What's new

US-Pakistan-India Equations Post-Obama – Analysis

monitor

ELITE MEMBER
Apr 24, 2007
8,571
7
12,509
Country
Bangladesh
Location
Bangladesh
US-Pakistan-India Equations Post-Obama – Analysis

Written by:
PR Chari
IPCS
8th June 2011

A month and a week have passed since Osama bin Laden’s dramatic execution in his Abbottabad hideout. Two outcomes, both fully anticipated, have already come true.

The first is that Osama’s execution and his burial at sea [read feeding to the sharks in the North Arabian Sea] in contravention of Islamic traditions, has evoked hardly any reaction in the Muslim world. Why? Unsurprising, because he was not visible following the American attack on his base in Afghanistan after 9/11. His periodic exhortations to the faithful through videos to carry on the jihad against Americans had begun to pall. Obviously, the Pakistan Army and ISI found value in secreting Osama away in Abbottabad so that they could continue milking the munificent American cow for over $20 billion in civil and military assistance over the years. Osama’s access to the outside world was severely restricted. Consequently, his charisma was fading; witness the minimal repercussions of his assassination in the Gulf and Middle East, convulsed presently by the ‘Arab Spring’. Ironically, Pakistan is the country most adversely affected by Osama’s killing. Almost daily revenge attacks are being launched on its security establishment by the Tehrik-e-Taliban and other outfits linked to al Qaeda.


Pakistan India Relations

The second outcome, equally anticipated, is that Pakistan’s anger that its sovereignty was violated by the Abbottabad raid was feigned. It has since quieted down. Anyway, this feigned anger was tempered by guilt, and was only meant to assuage the outraged domestic population. Pakistan’s dependence on American aid is absolute, and it could not have continued this charade for long. Now, the Americans have deprived Pakistan of its last fig leaf of sovereignty by forcing its consent to conducting ‘joint strikes’ against ‘high value targets’, [read important militant leaders holed up in Pakistan.] The successful drone strike, which took out Ilyas Kashmiri, is the first such ‘joint strike’. It succeeded because pinpoint and real-time intelligence were available to the Americans. Was this supplied by the ubiquitous ISI? Ayman al Zawahari, Mullah Omar and the Haqqani family are next in line. Watch this space.

What could Pakistan and India expect from the US in the post-OBL era? It remains dependent on Pakistan to ensure that logistics supplies transiting through Pakistani territory from Karachi reach the American and international forces deployed in Afghanistan. Pakistan has exploited this American vulnerability to disrupt supplies to convey its disapproval of US actions. Post Osama, the US will be much less tolerant of crude blackmail. It could, instead, exploit Pakistan’s vulnerability of being, in truth, a bankrupt and rentier state. More plainly, the US could use its aid to Pakistan for ensuring its fuller cooperation to address the jihadi threat emanating from its territory. President Obama has already advised Islamabad to refrain from exaggerating the threat from India and to not be niggardly in throwing its weight behind counter-insurgency operations against the jihadi outfits ensconced in the FATA and Khyber-Pakhtoonkhwa province.

What does all this mean for India? Significantly, the US has not renewed its standard call on India to reconcile with Pakistan and resolve the Kashmir dispute to enable Pakistan to reduce its military presence against India on its eastern flank, and re-deploy those forces on its western borders to grapple with the militant outfits based there. Instead, the US has treated India with great circumspection, appreciating its capacity, like China, to invest in the American economy, provide markets for American goods – especially defense equipment, and partner the US to stabilize the volatile Southwest Asian region. Pakistan [read Pakistan Army and the ISI] would find it difficult however to continue its aberrant foreign policy of using cross-border insurgency and terrorism to keep India off-balance. Indeed, Pakistan will be under great pressure to restrain its militants from acting with impunity from its territory.

India must obviously not shun dialogue with Pakistan. But it should re-define its terms and review the agenda beyond the hackneyed eight issues listed for discussion in the India-Pakistan Foreign Secretary level talks. High on this agenda should be the delivery of India’s ‘most wanted’ criminals provided asylum in Pakistan, plus visible action against those identified Pakistanis who had perpetrated the Mumbai outrage. This includes credible action against the Lashkar-e-Toiba and Jaish-e-Muhammad, which are enjoying ‘most favoured terrorist organizations’ status in Islamabad.

No doubt a ‘tough’ agenda will not appeal to the Prime Minister, who is, by nature, averse to driving a hard bargain against Pakistan, especially in its present state of discomfiture. But as the former NSA MK Narayanan informed an American interlocutor, as revealed by WikiLeaks, the Prime Minister stands ‘isolated’ in the Indian policy establishment. The majority would undoubtedly favour a more realistic and hard-nosed policy in dealing with Pakistan without getting mushy in the unfolding post-OBL era.


PR Chari
Visiting Professor, IPCS
email: prchari@gmail.com

IPCS

IPCS (Institute for Peace and Conflict Studies) conducts independent research on conventional and non-conventional security issues in the region and shares its findings with policy makers and the public. It provides a forum for discussion with the strategic community on strategic issues and strives to explore alternatives. Moreover, it works towards building capacity among young scholars for greater refinement of their analyses of South Asian security.
 
Obama is not going anywhere.there are 90+% chance that he will win election again.
Obama is little intrested in India Pakistan relation but certainly is in Pakistan Afghan one
 
As we have all acknowledged, Pakistan and US relations are headed no where but south -- but the reason for this is important for us to understand - the inability of the Pakistan army and ISI to obey the government and instead develop and insist that the policy of the army be the policy of the Pakistan government, is largely to blame for these relations headed south - but to be fair, there is also a structural component, driving these relations south, in both the US and in Pakistan.

I think Chari has read this right -- now what to do about it? How can this eventuality be used by India -- but really what is it that India seek ??

Going by Chari, there is no strategy but there is a tactical approach to deliver greater pressure on a "bankrupt and rentier" Pakistan -- how reasonable is to to expect this tactic to produce results which suggests a structural change in the way the Pakistan army and ISI view the world ???

I would suggest that it will be entirely unproductive - how so? Recall we are dealing with an army that is not rooted in the nationalism of the State, rather it is rooted in the narrative of the army itself - it not about the survival of Pakistan, it's about the survival of the army --need proof, look at the policy of strategic depth, I mean does it involve moving populations to save them? certainly not, the population is to be left to the Indian to care for.

So, the problem remains, how to influence the Pakistan army? And what is the purpose of this influence? The purpose of this influence is to diminish the Pakistan army and allow it's restructuring -- this eventuality, I would argue, is more of a possibility, when the army is deprived of using the oxygen of Pakistan under threat.
 
American cow for over $20 billion in civil and military assistance over the years.

This is well over hyped figure. Today ISPR has issued a statement which says in last 10 years only $1.4 billion are received as Military Assistance. For civil assistance also, the true figure and impact is negligible, less than half of the amount allocated reach Pakistan rest is gone in to American bureaucracy and taken back in fees, charges and other expenses.

Pakistan [read Pakistan Army and the ISI] would find it difficult however to continue its aberrant foreign policy of using cross-border insurgency and terrorism to keep India off-balance. Indeed, Pakistan will be under great pressure to restrain its militants from acting with impunity from its territory.

I don’t know what the hell is this So-called Analyst is talking about? How ISI is using cross-border insurgency and terrorism to keep India off-balance? When in reality it is India from its consulates on the mountains, training, funding, arming and sending the terrorists to Pakistan to cause murder and mayhem. But isn’t it convenient for this blind analysts to just ignore over 40,000 people dead in Pakistan due to Indian terrorism? He really think ISI is doing terrorism, and RAW is whiter than white? Liars had their day’s numbers, now nobody with an independent mind trusts such liars. The Indian guest here would abuse the privilege and start writing posts against my comments.

But now I wonder how Pakistani sites provides these Indians free voice in Pakistani forums, while me and other Pakistanis comments are never published by Indian forums and website. The Indians then come with their phoney stories about their democracy. When as a matter of fact, India is the most intolerant and terrorists society and country. Hindus zealots in India kill members of all the minorities with impunity. The killing of Sikhs, Dalits, Christians and Muslims is widespread all around India.

Anyway, this feigned anger was tempered by guilt, and was only meant to assuage the outraged domestic population. Pakistan’s dependence on American aid is absolute, and it could not have continued this charade for long.

Once again, false information, secondly as I wrote in another thread, it is all Musharaf’s fault, he should have pencilled out written contracts with clear cut responsibilities and costs to be paid by the Americans in advance for the services offered by Pakistan and use of infrastructure and transportation. If the traitor has done so, we would have received far more money without the stigma of aid. As a matter of fact Pakistani losses both in Financial terms and in human cost is fare greater than Americans can ever return.

But alas, because of the short-sightedness of Musharaf, Pakistan is still receiving commands of “do more” and stigma of aid, from every quarter.
 
I would suggest that it will be entirely unproductive - how so? Recall we are dealing with an army that is not rooted in the nationalism of the State, rather it is rooted in the narrative of the army itself - it not about the survival of Pakistan, it's about the survival of the army --need proof, look at the policy of strategic depth, I mean does it involve moving populations to save them? certainly not, the population is to be left to the Indian to care for.

Did you ever consider that what Pakistan views as 'strategic depth' in Afghanistan is actually a denial of strategic depth TO India?
I too want the Army's clout in Pakistan to be cut down.
But you seem to parrot the baseless ideas about Pakistan's Afghanistan policy.
I am pretty sure Pakistani Army will not bother to look at Afghanistan so long as Afghanistan is not made into the nth province of India. Otherwise, what does really Afghanistan offer? Not much but trouble.
You have lost respect in my eyes.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 2, Members: 0, Guests: 2)


Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom