Pakistan pivots to center as US and China vie for regional supremacy

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

China will never beat the western world

Western world is not one homogenous block. The US is rival of the US. For example.

 

[VCheng]

Western world is not one homogenous block. The US is rival of the US. For example.

Ah, that must explain everything!

 

[Nasr]

Even though he wasn't supposed to smoke on the flight, the two-star general was doing it anyway. And nobody onboard, not even the crew, would dare stop him.

It was 2017, and Maj. Gen. Asif Ghafoor, then the chief spokesperson of the Pakistan Army, the world's sixth-largest and only nuclear-armed Islamic military in the world, was on board a Pakistan International Airlines flight, flying back to Islamabad from London.

He was returning from a diplomatic mission that would sow the seeds of rapprochement which began to sprout this week, as details emerged about Pakistan and India's thaw through back-channel talks facilitated by European and Arab states, a stunning development between the archrivals.


Like many military officers, Ghafoor smoked.

But unlike most, the artillery general had a penchant for granting interviews on long-haul flights -- the perfect moment to talk about his recent trip.

Ghafoor had just spent a week in the U.K. with his boss, Pakistan's most powerful man, Gen. Qamar Javed Bajwa, conducting what his public relations machine was calling a spate of "military diplomacy."

"We told the British, and through them the Americans, that we are much like them, and not our friends in the East" said Ghafoor, wearing a blazer with a pocket square and a lapel pin in the shape a Pakistan flag, over swirling wisps emanating from his Marlboro Slim. He was referring to Pakistan's staunch ally, China.

"We emphasized that we share the same traditions, the same regiments and even the same uniforms with the British. That's because we have the same colonial history, the same past. We are naturally Western-oriented. Please remember that we were together during the Cold War, and don't bracket us with China. Don't force us into that camp."

Relations between Washington and Islamabad had been increasingly frosty since the mid-2000s, primarily over what the U.S. alleged was Pakistani support for the Taliban as well as Islamabad's tightening embrace of China. On that trip in late summer 2017, Ghafoor, his boss and other top Pakistani generals had been trying to send reconciliatory signals to the estranged Americans through their common cousin, the more familiar British defense establishment. After all, the Pakistani military traced its lineage back to the British Indian armed forces when Great Britain ruled the subcontinent, and maintained those important connections over the decades since independence.

Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan attends a meeting with Chinese Premier Li Keqiang in April 2019 at the Diaoyutai State Guesthouse in Beijing. © Reuters

Kemal Alam, a research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, a British government-funded think tank in London, said that in his tenure at the organization from 2015 till 2019, at least two dozen Pakistani generals visited the U.K.

"Two-stars, three-stars, even four-stars, visited often," said Alam. "London was an important stop for them to relay signals to Washington."

But besides passing on the word to the Americans, the British had also encouraged the Pakistanis to normalize ties in their own neighborhood, and so Bajwa had reciprocated by breaking new ground. At London's RUSI, he offered an olive branch to an old enemy, announcing that India -- Pakistan's larger neighbor and nemesis -- was welcome to join the much-vaunted China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), the $60 billion flagship infrastructure project of China's Belt & Road Initiative (BRI).

Though muted and disrupted by diplomatic shortfalls and military engagements, the overtures from Islamabad continued in one way or the other, with little interest from India. Fast forward to last week and Bajwa, now firmly in charge of Pakistan's foreign affairs after being granted an extension of tenure by the pro-military government, has made another advance toward India, with a fresh offer to "bury the past."

The Indians have finally responded. On Tuesday, Pakistan's National Day, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi congratulated his Pakistani counterpart Imran Khan with a warmly worded letter, hoping for the end of hostility in the region. Almost on cue, a bevy of reports has surfaced, detailing how the Pakistanis and Indians had been engaged in behind-the-scenes talks with help from common friends. And immediately, the low-hanging fruit of the India-Pakistan peace process, talks over water-sharing agreements, was plucked by a meeting of Indian and Pakistani agricultural secretaries this week.

Considering the two countries almost went to war two years ago, when India sent warplanes to attack Pakistan for Islamabad's alleged support of militants in the disputed Muslim-majority region of Kashmir -- which Pakistan responded to by downing an Indian jet and capturing the pilot -- diplomats and analysts are assessing the compulsions behind Pakistan's peace overtures, and India's reciprocity.

Tactically, they say, the expected American military pullout from neighboring Afghanistan is forcing Pakistan to play nice, for the Islamic republic does not want to return to where it was on Sep. 10, 2001, before it signed up to help the U.S. in Afghanistan: an isolated, semi-pariah state without many friends or prospects, and the primary supporter of the Taliban.

Strategically, they estimate that the great power competition brewing in the larger Indo-Pacific region between Pakistan's old partner, the U.S., and its staunch ally, China, is pushing Islamabad toward the center ground of nonalignment.

"There are two drivers for Pakistan. Firstly, [U.S. President Joe] Biden is sending clear signals that Afghanistan is going to be sorted," said a former senior U.S diplomat who who has worked in the region. "Our troops might not be out by May 1 [the deadline set by the Trump administration], but we will still leave."

Biden on Thursday said he "can't picture" U.S. troops being in Afghanistan next year.

"We are not staying for a long time. We will leave," Biden said in his first press conference as president.

The American official said the inevitable withdrawal will change the dynamic. "We will want Pakistan to continue to support the Afghanistan project but the U.S. won't be as dependent on them. So they risk feeling isolated from the U.S. again."

A container is loaded on to the container ship Cosco Wellington at the China Pakistan Economic Corridor port in Gwadar, Pakistan. © Reuters

But in the greater scheme, with U.S.-China tensions soaring over the former's quest for a "rules-based international order" in the Indo-Pacific, the Pakistanis are worried they could be looked upon not as a partner of the West, but a mere proxy of Beijing.

"The U.S.-versus-China rivalry is a major concern for Pakistan. It has left heads spinning in Islamabad," said the official. "The Pakistanis are saying, 'Wait a minute. We used to be friends with both the Chinese and the Americans, and now suddenly it's no longer acceptable? And there's pressure to choose sides?'"

"And there's public criticism of CPEC, which they believe is crucial to stimulate economic growth and create much needed jobs. The Pakistanis didn't see it happening this way."

The former diplomat was referring to Gen. Bajwa's recent statement about the massive, China-backed infrastructure project in particular, which has raised alarms in both Washington and New Delhi, primarily because it positions China in the Western Indian Ocean through a potential naval presence in the Pakistani ports of Gwadar, Jiwani and Karachi.

"CPEC has been at the heart of our economic transformation plan and we have left no quarter to declare its necessity for addressing our economic woes," said the general in his landmark speech on March 17. "While CPEC remains central to our vision, only seeing Pakistan through the CPEC prism is also misleading."

For some South Asia watchers, Bajwa's disclaimer was seen as Islamabad not entirely moving away from Xi Jinping's Belt and Road project, but putting some distance between itself as a sovereign entity and being seen as a Chinese satellite state.

"It's an imperative for Pakistan to be seen as an independent player. China is just one aspect of Pakistan's foreign policy pursuance. Yes, I have a problem with being bunched up entirely with China and seeing and being seen entirely through the Chinese prism. It's reductionist," said Hina Rabbani Khar, Pakistan's former foreign minister.

"There was a brief period in the previous government to completely be in the China camp, but it's time to take the center ground. However, Pakistan would be foolish to compromise what is a strong, pure and proper strategic alignment and strategic relationship with China. You can't wish a strategic relationship. It's based on an alignment of visions and reasons."

Former Pakistan Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar says China is "just one aspect" of Pakistan's foreign policy pursuance. © Reuters


That quest for the "center ground" has long eluded Pakistan's policymakers. During the Cold War, the Islamic republic was firmly allied with the U.S. In the Middle East, it chose to be closer to the Saudi Arabia-led Sunni bloc, compromising its relationship with its Shia neighbor, Iran. And economically and militarily, it's now heavily dependent on Chinese financing and hardware.

"If you have only one patron, your options are limited," said Tanvi Madan, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington. "With a broader base, you can hope to elicit more benefits, from more players."

"Clearly, Pakistan is facing a confluence of constraints. Due to the Afghanistan withdrawal. Due to U.S.-China tensions in the Indo-Pacific. Due to COVID's economic repercussions. Due to debt repayments. Even due to its old allies Saudi Arabia and [the United Arab Emirates] engaging and trading more with India. And so it's trying to create some space for itself."

But there is much room for skepticism. Pakistan and India have fought wars in 1947-48, 1965, 1971 and 1999. They've had countless skirmishes, mostly in the disputed mountains and valleys of the Kashmir region, where Pakistan has long supported political and militant groups, and which India has recently annexed by withdrawing the special status granted to the region by its own constitution, as well as enforcing a severe lockdown on its 12 million residents, most of them Muslims.

"The recent thaw is not an olive branch from Pakistan. It's akin to Pakistan throwing the entire olive garden at India," said Mosharraf Zaidi, a former adviser in Pakistan's foreign ministry, who has led aid and development programs throughout South Asia. "The fact that India attacked Pakistan and then unilaterally and brutally annexed Kashmir should have signified the end of any kind of Pakistani efforts to try to normalize the region and de-escalate the conflict. And yet the Pakistanis have repeatedly reached out to India."

Since they were both partitioned into independence by the British, the two countries have also engaged in trade, culture and cyberwars, and topped those off with a nuclear arms race. They've even used cricket and movies, the most popular pastimes in the region, to make diplomatic inroads as well as to cut off contact.

"Many Pakistanis will be rightly skeptical about expecting any sort of reciprocity from Narendra Modi's Hindu extremist government," said Zaidi.

Kashmiris run for cover as Indian security forces fire teargas shells during clashes in Kashmir in September 2019. © Reuters
But in New Delhi, the compulsions for normalization are also piling up, though at a different pace.

After losing men and ground in a military engagement with the China's People's Liberation Army in the Himalayas last year, the Indian military has been warning about the prospect of a two-front war with what Beijing's diplomats call the "Iron Brotherhood" between Pakistan and China.

Now, with a new U.S. administration, India is rethinking its own strategic calculus: operationalizing the Quadrilateral Strategic Dialogue, or the Quad -- the Indo-Pacific based partnership between the U.S., India, Japan and Australia that is fast emerging as a check on China -- and doubling down on its defense relationship with the Americans, even as it battles severe economic pressures triggered by COVID-19 as well as growing international criticism about its treatment of minorities, dissenters and the press.

"On the Indian side, there is the COVID challenge, economic slowdown, border tensions with China. They do not want problems on two fronts," said the former senior U.S. official who has worked in the region. "But they're also worried about the Biden administration coming in. The Democrats have historically been more concerned about human rights, India is concerned that U.S. concerns about India's actions in Kashmir and treatment of Muslims might take some of the bloom off the rose from the U.S.-India relationship."

"Though it is not evident publicly yet, these concerns could take some of the bloom off the rose from the U.S.-India relationship, to a degree," said the former diplomat. "But if the Indians are feeling the pressure, the Pakistanis are feeling a lot of pressure."

However, as he considers peace, India's Modi has a different constituency to worry about: the Hindu-nationalist base that got him elected and imagines an Akhund Bharat -- the Indian subcontinent minus Pakistan -- and is against normalizing ties.

"Previously, Modi's base has been unhappy about him reaching out to Pakistan," said Brooking's Madan. "But given no impending general election and perceptions of him as strong on national security, he has the flexibility to see how things go. If talks fail, he can tell the world, 'look, we tried.' But If there is derailment due to a terrorist attack, then does he stay the course, give up on talks, or find a way to retaliate?"

Pakistan pivots to center as US and China vie for regional supremacy

Islamabad attempts peace with India, wary of being seen as Beijing's proxy

asia.nikkei.com

Peace is good, but with hindustan, peace can only be achieve with Kashmir's liberation. Peace has been given a chance many a times in the last 74 years. Now there is no more room for negotiations.

For the immediate, seize all military dueling along the border, yes that is a realistic target. However if the "think tanks" are gesturing toward another "Samjhauta Express", then they are fools to think such a thing.

Pakistan's main external enemy is the Zionist-Hegemonic State, israel and with israel, america/britain/france are spoken in the same breath. Not forgetting hindustan is israel's pet and ally.

As such, Pakistan would be foolish to think any overtures from hindustan, are genuine. They would strike Pakistan the moment they see an opening/opportunity and this rapprochement drive Pakistan's leadership provides that very opening the hinduvta fanatics are looking for.

 

[aziqbal]

^ For Chinese bootlickers. We should not be completely dependent on one power, otherwise the Chinese can f*ck us over just as fast as the Americans can. We should maintain a balance.

very sensible post

These Chinese boot lickers dont know China will do to Pakistan worse than America has

they are blindly following anything Chinese

Pakistan first let both fight each other and we stay out let and milk both

 

[The Maverick]

very sensible post

These Chinese boot lickers dont know China will do to Pakistan worse than America has

they are blindly following anything Chinese

Pakistan first let both fight each other and we stay out let and milk both

milk both are you serious
China has virtually taken over gilgat and gwader to do what it likes .
granted you loans for cpec and is now charging interest on these .nothing is free even the thunders you boast China 3rd tier combat plane behind j20 and j10 is costing you dollars.
I ask again who are you milking exactly

 

[Goritoes]

Please keep in mind that there is a process for arms sales, which applies to all countries. If others can work their way through this well-known process, so can Pakistan. There is nothing that stops Pakistan from taking advantage of the same system.



USA can only convey its opinions in diplomatic terms. It did request Pakistan multiple times not to carry out its nuclear tests. However, Pakistan, as a sovereign nation, decided that its national interests were served better by ignoring USA's request. If Pakistan has no sane minds that would trust USA, do you think there would be any on the US side that would trust Pakistan after those (and later) events? After all international geopolitics is always a two-way street. and, as I said above, there is a process for arms sales, which applies to all countries. If others can work their way through this well-known process, so can Pakistan. There is nothing that stops Pakistan from taking advantage of the same system.

And it also is important to keep in mind that whatever USA does is not unique to it. All major powers, and indeed even minor powers, try to do everything that you attribute to USA. It is just that some do it better than others.

You miss the point don't you, US never request anyone if it wants anything, US only issue statements for International and Local public consumption, but plans are always made in Advance, US has no right to even request Pakistan to stop its Nuclear test when America abandoned Pakistan in two big major wars they fought, plus the history of mistrust started once again by US when CIA assassinated Pakistan's first PM Liaquat Ali khan, And as for later events if you mean 9/11 then it was a terrorists attack with non state Actors involved, If you believe International Geopolitics is a two way street then remind me when was the last Time US actually come to rescue or did something for Pakistan?

Look you are not naïve nor stupid, you and i both know how things work in US, its one of the oldest trick in US book that a Govt/President pass some arm sales only to be later blocked by Congress which is influenced by lobbies, Just because you are American doesn't mean you have to deliberately lie or deceive people over what the reality is , America has its good's and bad but i notice for you US never did anything wrong with either Pakistan or any other country, come on man .

very sensible post

These Chinese boot lickers dont know China will do to Pakistan worse than America has

they are blindly following anything Chinese

Pakistan first let both fight each other and we stay out let and milk both

If you really find his post, and the language he used sensible then RIP to PDF and its reputation for giving a title such as THINK TANK to you.

 

[aziqbal]

Western world is not one homogenous block. The US is rival of the US. For example.

well today EU joined US against China on sanctions

and EU + UK is sending warships to South China Sea along with US

 

[Awan68]

"We emphasized that we share the same traditions, the same regiments and even the same uniforms with the British. That's because we have the same colonial history, the same past. We are naturally Western-oriented. Please remember that we were together during the Cold War, and don't bracket us with China. Don't force us into that camp."

This Chutyapa needs to be adressed within our military, bieng colonised is a thing of shame not pride.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

well today EU joined US against China on sanctions

and EU + UK is sending warships to South China Sea along with US

Minor sanctions. China is EU's largest trading partner and it's only going to get bigger as the New Silk Road is being built.

 

[aziqbal]

Minor sanctions. China is EU's largest trading partner and it's only going to get bigger as the New Silk Road is being built.

why did Beijing react so angrily then? crying and claiming to WHO

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

why did Beijing react so angrily then? crying and claiming to WHO

They have to put a public face and a private face. Hillary Clinton said that.

Hillary Clinton answers for saying politicians need 'a public and a private position' on issues

During the second presidential debate, Hillary Clinton had to answer for emails leaked online that included excerpts from private speeches she'd given to banks.

www.businessinsider.com

and EU + UK is sending warships to South China Sea along with US

It is expensive and serves no purpose since they don't dare fight the islands.

 

[Verve]

It was Gen Bajwa who said 'no more' to USA! Yet this article attempts to paint a completely different picture. Strategic alignment is done and dusted with China, it is up to USA (& West) now to decide whether they want to have good relations without conditions.

Propaganda article this.

 

[nahtanbob]

Even though he wasn't supposed to smoke on the flight, the two-star general was doing it anyway. And nobody onboard, not even the crew, would dare stop him.

It was 2017, and Maj. Gen. Asif Ghafoor, then the chief spokesperson of the Pakistan Army, the world's sixth-largest and only nuclear-armed Islamic military in the world, was on board a Pakistan International Airlines flight, flying back to Islamabad from London.

He was returning from a diplomatic mission that would sow the seeds of rapprochement which began to sprout this week, as details emerged about Pakistan and India's thaw through back-channel talks facilitated by European and Arab states, a stunning development between the archrivals.


Like many military officers, Ghafoor smoked.

But unlike most, the artillery general had a penchant for granting interviews on long-haul flights -- the perfect moment to talk about his recent trip.

Ghafoor had just spent a week in the U.K. with his boss, Pakistan's most powerful man, Gen. Qamar Javed Bajwa, conducting what his public relations machine was calling a spate of "military diplomacy."

"We told the British, and through them the Americans, that we are much like them, and not our friends in the East" said Ghafoor, wearing a blazer with a pocket square and a lapel pin in the shape a Pakistan flag, over swirling wisps emanating from his Marlboro Slim. He was referring to Pakistan's staunch ally, China.

"We emphasized that we share the same traditions, the same regiments and even the same uniforms with the British. That's because we have the same colonial history, the same past. We are naturally Western-oriented. Please remember that we were together during the Cold War, and don't bracket us with China. Don't force us into that camp."

Relations between Washington and Islamabad had been increasingly frosty since the mid-2000s, primarily over what the U.S. alleged was Pakistani support for the Taliban as well as Islamabad's tightening embrace of China. On that trip in late summer 2017, Ghafoor, his boss and other top Pakistani generals had been trying to send reconciliatory signals to the estranged Americans through their common cousin, the more familiar British defense establishment. After all, the Pakistani military traced its lineage back to the British Indian armed forces when Great Britain ruled the subcontinent, and maintained those important connections over the decades since independence.

Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan attends a meeting with Chinese Premier Li Keqiang in April 2019 at the Diaoyutai State Guesthouse in Beijing. © Reuters

Kemal Alam, a research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, a British government-funded think tank in London, said that in his tenure at the organization from 2015 till 2019, at least two dozen Pakistani generals visited the U.K.

"Two-stars, three-stars, even four-stars, visited often," said Alam. "London was an important stop for them to relay signals to Washington."

But besides passing on the word to the Americans, the British had also encouraged the Pakistanis to normalize ties in their own neighborhood, and so Bajwa had reciprocated by breaking new ground. At London's RUSI, he offered an olive branch to an old enemy, announcing that India -- Pakistan's larger neighbor and nemesis -- was welcome to join the much-vaunted China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), the $60 billion flagship infrastructure project of China's Belt & Road Initiative (BRI).

Though muted and disrupted by diplomatic shortfalls and military engagements, the overtures from Islamabad continued in one way or the other, with little interest from India. Fast forward to last week and Bajwa, now firmly in charge of Pakistan's foreign affairs after being granted an extension of tenure by the pro-military government, has made another advance toward India, with a fresh offer to "bury the past."

The Indians have finally responded. On Tuesday, Pakistan's National Day, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi congratulated his Pakistani counterpart Imran Khan with a warmly worded letter, hoping for the end of hostility in the region. Almost on cue, a bevy of reports has surfaced, detailing how the Pakistanis and Indians had been engaged in behind-the-scenes talks with help from common friends. And immediately, the low-hanging fruit of the India-Pakistan peace process, talks over water-sharing agreements, was plucked by a meeting of Indian and Pakistani agricultural secretaries this week.

Considering the two countries almost went to war two years ago, when India sent warplanes to attack Pakistan for Islamabad's alleged support of militants in the disputed Muslim-majority region of Kashmir -- which Pakistan responded to by downing an Indian jet and capturing the pilot -- diplomats and analysts are assessing the compulsions behind Pakistan's peace overtures, and India's reciprocity.

Tactically, they say, the expected American military pullout from neighboring Afghanistan is forcing Pakistan to play nice, for the Islamic republic does not want to return to where it was on Sep. 10, 2001, before it signed up to help the U.S. in Afghanistan: an isolated, semi-pariah state without many friends or prospects, and the primary supporter of the Taliban.

Strategically, they estimate that the great power competition brewing in the larger Indo-Pacific region between Pakistan's old partner, the U.S., and its staunch ally, China, is pushing Islamabad toward the center ground of nonalignment.

"There are two drivers for Pakistan. Firstly, [U.S. President Joe] Biden is sending clear signals that Afghanistan is going to be sorted," said a former senior U.S diplomat who who has worked in the region. "Our troops might not be out by May 1 [the deadline set by the Trump administration], but we will still leave."

Biden on Thursday said he "can't picture" U.S. troops being in Afghanistan next year.

"We are not staying for a long time. We will leave," Biden said in his first press conference as president.

The American official said the inevitable withdrawal will change the dynamic. "We will want Pakistan to continue to support the Afghanistan project but the U.S. won't be as dependent on them. So they risk feeling isolated from the U.S. again."

A container is loaded on to the container ship Cosco Wellington at the China Pakistan Economic Corridor port in Gwadar, Pakistan. © Reuters

But in the greater scheme, with U.S.-China tensions soaring over the former's quest for a "rules-based international order" in the Indo-Pacific, the Pakistanis are worried they could be looked upon not as a partner of the West, but a mere proxy of Beijing.

"The U.S.-versus-China rivalry is a major concern for Pakistan. It has left heads spinning in Islamabad," said the official. "The Pakistanis are saying, 'Wait a minute. We used to be friends with both the Chinese and the Americans, and now suddenly it's no longer acceptable? And there's pressure to choose sides?'"

"And there's public criticism of CPEC, which they believe is crucial to stimulate economic growth and create much needed jobs. The Pakistanis didn't see it happening this way."

The former diplomat was referring to Gen. Bajwa's recent statement about the massive, China-backed infrastructure project in particular, which has raised alarms in both Washington and New Delhi, primarily because it positions China in the Western Indian Ocean through a potential naval presence in the Pakistani ports of Gwadar, Jiwani and Karachi.

"CPEC has been at the heart of our economic transformation plan and we have left no quarter to declare its necessity for addressing our economic woes," said the general in his landmark speech on March 17. "While CPEC remains central to our vision, only seeing Pakistan through the CPEC prism is also misleading."

For some South Asia watchers, Bajwa's disclaimer was seen as Islamabad not entirely moving away from Xi Jinping's Belt and Road project, but putting some distance between itself as a sovereign entity and being seen as a Chinese satellite state.

"It's an imperative for Pakistan to be seen as an independent player. China is just one aspect of Pakistan's foreign policy pursuance. Yes, I have a problem with being bunched up entirely with China and seeing and being seen entirely through the Chinese prism. It's reductionist," said Hina Rabbani Khar, Pakistan's former foreign minister.

"There was a brief period in the previous government to completely be in the China camp, but it's time to take the center ground. However, Pakistan would be foolish to compromise what is a strong, pure and proper strategic alignment and strategic relationship with China. You can't wish a strategic relationship. It's based on an alignment of visions and reasons."

Former Pakistan Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar says China is "just one aspect" of Pakistan's foreign policy pursuance. © Reuters


That quest for the "center ground" has long eluded Pakistan's policymakers. During the Cold War, the Islamic republic was firmly allied with the U.S. In the Middle East, it chose to be closer to the Saudi Arabia-led Sunni bloc, compromising its relationship with its Shia neighbor, Iran. And economically and militarily, it's now heavily dependent on Chinese financing and hardware.

"If you have only one patron, your options are limited," said Tanvi Madan, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington. "With a broader base, you can hope to elicit more benefits, from more players."

"Clearly, Pakistan is facing a confluence of constraints. Due to the Afghanistan withdrawal. Due to U.S.-China tensions in the Indo-Pacific. Due to COVID's economic repercussions. Due to debt repayments. Even due to its old allies Saudi Arabia and [the United Arab Emirates] engaging and trading more with India. And so it's trying to create some space for itself."

But there is much room for skepticism. Pakistan and India have fought wars in 1947-48, 1965, 1971 and 1999. They've had countless skirmishes, mostly in the disputed mountains and valleys of the Kashmir region, where Pakistan has long supported political and militant groups, and which India has recently annexed by withdrawing the special status granted to the region by its own constitution, as well as enforcing a severe lockdown on its 12 million residents, most of them Muslims.

"The recent thaw is not an olive branch from Pakistan. It's akin to Pakistan throwing the entire olive garden at India," said Mosharraf Zaidi, a former adviser in Pakistan's foreign ministry, who has led aid and development programs throughout South Asia. "The fact that India attacked Pakistan and then unilaterally and brutally annexed Kashmir should have signified the end of any kind of Pakistani efforts to try to normalize the region and de-escalate the conflict. And yet the Pakistanis have repeatedly reached out to India."

Since they were both partitioned into independence by the British, the two countries have also engaged in trade, culture and cyberwars, and topped those off with a nuclear arms race. They've even used cricket and movies, the most popular pastimes in the region, to make diplomatic inroads as well as to cut off contact.

"Many Pakistanis will be rightly skeptical about expecting any sort of reciprocity from Narendra Modi's Hindu extremist government," said Zaidi.

Kashmiris run for cover as Indian security forces fire teargas shells during clashes in Kashmir in September 2019. © Reuters
But in New Delhi, the compulsions for normalization are also piling up, though at a different pace.

After losing men and ground in a military engagement with the China's People's Liberation Army in the Himalayas last year, the Indian military has been warning about the prospect of a two-front war with what Beijing's diplomats call the "Iron Brotherhood" between Pakistan and China.

Now, with a new U.S. administration, India is rethinking its own strategic calculus: operationalizing the Quadrilateral Strategic Dialogue, or the Quad -- the Indo-Pacific based partnership between the U.S., India, Japan and Australia that is fast emerging as a check on China -- and doubling down on its defense relationship with the Americans, even as it battles severe economic pressures triggered by COVID-19 as well as growing international criticism about its treatment of minorities, dissenters and the press.

"On the Indian side, there is the COVID challenge, economic slowdown, border tensions with China. They do not want problems on two fronts," said the former senior U.S. official who has worked in the region. "But they're also worried about the Biden administration coming in. The Democrats have historically been more concerned about human rights, India is concerned that U.S. concerns about India's actions in Kashmir and treatment of Muslims might take some of the bloom off the rose from the U.S.-India relationship."

"Though it is not evident publicly yet, these concerns could take some of the bloom off the rose from the U.S.-India relationship, to a degree," said the former diplomat. "But if the Indians are feeling the pressure, the Pakistanis are feeling a lot of pressure."

However, as he considers peace, India's Modi has a different constituency to worry about: the Hindu-nationalist base that got him elected and imagines an Akhund Bharat -- the Indian subcontinent minus Pakistan -- and is against normalizing ties.

"Previously, Modi's base has been unhappy about him reaching out to Pakistan," said Brooking's Madan. "But given no impending general election and perceptions of him as strong on national security, he has the flexibility to see how things go. If talks fail, he can tell the world, 'look, we tried.' But If there is derailment due to a terrorist attack, then does he stay the course, give up on talks, or find a way to retaliate?"

Pakistan pivots to center as US and China vie for regional supremacy

Islamabad attempts peace with India, wary of being seen as Beijing's proxy

asia.nikkei.com

In the short term Pakistan is dependent on China. If you ever get out of the rut Pakistan's goals in Central Asia put you on a collision course with China

 

[VCheng]

You miss the point don't you, US never request anyone if it wants anything, US only issue statements for International and Local public consumption, but plans are always made in Advance, US has no right to even request Pakistan to stop its Nuclear test when America abandoned Pakistan in two big major wars they fought, plus the history of mistrust started once again by US when CIA assassinated Pakistan's first PM Liaquat Ali khan, And as for later events if you mean 9/11 then it was a terrorists attack with non state Actors involved, If you believe International Geopolitics is a two way street then remind me when was the last Time US actually come to rescue or did something for Pakistan?

Look you are not naïve nor stupid, you and i both know how things work in US, its one of the oldest trick in US book that a Govt/President pass some arm sales only to be later blocked by Congress which is influenced by lobbies, Just because you are American doesn't mean you have to deliberately lie or deceive people over what the reality is , America has its good's and bad but i notice for you US never did anything wrong with either Pakistan or any other country, come on man .

US policy towards Pakistan has been largely polite, except during more recent times, where Pakistan has clearly chosen to forge its own way ahead, independent of any US considerations. Both countries have the equal right to pursue their own national interests, just as Pakistan decided to pursue atomic weapons, and USA did not want Pakistan to declare them overtly (the previous covert status was much better).

Please present your proof of the claim that CIA assassinated any Pakistani leader, including Liaquat Ali Khan. https://factcheck.afp.com/no-declas...t-show-cia-assassinated-pakistans-first-prime

Lastly, the US system and the way it works through its check and balances is pretty open and understood by all those who wish to benefit from it. After all, Pakistan benefited from it over the decades from the same system tremendously. There is nothing stopping Pakistan from benefiting from it even now, if it so chooses. If not, then it is okay too for Pakistan to make its own way. The US system, for better or worse, remains the same. It is never wrong for any country, be it USA, or Pakistan, to pursue its own national interests. Always.

 

[CrazyZ]

Pakistan interests lie with with a China led Eurasian bloc. It should keep an eye on working toward a greater ME/NA bloc (this is still a work in progress). Pakistan should keep friendly terms with USA and continue counter terrorism collaboration however USA's two main foreign policy objectives (spreading turmoil in the ME and containing China) don't sync with Pakistan's interests.