There has never been a dull movement in Pakistani politics. Something is always happening – and it only gets bigger with time. There is an innate restlessness in the political structure that could perhaps have settled down if the players had let the system take its position. As a result, a seven-decade-long transition is still underway.
Our position remains uncertain on the domestic and international front. The fault lies in our foundations as we refuse to recognise and acknowledge our faultlines and continue to encounter political wilderness.
On the very first day of the new year, US President Donald Trump, through a tweet that was liked by a quarter of a million people in less than 12 hours, dropped a bombshell on Pakistan by accusing it of “lies and deceit and fooling American leadership”. The timing of this unprecedented accusation has shocked people in Pakistan and, to an extent, in Washington. Did they not see it coming? Weren’t we expecting something closer to that end? Long before Trump even entered in the White House, George Bush used to mention the “axis of evils” and many in our country feared that after Iraq, Syria and Iran, Pakistan could be America’s next target.
The growing mistrust about Pakistan runs deep in many political capitals. We have somehow not been able to make friends, not in terms of gestures but by virtue of the policy choices that we have made. This has brought us to this stage. The Pakistani leadership was aware of the growing tensions between Washington and Islamabad and the causes behind it. But since Trump came into office, Pakistan’s relations with the US have not got off to a good start. In fact, both countries barely have strong relations. Recently two high-profile visits from both sides have given the impression that the Trump administration wants to engage and not confront Pakistan.
Pakistan’s civil and military diplomacy does not have the experience of dealing with and confronting a military superpower. Our past alliances with Washington were related to our utility in serving its interests. There was no direct conflict of interest. However, it is entirely different this time around. The world’s most-wanted terrorist was hunted down and killed on Pakistani soil. For years, terrorists hideouts remained active within Pakistan and from our soil.
Trump’s claim that $33 billion has been given in aid to Pakistan over the last 15 years seems to be exaggerated. There is no official data to prove this claim and a majority of these funds came into Pakistan as reimbursements under the Coalition Support Fund (CSF), which is believed to be $1 billion per annum. Meanwhile, non-military assistance was received in two major chunks: the first installment was received following the 2005 earthquake in Kashmir while the second came under the Kerry Lugar Bill and amounted $7.5 billion.
This funding, under the legislation of the US Congress, was not meant to be transferred to the Pakistan government’s account. It was meant to be spent on projects via US government-approved contractors – many of whom were foreigners – and implemented by foreign NGOs. Some of the projects that were funded by this means is still in the process of completion. So, it is not clear how much money was actually spent in Pakistan. Equally, it would be difficult for our government to verify and confirm the exact figure that was utilised. As a result, the figure of $33 billion needs to be confirmed by multiple sources. Why is this figure is being floated and on what basis? ANP leader Bushra Gohar has rightly asked for parliamentary oversight over the foreign funding coming into Pakistan.
In his new book ‘Neighbors in Arms’, US Congressman Larry Pressler has quoted a figure of the US funding provided in the 1980s during the Afghan jihad’s two phases: $3.2 billion from 1981 to 1987 that was followed by $4.02 billion until funding was cut off under the Pressler Amendment. Another US scholar Denis Cox has also quoted a breakup of funding in the 1980s, including funds received from China, Saudi Arabia and the US. Both figures do not match and, therefore, become difficult to verify. Trump’s latest figure will be quoted for a long time to come in the US. Pakistan’s relations with the US will be affected until a researcher questions this figure and comes up with adequately sourced data.
Various written accounts suggest that many senior officials in various US administrations have held a similar view to Trump’s about Pakistan. But such views have never come directly from a US president. Pressler’s book accuses Pakistan of lying over the issue of making a nuclear bomb. He told the then US president Reagan that “we are helping Pakistan get nuclear weapons – and, in fact, our Pentagon is helping Pakistan pay for its nuclear weapons”.
References like these could help Trump build a case against Pakistan. In the backdrop of the current wave of white racism – Trump’s core constituency – it may not be difficult for him sell this perception to the American people, Congress and his allies, including India and Afghanistan. It won’t be wrong to believe that the Trump’s foreign policy agenda is guided by domestic political consideration – from Jerusalem to Pakistan – that clearly seem to be attempts to divert the domestic focus on the ongoing Muller investigation against his election campaign’s contacts with Russia. But his outburst has long-lasting consequences for Pakistan.
Islamabad has already been cornered and stands openly accused and damaged. A response will not heal that. Trump is asking for an open confrontation. We must not give him that opportunity. We must let the political leadership take the lead on such matters.
Playing the victim card is not helping us and some soul-searching is required. Are we capable of that? Past experiences do not give us much hope. Our crisis has always been of our own making. The threats we have faced and troubles that we find ourselves in were direct consequences of the choices that we have made. There is still time to lead 200 million – a majority of whom are illiterate and live in painful poverty – towards a progressive path instead of a confrontational future.
Email: mush.rajpargmail.com
Twitter: MushRajpar