With Donald Trump still engaged in review and re-orientation of US relations with various countries with the Pakistani leadership awaiting an encouraging gesture from Washington DC, the concerns, priorities and nuances of the American foreign and trade policies are becoming clear in bits and pieces, particularly in South and South West Asia, South East Asia and Pacific and the Middle East. It is within the context of these regions that the significance of Pakistan would be weighed and prioritized for its future relationship with the Trump Administration. The challenges to the US decision-makers stem from an array of complex issues of immediate concern that include the rise of China as an economic and military power rivalling the US for world leadership; the unending turmoil in the Middle East; the precarious equilibrium in the Gulf region and the Iran’s nuclear program; the resurfacing of terrorist outfits in Afghanistan; the danger of nuclear standoff in South Asia involving three nuclear states; India’s deliberate and provocative genocidal policy in the Jammu and Kashmir; the US over-reliance on India as a counterweight to China. It is the unorthodox re-orientation of US relations with many countries and on many continents that makes the world leaders tremble experiencing sleepless nights when President Donald Trump makes one jolting announcement after the other in Washington DC. It is feared that the withdrawal of US support for the Ukrainian war and lukewarm approach to NATO as a security cover for Europe; the US trade disputes; the possible US pullout from multilateral economic agreements involving the North American, Southeast East Asian and Pacific states; the signalling of China for human rights violation and discrimination in Hong Kong and Xinjiang and ignoring the same elsewhere particularly in India, Gaza and Gulf States; the Russian re-assertion in Central Asia and Eastern Europe would have decisive and far-reaching repercussions on the international diplomatic landscape. Europe would reap what it has sowed with an obvious overreliance on NATO for security and expansion of its influence in the former Soviet Republics which emerged as independent countries after the collapse of the USSR despite clear assurances to the Kremlin at the highest level and loud protests by the Russian leaders. The NATO alliance (3.5 million soldiers and personnel) has been costing the US a huge annual expenditure in billions without any worthwhile contribution from the EU. The Europeans have had this free lunch since the inception of the alliance in 1945. How long it could have continued? The US leadership has every right to review its commitment to EU security. Similarly, the US also has the right to review its trade policy and economic and financial commitments with other countries as part of its “Make America Great Again” project. Pakistan, stuck in internal political and economic problems, should have concerns about having a balanced relationship with the US and China. There is a perceptible frustration and nervousness within the American leadership to contain China. The world has evolved past the unipolar world. Today, the international diplomatic landscape has a few unannounced alliances of states to stand against the hegemony of the US. The options of the US to contain China have been shrinking fast. The US would bank on the Quad and Indo-China-Pacific alliance to contain its rival. The Indian strategic contest with China – even with the US at its back – would be fraught with dangers for the South Asian region. This nexus between the US and India would, of necessity, oppose BRI and CPEC provoking an ultimatum from the US for the countries of the region to take sides as resorted to by the American leaders in the past. This would plunge Pakistan between the devil and the deep blue Sea. By all means, it would be suicidal for Pakistan to review its relations with a reliable and well-trusted friend like China which has invested billions of dollars in CPEC outweighing the total of US financial assistance to Pakistan in the past six decades. The US would never be a wise alternative option to be prioritized over China. The likely US ultimatum if it ever materializes would compel us to tightly embrace China, and forge close relations with other countries hostile to the US. Would the US avoid this by striking a balance in its relations with India and Pakistan? However, if the past is any guide, hopes for such US wisdom are bleak. It is the apparent nervous reaction to the rise of China that will drive the US policy in the region. The Americans, at best, will try to create a lull in the hostile exchanges between Pakistan and India. This is where Pakistan should hold its ground without wavering in its commitment to the just struggle of the people of Kashmir. Will our leadership have the spine to withstand the pressure brought on them by the US without forcing India to restitute the status of Jammu and Kashmir and start meaningful talks for the resolution of Kashmir according to UN resolutions? The US policy towards Afghanistan is unclear. Though the US leadership is worried about the resurgence of terrorist outfits in Afghanistan, they have given no indications about their intervention to twist the arms of the Taliban to stop the terrorist outfits from using their country for terrorist activities notwithstanding Pakistan’s utmost desire to secure external support to face the TTP and the internal insurgency in Balochistan. The US intervention would trigger a new wave of antiterrorism war in this region which could irk China, Russia and Turkey which have developed great stakes in the return of peace and stability in Afghanistan. It is here that Pakistan could be of any importance to the US but would risk its relations with the above three countries. The option if it ever materializes has to be weighed carefully. With the fast-changing global scenario, Pakistan will have to walk a tightrope to steer clear of the competition and confrontations among the big powers. The author was a member of the Foreign Service of Pakistan and he has authored two books.