Daily Times

When it comes to bringing peace and stability to Afghanistan, nobody can assert whether Trump, the US military, India or Pakistan can do the job.

There is no doubt that a strategy is required for this but the one adopted by Trump can hardly be called the best. Ties between Pakistan and the US have been uneasy since Trump announced his new policy on Afghanistan and South Asia in August.

This was when he said that Pakistan “often gives safe havens to agents of chaos, violence and terror” and hinted that ties between the US and Pakistan were about to become very different.

US Defence Secretary James Mattis’ recent visit to Pakistan was the most recent in a series of high level interactions between the two sides which started following Trump’s August address. Mattis has rehashed the US’ incessant approach towards Pakistan to accomplish ‘more’ in its battle against terrorist groups working in Afghanistan’s South Eastern region, mainly the Haqqani network.

In spite of the fact that Mattis’ message reverberated Trump’s apprehensions on Pakistan, his tone was not as harsh as that of other American authorities. The silver lining was that Mattis made it clear that the objective of the talks was for the two countries to find ‘common ground’ in the fight against terrorism.

It is obvious that a more robust Indian role in the region will serve various US policy objectives. In any case, the Trump administration will continue to take unilateral actions because of its perception that Pakistan continues to use jihadis as strategic assets to counter Indian power in the region

However, nobody needs a crystal ball to find out what Trump actually wants. It’s the same thing the Bush administration wanted and what the Obama administration wanted. His approach on Afghanistan however, is distinct from Bush or Obama’s, because he has begun to see Pakistan as a contributor to the elements that keep the US entangled in Afghanistan. In other words; Trump sees Pakistan as part of the problem. The question is, what is the future of these two strategic allies?

The answer is not clear. It seems that Islamabad will remain under pressure by the Trump administration to produce better results.

Meanwhile, the nature of the partnership will remain value-based and security driven. If things go completely downhill, the US may declare Pakistan a state-sponsor of terrorism. This could be followed by stripping Pakistan of it’s non NATO ally status. US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has already cautioned Pakistan that its status as privileged military ally is vulnerable as long as it keeps ‘harbouring terrorists’. But the story doesn’t end here.

The Indianisation of US foreign policy may also increase tensions with Pakistan and China, because it is obvious that a more robust Indian role in the region will serve other US policy objectives. In any case, the Trump administration will continue to take unilateral actions because of its perception that Pakistan continues to use jihadis as strategic assets to counter Indian power in the region.

Keeping in mind the Raymond Davis, Salala and Abbottabad episodes, Pakistan ought to focus on ‘jihadis’ as a permanent threat. There is a dire need to shift from a security oriented approach to a non-traditional one. Pakistan also needs to modify its security policies.

To conclude, Pakistan walks a diplomatic tight rope amidst strained Pak-US relations and the tensions may escalate to unprecedented levels.

The writer is currently working in Strategic Vision Institute (SVI) Islamabad as Research Affiliate

Published in Daily Times, December 17^th 2017.