistan & USA exist in the form of Non-NATO Ally in War on terror and US is pouring aid for the development as well. So this is high time for both Islamabad & Washington to revisit their policies for the peaceful future relations.

The current policies if reexamined could reflect the common aspirations of the Pakistan and the US to live in the atmosphere of peace and security and pursue economic opportunities in a better way. Both states must work to continue to extend mutual relationship and work to overcome common challenges. Despite the fact that the last year was quite bitter vis-à-vis Pak-US leadership, but the probability of cooperation can not be ruled out in future. So, there is dire need to remove the prevailing trust deficit and responsible roll of policy makers in bringing the parties to same table. On the other hand US must adopt non-discriminatory foreign policy towards the region in general and particularly towards Pakistan, so that a peaceful and viable way out could be devised for the coming generation.

View profile and articles by Muhammad Jawad Hashmi →
 
My old article on the same matter:

The growing agitation of Pakistan with the US

A recent survey conducted by Pew Global Attitudes (a project of a research center in Washington) in Pakistan has proven that the 64% of the people in Pakistan see USA as one of the greatest threats to Pakistan. On the other hand only about 9% believe that the US can ever be Pakistan’s ally. However 70% of the Pakistanis who were questioned are absolutely against the Taliban and seek their utter elimination. Another survey conducted for the international broadcaster Al Jazeera by Gallup Pakistan found that 59 percent of Pakistanis felt the greatest threat to the country was the United States rather than the Taliban.

As the report suggests Pakistanis despise the USA but do not side with the Taliban or Al Qaeda. Generally Pakistanis view US unfavourably but they see the militants negatively too.

Unfortunately the Americans cannot come to understand why Pakistanis see them as their foremost enemy rather than the terrorists. On the other hand Pakistanis feel they have been constantly betrayed despite seeing the Americans as allies. They believe they have been used to accomplish USA’s strategic goals and interests in the region and have then been abandoned.

A look at history

The Taliban were formed, supported and funded by the USA in the 1980’s in order to drive away the Soviets from Afghanistan and offset the defeat they suffered to the Communists in the Vietnam War. According to newly opened CIA files USA wanted the Soviets to intervene in Afghanistan and aid was being transferred to Anti communist elements since July 1979 which was before the Soviets had officially invaded.

Pakistan was not always keen to join the war and did so upon USA’s insistence. Sources even claim that Zia Ul Haq did not want to get involved in the war but many promises of opening up military and economic assistance were offered to President Zia by American diplomats to convince him to join the war. This and the promise of a long lasting relationship with the USA convinced Pakistanis.

However by directly interfering in neighbouring Afghanistan on the behest of American urging Pakistan suffered over 120 incidents of terrorism which killed many citizens. One such bombing was the Islamabad depot bombings which were blamed on Najibullah’s Soviet backed Afghan government. USA suffered no losses as they had no troops on the ground and were too far away from the region.

Not surprisingly when the war was over Pakistan was not needed and the country was abandoned. In 1990 military and economic ties were cut off with Pakistan under the Presler Amendment which required proof that Pakistan did not possess a nuclear weapon. Tests by India on the other hand which were actually conducted much earlier were ignored and no sanctions were slapped on India.

Pakistanis also felt betrayed because America itself has one of the largest stockpiles of nuclear weapons in the World and is the only Nation to have used them.

Pakistan’s Nuclear Tests

India conducted its first surprise nuclear test in 1974 known as the “Smiling Buddha.” USA turned a blind eye to the first test but India’s second test in 1998 which followed a similar test by Pakistan almost immediately received international condemnation. Initially sanctions were imposed on both India and Pakistan.

However after a few months the sanctions on India were removed while those on Pakistan remained. Certain military sanctions specially relating to nuclear technology continue till today however no such sanctions are being imposed on India. The differential treatment annoys Pakistanis as India has 10 times Pakistan’s population and is much larger than Pakistan. The military as well is larger than Pakistan’s own.

Furthermore Pakistanis cannot understand why USA signed a nuclear deal with India but is not willing to sign the exact same deal with Islamabad which has sent clear signals that it wants a peaceful nuclear deal with the USA for power generation purposes. Pakistan is facing crippling power shortages that are affecting the daily life of its citizens. In major cities people have to make do without 6-10 hours of electricity in a day.

The relationship today

Americans believe that the aid they are giving Pakistan in the War on Terror is more than enough and is a message to Pakistan to forget the past and move on. However what they don’t seem to understand is that the losses of Pakistan in the WOT have crossed $35.5 Billion in damages to Pakistan. The aid does not compensate Pakistan for the losses given that the $11 Billion in aid given as yet is not even a quarter of this figure.

To aggravate things further much of the aid given to Pakistan has still not been delivered and much of it will be eaten up by the administrative costs of the US embassy.

In addition the Americans have expressed no sympathy for the 8000 Pakistani civilians and 2500 soldiers killed in a highly unpopular war but have always pushed Pakistan to do more as if it were their colony.

Many Pakistanis as a result believe that USA is supporting terrorism in their country. The fact that the US has released several Taliban commanders from its custody such as Abdullah Mehsud who have attacked Pakistani Nationals soon after their release has further supported this belief. The latest addition to the long list of such commanders is Mehdi-Mohammed Ghazali who was captured in Pakistan recently and is a Swedish National released from Guantanamo Bay.

The American media has a way of aggravating the situation and pouring salt to the fresh wounds of the Nation. The suggestion that Pakistani nukes may fall in the hands of terrorists only fuels rage and in turn is seen as a scheme to take possession of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons. On the other hand the constant campaigns of accusations aimed at Pakistan’s premier intelligence agency the ISI and the military are seen as an attempt to isolate and destroy the military and ISI so that it cannot stop CIA’s designs in the region.

When it is stated that Pakistan is not serious in the War on Terror despite the death of thousands of its own people it also fuels Anti Americanism. The Pakistanis have now become even more suspicious of the USA because of these media campaigns.

Due to the American policies towards Pakistan in the past and those that still continue today many Pakistanis simply see the terrorist organizations as American agents. For the majority of Pakistanis the USA and Taliban are basically two sides of the same coin.


Is USA losing Pakistan?

The very attitude of the USA towards Pakistan leaves lingering resentment and rage amongst Pakistanis. It does nothing but make terrorist organizations more powerful.

Where yesterday only a section of the population believed no productive ties could ever develop between Pakistan and USA today this phenomenon is noticeable even amongst the moderates as they see the USA as their sworn enemy. Pakistani analysts now believe it is time for Pakistan to take a tougher stance with the USA and design a policy that stops the tide of rising extremism and ensures Pakistan is not seen as an American lackey.

Most Pakistanis are already suggesting that either the Pakistanis take a tougher stance towards the USA and demand to be treated with the respect they deserve or withdraw from the War completely declaring themselves neutral to both the USA and the Afghan Taliban.

Whatever the case Pakistanis are now adamant to stand up to the United States and present themselves as an independent Nation that has enough spine to say no to the Americans when needed and guard its own interests. US is on the path to losing Pakistan much like it lost Iran in the 1980's.
 
Key point here is that US-Pak relationship is a marriage between two unequal partners. For US, Pakistan is a bride to be bedded only when convenient. Pakistan on the other hand knows this fact, still can’t resist and say ‘No’ when US comes knocking bearing fresh gifts. Reminds me of Ghalib’s couplet:

Qarz ki peetay thay mai, laken samejhtey thay kay haan
Rang la aeygi hamaari faaqeh masti ek din.

Meaning we used to drink borrowed wine despite realizing that one day we will be severely punished for getting drunk with no coins in our pocket.
 
Key point here is that US-Pak relationship is a marriage between two unequal partners. For US, Pakistan is a bride to be bedded only when convenient. Pakistan on the other hand knows this fact, still can’t resist and say ‘No’ when US comes knocking bearing fresh gifts. Reminds me of Ghalib’s couplet:

Qarz ki peetay thay mai, laken samejhtey thay kay haan
Rang la aeygi hamaari faaqeh masti ek din.

Meaning we used to drink borrowed wine despite realizing that one day we will be severely punished for getting drunk with no coins in our pocket.

well said, however if we dwell in the early history of the relationship ~ 50's and upto say 63, everything was honky-dory as they say. it was ayub's misinterpretation of the 'mutual defence treaty' and by waging war in 65, began the slide of mistrust.
 
In context of US, Pakistan's Foreign Policy has been dismal. Pakistani policy makers and its leaders used US for military build up failed to reap the benefit of US on economic front. Pakistan is full of natural resources and it could have utilized US by attracting FDI which would have brought the strength to financial backbone and provided economic shock absorbers in case of economic tough times especially in war time.

Increasing US interest in Pakistan since 1950s would have made US to come and defend Pakistan or at least back strongly over various issues as US would have wanted to protect its investment in Pakistan.

I have already talked about the failure of Pakistan to get US advance research and education facilities during those years in an old thread.

When we deal with unequal nations relations, the smaller state has to increase the bigger state's interest in its territory so that in any case they have to back you up completely as they don't their investment go down the drain and affect their economy.

If we look at Pakistan-US, in war times, US didn't loose economically while Pakistan did. If there were economic connections at good scale, US economy would have been affected and at that time it was competing with USSR. So US not only had to defend its strategic reasons bu also for economic reasons.

I think at this aspect, Pakistan has earned it little by inculcating China in KKH and Gwadar that gives Pakistan a strategic and economic advantage.

Still Pakistan has not only failed to understand US, but also repeatedly repeating same mistakes over and over again.

For a nation, the Foreign Policies are made with Long time goals and for that one needs to have stable Political Set up. Otherwise there will be Major Changes in Foreign Policy after every change in power. Foreign polcies adapt and gets trimmed at edges and bent according to current socio-economic, geo-politic, and strategic condition, but the main idea remains the same.

It also instills confidence in the allies as they can expect what will be the future moves of their allies and it helps in coordinating a joint strategy.

The success of Afghan war was this decade long cooperation at all level especially Strategic level. Ties have to be made continuous and ever increasing and smaller nations can use their strategic locations to get major benefits from the bigger allies.

Another aspect I like to mention is that over-dependence on allies rather than self-reliance. Always asking for help irks the allies too. Allies have their own domestic and international troubles in various times and when the other ally asks for money in tough times that causes troubles. Its just like asking loan from a friend at end of the month when he also has financial crunch during the last days of month.

Accountability and admittance of failure is also a major factor. If a country fails at various areas, from defense to economy, all should be held responsible. You can't expect economic growth if your borders are gun blazing. You can't expect political leadership to focus on internal problems while the security forces are engaged with enemy.

Don't let the Civilian and Military leadership to pass on the blame to each other and since Military has power, Political leadership gets the final blame. De-politicizing Security forces is also important. For a good finance minister, you pick a person with good credentials in economics, not in military battle tactics. If he has both, well and good, but the former should be given priority.

To be continued
................
 
@KRAITPolitical leadership gets the final blame.
no it dosnt - ARMY gets the blame for all our ills. there was no army from 47-58 (11 years). it was the best opportunity to set the 'tone' for how the country is going to be 'run' but it didnt happen. the politicians / establishment were too busy jockeying for power.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
@KRAITPolitical leadership gets the final blame.
no it dosnt - ARMY gets the blame for all our ills. there was no army from 47-58 (11 years). it was the best opportunity to set the 'tone' for how the country is going to be 'run' but it didnt happen. the politicians / establishment were too busy jockeying for power.
All I am saying that all majority of Pakistani people blame political leadership whereas Military has ruled for equal amount of time in Pakistan like Civilian leadership.

Army also had decades to set the "tone" for how the country is going to be "run". Sir my point is, politics of every nation is dynamic and the efficiency increases with time, its a gradual process.

One has to stick to one type of rule, either democratic or Military rule, to and fro confuses the allies as they don't know that after few years they will be dealing with a Democratically elected President and Prime Minister or Military Dictatorship.

I am telling from how your allies look at you, especially US. They often say that this to and fro makes things difficult for them to deal with.

They started WoT with Military Dictator in power and now they are dealing with Democratic govt.

You have to take into account their discomfort regarding this.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
well said, however if we dwell in the early history of the relationship ~ 50's and upto say 63, everything was honky-dory as they say. it was ayub's misinterpretation of the 'mutual defence treaty' and by waging war in 65, began the slide of mistrust.

Until, 1961 India & China were close; I vaguely remember the chant of “Hindi –China bhai bhai” meaning Indians & Chinese are brothers following the Chu Enlai’s visits to India 1957 & 1960. Thus India with close ties with the Soviet Union & China and leader of the non-aligned nations was considered an unreliable country.

Objectives of both the parties were different. US wanted to create a noose around the Communist block and invited Pakistan to join SEATO & Baghdad ( CENTO) pacts. Pakistan on the other hand used the defence pacts to bolster her defence forces. It was only after 1962 Indo - China war and US massive military assistance to India that some sort of realism crept into Pakistan’s corridors of power.

There was a paradigm shift in the US foreign policy with the election of John F Kennedy. One of the reasons could be that US ambassador to India John K Galbraith was extremely influential with the Kennedy administration.

I was a student in the UK in 1965 and I recollect a comment by one of the Democratic Senators that Arms were given to Pakistan to fight Communists not to wage war against friendly India.
 
In context of US, Pakistan's Foreign Policy has been dismal. Pakistani policy makers and its leaders used US for military build up failed to reap the benefit of US on economic front. Pakistan is full of natural resources and it could have utilized US by attracting FDI which would have brought the strength to financial backbone and provided economic shock absorbers in case of economic tough times especially in war time.

Increasing US interest in Pakistan since 1950s would have made US to come and defend Pakistan or at least back strongly over various issues as US would have wanted to protect its investment in Pakistan.

I have already talked about the failure of Pakistan to get US advance research and education facilities during those years in an old thread.

When we deal with unequal nations relations, the smaller state has to increase the bigger state's interest in its territory so that in any case they have to back you up completely as they don't their investment go down the drain and affect their economy.

If we look at Pakistan-US, in war times, US didn't loose economically while Pakistan did. If there were economic connections at good scale, US economy would have been affected and at that time it was competing with USSR. So US not only had to defend its strategic reasons bu also for economic reasons.

I think at this aspect, Pakistan has earned it little by inculcating China in KKH and Gwadar that gives Pakistan a strategic and economic advantage.

Still Pakistan has not only failed to understand US, but also repeatedly repeating same mistakes over and over again.

For a nation, the Foreign Policies are made with Long time goals and for that one needs to have stable Political Set up. Otherwise there will be Major Changes in Foreign Policy after every change in power. Foreign polcies adapt and gets trimmed at edges and bent according to current socio-economic, geo-politic, and strategic condition, but the main idea remains the same.

It also instills confidence in the allies as they can expect what will be the future moves of their allies and it helps in coordinating a joint strategy.

The success of Afghan war was this decade long cooperation at all level especially Strategic level. Ties have to be made continuous and ever increasing and smaller nations can use their strategic locations to get major benefits from the bigger allies.

Another aspect I like to mention is that over-dependence on allies rather than self-reliance. Always asking for help irks the allies too. Allies have their own domestic and international troubles in various times and when the other ally asks for money in tough times that causes troubles. Its just like asking loan from a friend at end of the month when he also has financial crunch during the last days of month.

Accountability and admittance of failure is also a major factor. If a country fails at various areas, from defense to economy, all should be held responsible. You can't expect economic growth if your borders are gun blazing. You can't expect political leadership to focus on internal problems while the security forces are engaged with enemy.

Don't let the Civilian and Military leadership to pass on the blame to each other and since Military has power, Political leadership gets the final blame. De-politicizing Security forces is also important. For a good finance minister, you pick a person with good credentials in economics, not in military battle tactics. If he has both, well and good, but the former should be given priority.

To be continued
................


KRAIT JEE I Could Not Agree More,While Pakistan Enjoyed All The Benefits That Japan and South Korea Availed,Pakistan Did Not Take Advantage Of Them.I Have To Give Credit To Your Leader Nehru.He Took Full Economic Advantage of His Relationship With USSR
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom