Perhaps every generation of leaders reaches a point of witnessing a seemingly unprecedented level of change. For Pakistan, that point is certainly now. As our political landscape reinforces its transformation, it is readily apparent that future successes depend on the collective fate of the region. Full credit must be given to the determined leadership of the last administration, especially President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani, for steering the PPP-led coalition government to a full term despite, to be diplomatic, challenges to the legitimacy of their rule. This accomplishment, decades in the making, was Pakistan’s silent revolution, as other Muslim-majority countries begin the long trek towards establishing institutions on a, hopefully, democracy-bound trajectory. Democracy is not one event, of course, but rather a process; now the leadership of Pakistan must take their duly earned roles to ensure stability in an inconstant regional environment. Frankly, no deal more directly impacts Pakistan’s own stability than Afghanistan’s Bilateral Security Agreement (BSA). As Pakistan gears up for a post-2014 world, memories of the last US withdrawal hover over the table while the tangible fallout of that fateful event — the guns, the militancy and an extremism we had never seen before — is manifested within our borders. That past can either be treated as baggage that slows down effective partnerships or it can serve as substance from a policy playbook. A deconstruction can lead to informed policy-making finding its footing in a new dynamic. Yet the complexities resulting in President Hamid Karzai’s refusal to sign the BSA, as it stands, has opened up the real possibility of a complete pullout of US and NATO forces. This leads to very understandable anxiety on our side of the border because peace in Pakistan is inextricable from peace in Afghanistan. This is an opportunity for an exercise in foresight, yet the zero option is being floated as a very real one by the US. This may be in response to frustrations with the government in Kabul, which must consider the apprehensions of the loya jirga (grand assembly) and its own upcoming elections before setting ink to paper. In any case, it underscores the need for a multidimensional mobilisation on the part of Islamabad should the US opt for a hasty exit — which could sink Afghanistan into volatility and throw water on the collectively hard-won gains of the last decade plus. The phrase ‘trust deficit’, so readily used in terms of US-Pakistan relations, appears to have found a new bilateral relationship to oversimplify and call home. The Sharif government must see the dangers such an Afghanistan poses to future economic and security concerns, as they focus on spending capital empowering youth with opportunity, and men and women with a sense of peace and plurality. Another backwash of war stymies our internal gains, and this administration must, just as the last did, meet this sobering possibility with the full force preparation allows, while being supportive of any deal that ensures a steady neighbour. As the saying goes, we must hope for the best while preparing for the worst. We simply cannot handle another wave of militancy and have a sound basis for the neuralgia. Good news is hard to come by in our region but thawing relations between Iran and the west is a promising turn of events. The opportunity presented itself with the June election of President Hassan Rouhani, who won on pledges to end crippling sanctions fuelling Iran’s isolation. Envoys from Iran and six world powers — the US, UK, France, Germany, Russia and China — will meet in the coming days to start working out specific steps needed to implement Tehran’s curbing of its nuclear programme. Talks remain in a fragile state and require cautious shepherding of the building hope and momentum. A senior western diplomat described the implementation phase as “extremely difficult and complex” while Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi told the state-run news media, FARS, that a deal was in no way legally binding and, furthermore, Iran had the right to pull back if the West did not uphold its end of this grand bargain. While statements like these underscore years of mutual distrust between Iran and the west, they also play the politics of low expectations. It is in Pakistan’s interest for this deal to materialise and local economies to be further opened. To give an example, Islamabad has borne severe criticism for its interest in pursuing the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline. For years, experts have warned about the dangerous depletion of natural gas reserves in the country; furthering the problem is the threat of a rising insurgency in resource-rich areas. The pragmatic undertaking has stalled under the Nawaz Sharif administration, ostensibly due to opposition by the US. The US’s interests as regards Pakistan have been traditionally mercurial, but this could deepen an involvement in the development sector. India is certainly preparing for a state of better ties with Iran, with plans to buy millions of barrels of oil from Iran, constructing Chabahar port and railway networks to connect to Central Asian countries passing through Afghanistan. There are no threats of sanctions against India, a dichotomy the Sharif administration would do well to note. Pakistan has made unprecedented overtures to strengthen ties under the administration of President Asif Ali Zardari, a theme continuing into the government of recently elected Nawaz Sharif, always a banner-holder for improved ties with India. In Pakistan’s May elections, none of the major party manifestos mentioned India at all, except in a positive light and with declarations to improve bilateral ties, specifically economic ones. On the other hand is India, set for elections in 2014, and vehemently amplifying anti-Pakistan rhetoric, with political leaders assuming jingoistic language, while Islamabad calls for cooler heads to prevail. With the hostile Narendra Modi slated to be the BJP’s candidate for prime minister amidst a hushed Congress Party, the Indian polity has swerved sharply to the right, ushering in scary scenarios in the minds of South Asia watchers. Excessive hawkishness comes at the expense of regional stability, and with the danger of rolling back hard-won progress. Islamabad must retain its commitment to pragmatic goals and remain calm amidst potential rhetorical slams and accusations from New Delhi. Once again, cooperation will only be in Pakistan’s self-interest as the opportunities it could afford our youth are incalculable. Our political and security leaders face all the aforementioned challenges while battling an extremist threat causing Pakistan’s internal haemorrhaging. A spokesman for the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) claims that Maulana Fazlullah, who took over command after the November 1, 2013 drone strike that killed Hakeemullah Mehsud, has left Afghanistan and is now based in FATA. The TTP is clearly not interested in any sort of meeting with the government, and will continue to carry out vile attacks on the military and open society. The leadership’s job is not an enviable one. As a nascent democracy, our decisions should be rooted in public consent and it would be a stroke of true political virtuosity if this government broadly engaged with the people, elucidating certain vital issues and opening forums of discussion. A clear vision coupled with the backing of the general public should serve as the one constant amidst the ambiguity. Sana Ali is a student at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies in Washington, DC