The pathetic state of Pakistan’s foreign policy in these turbulent times is a reflection of its domestic, social and economic crisis. The severity of this crisis in recent years has had devastating impacts on every sector of the state and society. The corruption within the state apparatus and the influx of massive amounts of black capital into its most sensitive institutions has not only started to disrupt the general implementation of the governmental policies but has also disintegrated the structures that are supposed to execute the centralised policy decisions. There is an intense trust deficit between the government and the institutions and the foreign allies of the ruling elite. The covert operation by the US Navy Seals to capture and kill Osama is a blatant manifestation of mutual distrust and deception between the imperialists and the Pakistani state. But this disarray of the country’s foreign policy is rooted in the origins of partition and the so-called independence that was not achieved through a fight and struggle against imperialism but was rather the outcome of negotiated deals in which the imperialists ensured the continuation of their exploitation and plunder of the subcontinent. In fact, the Indian and Pakistani leaders representing the local ruling classes connived with the imperialists in this transaction that did not dare to touch the capitalist system imposed by the imperialists during their 200 years of direct colonial rule of the subcontinent. From that aspect the economic and social interests of the so-called national bourgeoisie were more aligned to those of imperialism rather than the interests and aspirations of the oppressed of this South Asian subcontinent. The Americans had already started to intervene in the policies of the Muslim League even before the departure of the British Raj. The US ambassador to Pakistan was already advising the leaders of the new state in 1947. The recent revelation of the secret correspondence between Winston Churchill and Jinnah shows the deep influence and indulgence of reactionary imperialists in policy decisions at that time. The decision of Liaquat Ali Khan to cancel his visit to the Soviet Union and instead embark on a US sojourn indicates the domination of imperialism on the rulers of Pakistan. This subservience to imperialism has continued to be the cornerstone of the foreign policy of the Pakistani ruling classes. It has more to do with economics than with anything else. The Pakistani state was bankrupt right from its inception and had to rely on imperialist booty as the wealth of the country was being plundered by the ruling classes, the state hierarchy and imperialism. Apart from a few years in the early 70s, the ruling elites have been dependent on imperialist crumbs to run the state apparatus of coercion. This repression of the state was used to continue the exploitation of the oppressed classes of Pakistan. But the imperialists are and were never generous in their ‘aid’, in spite of the fact that it was funding a system that facilitated their extortion. But these relations were never harmonious and stable; rather the contradictions that were developing and imploding in Pakistan’s society did fluster them rather frequently. On the other hand, imperialists are quite economical with truth and their aid. Their own crisis and strategic interests often led to the closure of drastic reduction in aid. The regimes in Pakistan starting with General Ayub Khan tried to flirt with China and other US adversaries during the Cold War era. Bhutto went a bit further and tried to change the course of foreign policy by developing closer ties with China and Russia. He also tried to create an Islamic bloc and the OIC by holding the summit at Lahore in 1974. But it was a futile exercise as most of the rulers of the Islamic world ruling over crisis-ridden capitalist states were dependent on the US not just for economic reasons but also for their security. The most significant of these despots was and is the House of Saud. In reality, with a capitalist economic and social base it is almost impossible to have an independent political and foreign policy. In an epoch where there is a world economy and a world market, the chances of escaping from the crushing domination of US imperialism are bleak. The other mainstay of Pakistan’s diplomacy is its relations with Saudi Arabia. But it is also a very convoluted and uneven relationship. The Pakistani elites beg for Saudi oil and money but the reactionary Saudi monarchy treats them with even more contempt as beggars. They call the shots and almost every ruler in Pakistan’s history has had a slavish attitude towards these monarchs. The Saudi rulers are frequently used by the Americans to execute their policy interests in countries like Pakistan. It is they who call the shots and influence decisions like the release of the Sharifs. They never even tried to save Bhutto from execution although it was one power the obscurantist Zia dictatorship could not have refused. The ‘deep’ and ‘sweet relations’ with today’s China are another deception of an ‘everlasting friendship’. This is not even the China of Mao’s era where at least they had a planned economy that had a decisive impact on the character of the foreign aid given to countries like Pakistan. They now export capital for greater profits and hence have assumed an imperialist role. There is one consistency in Pakistan’s foreign policy — hostility towards India. It is reflected with a similar fanaticism across the Radcliff Line. It suits the interests of the establishment for massive expenditures on the army and to crush internal dissent and revolts of the working class with the alibi of the danger of foreign aggression. They have played war and peace with no fundamental change and the masses in South Asia have suffered for generations. This disciple policy will keep on crushing the oppressed until and unless these economic and state structures are overthrown. The policy of strategic depth in Afghanistan is motivated with the same material interests. The foreign policy in the last analysis is the reflection of the domestic policy. These are based on class exploitation and a capitalist system that is redundant and increasingly devastating society. Only through a socialist revolution a foreign policy based on class unity can end conflict and bloodshed. The present policy called the ‘national policy’ represents a nation that is far from completion, sovereignty, unity and integrity. It is the policy of the ruling classes who have historically failed to create a nation state. The writer is the editor of Asian Marxist Review and International Secretary of Pakistan Trade Union Defence Campaign. He can be reached at ptudc@hotmail.com