These so-called choices were made at America's behest and with their full cooperation to fight the 'evil empire'. It is only after the 9/11 blowback that the West got all high and mighty and put all the blame on Pakistan. Certainly Paksitan must take responsibility for its part; but the US seems to have developed amnesia about its role in the current development.
At the behest of the USA Pakistan developed nukes, which lead to trouble relations with the US? I think you are not understanding my point. What if you insisted on doing something that p-sses of the Chinese (like, say, sell arms to Taiwan)?
There is no double standard. Pakistan has always known that the West is an unreliable and duplicitous partner. As far back as Ayub Khan when he wrote "Friends, not Masters" about the Pak-US relationship, we knew the West could not be trusted. That is when we started our all-weather relationship with China.
Clearly this conflicts with earlier claims above about the US/Pak relations.
The West abandoned our so-called friendship over the decades and embraced our arch-enemy India. But, to be fair, saner minds in Pakistan never had any illusions about the depth of Western friendship in the first place.
Balony. Don't for an instance fool yourself into thinking China is any less instrumental in its relations with other nations than any other major power. They just have a different take than e.g. US on what constitutes short and long term (different time horizons)
Try selling some arms to Taiwan, see what happens (e.g. some APCs, as if that would somehow affect the huge numerical advantages of mainland China. Or even small arms and ammunitions, for that matter. Or support a free Tibet).
The timeline of India's closeness with the West is directly tied to China's rise.
That is what I said (and to CCCPs demise) > it is not about Pakistan v India but about global balance of powers.
Pakistan has offered friendship to the West but it was never fully returned. In 1965 and again in 1971, we saw exactly how useless our Western 'friends' were compared to India's frienship with Russia.
Boohoohoo.
India was supposedly non-aligned. (NOT!)
I'm sorry but I agree to conclude we disagree in our reading of relations. And it btw is silly to talk about relations with ' the West' as if this is one unified, homogeneous block, like US slaves. E.g. relations with France over time.
Exactly my point. Pakistan's 'friendship' was expendable.
'Real politik' - such is the nature of the big game. Goes for all relations. If it comforts anyone, there even comes a point where this applies to e.g. US/UK relations.... As for US/NL relations, may I call into recollection the relatively recent so-called '
The Hague invasion act'
