SLAMABAD (AFP)--Pakistan should stop protesting against U.S. missile strikes in its territory and instead focus on extracting concessions for what it sees as a violation of sovereignty, analysts said recently.
The first suspected U.S. missile strikes since the country's new President Barack Obama took office destroyed two alleged militant dens Friday in Pakistan's northwestern tribal belt. Officials put the death toll at 21, including three children.
Drawing heavy criticism from the Pakistan government, the strikes dashed hopes that the new administration in Washington would halt such attacks in the fight against extremists in South Asia.
Political analysts stress that expectations of a policy change are unrealistic, despite Washington's appointment of a new special envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan and the Obama administration's pledge to reinvigorate diplomatic strategy.
Former interior minister and retired lieutenant general Hamid Nawaz said Pakistan has to work harder in the national interest to extract concessions elsewhere and overcome the clear violation of national sovereignty.
"They (the U.S.) are very serious as far as terrorism is concerned. The new U.S. administration is deploying additional troops in Afghanistan, and when Gen. David Petraeus was here, he was concerned about the supply route (to the troops) ," he said.
The United States is seeking to increase the number of supply routes into Afghanistan, where U.S. and North Atlantic Treaty Organization forces are fighting Taliban insurgents, with extremist attacks plaguing the main transport corridor through Pakistan.
"The U.S. may help Pakistan more in terms of giving more aid, offering more trade opportunities, relaxing pressure on the nuclear program or helping us improve relations with India," Nawaz said.
"Pakistan has to take decisions in the national interest. There is no use in protesting to the United States. We will have to take action," Nawaz said.
"We can tell them, 'Do not violate our sovereignty, and if you do we will stop the supply route', things like that, so that our voice is heard in Washington."
Ishtiaq Ahmed, an international relations professor at Islamabad's Quaid-i- Azam University, also hinted at some kind of quiet agreement.
"There might be an understanding at some levels between the two sides about the U.S. drone attacks in Pakistani tribal areas," he said.
"Protests by Pakistan over missile strikes are basically meant for domestic public consumption, otherwise it is not possible that we keep on protesting and they keep on doing it," Ahmed said.
Former President Pervez Musharraf also said recently that Pakistan's efforts in the fight against terror should be rewarded with greater assistance.
On the eve of Friday's strikes, Obama warned that Islamist extremists in Pakistan and Afghanistan posed a grave threat and would be tackled as a single problem under a wider strategy.
Dozens of missile strikes since August have sparked government criticism of the United States, a close ally fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan and believed to be firing the missiles from unmanned CIA aircraft.
"These attacks do not help the war on terror. It alienates the local population," a spokesman for President Asif Ali Zardari said after the head of state lunched with U.S. Ambassador Anne Patterson on Saturday.
"We maintain that these attacks are counterproductive and should be discontinued," said the foreign ministry spokesman.
Islamabad has welcomed Obama's appointment of veteran U.S. diplomat Richard Holbrooke as special Afghanistan and Pakistan envoy. He has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize several times and is known for brokering the 1995 peace agreement that ended war in Bosnia.
Political analyst Hasan Askari said that while Washington pursues a double- pronged strategy, a full-scale review was underway.
"The U.S. administration appears to be very active on Afghanistan," Askari said. "There are drone attacks, and on the political front they have appointed a special envoy for Pakistan and Afghanistan. They are reviewing policy."
