Daily Times

A few days ago, Lt Gen (Retired) Talat Masood writing for another daily outlined the challenges in the formulation of Pakistan’s foreign policy. A very well informed and reasonably argued article suggesting that Imran Khan may not be able to ignore these challenges hence he should to devote himself to looking inwards; a desire Imran has repeatedly expressed.

His stated observations are useful ones and, I hope, will be given the consideration they deserve. However, he does not pay heed to the meeting of the four intelligence chiefs. I am of the view that a general outline of our future foreign policy has already been formulated and agreed to, by all concerned. Since it is highly unlikely that the interim government could have done so on its own, it has to be one owned by the current government; with the approval of the military; which is supposed to play an important role in foreign policy formulation.

The article accurately lists the US and Afghan grievances against us: stability in Afghanistan, the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and our deep relations with China, but seems to gloss over our irritants. It was after all an US general who gloatingly commented, some years ago, on the deadliness of the Afghan National Army (ANA), in its ability to ‘teach Pakistan a lesson in cross border attacks’, or words to that effect.

I find it amazing that our analysts also choose to buy the US narrative so completely that they seem like US-apologists. Are the US and Afghanistan really that innocent and, are we alone guilty of all that went wrong? Not that it matters so much now. The meeting of intelligence chiefs could not occur in a vacuum; nor could it be divorced from the core issue of foreign policy. If there is a connection; then the foreign policy parameters have been defined.

The follow-up sequel to that meeting is scheduled in Moscow on September 4. All concerned, including the Central Asian States, US, Afghanistan, and India were invited. The US refusal was half expected since it refused an invitation last year, too; and, because it will not acknowledge that it may no longer hold supreme authority regarding Afghanistan. Moreover, the US and Afghan governments have a grudge against the Taliban due to the recent spate of attacks.

We need a peaceful Afghanistan; to which end we must take every possible step to ensure it happens. And yet, we cannot succumb to the unreasonable expectations of the US, nor can we accept cross border ventures from Afghan soil onto ours. Nor should we give up on CPEC, China, Russia and Iran merely to appease the US

These Taliban attacks have indeed further weakened Ghani’s position domestically at a critical juncture; when parliamentary elections are only weeks away and the presidential elections scheduled to take place next year. And yet, despite these facts, I would have thought Ghani the wiser had he chosen to send his representatives, even if the selected representatives were not of a ‘decision-making grade’.

Firstly, that could be interpreted as a deliberate move by Ghani to distance himself from the US shadow. Even if it were a mere gesture it could have borne dividends. Secondly, it would have given Ghani’s representatives an opportunity to assess — directly and through nuances — positions of other participants. Now, like the US, Ghani too will be dependent on Indian eyes to provide a comprehensive feedback on all that occurred. India has, as wisely as it always does on matters of foreign policy, chosen to attend.

If Pakistan has indeed chartered a fresh course on foreign policy, intending to swim through waters new to us, it might explain Shah Mahmood Qureshi’s, our current Foreign Minister, rather undiplomatic response to the US State Department’s claim of what transpired between Pompeo, the US Secretary of State, and PM Imran during their telephonic conversation. The exchange has resulted in a spat that still seems ongoing. Qureshi is not entirely inexperienced in diplomacy. After all, he was also the foreign minister during the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) government till 2011, when he left PPP and decided to search for greener pastures.

Symbolically, ironically, or by mere coincidence, Pompeo and US Chairman Joint Chiefs arrive for meetings in Pakistan on the day after the Moscow moot on Afghanistan begins. This should be very interesting. I am sure the US reps will come in their standard mode of “good cop, bad cop” or “bad cop, worse cop”. What should be interesting is how Pakistan plays the game. Reportedly, US authorities have provided Pakistan with a recording of the Pompeo-Imran telephone call, to support their claim.

If that is so, will Qureshi brazen it out or apologize for the misunderstanding? And, whichever way this goes, will Pakistan respond diplomatically to the US demands to “do more”, which will surely be their demand, or will it continue to be more blunt than diplomatic? After all, we have toned down from our affronted position with regard to the telephone call.

It is certainly more than time for us to have developed clarity in our Afghan and US policy. We need a peaceful Afghanistan; to which end we must take every possible step to ensure it happens. And yet, we cannot succumb to the unreasonable expectations of the US, nor can we accept cross border ventures from Afghan soil onto ours. Nor should we give up on CPEC, China, Russia and Iran merely to appease the US. And yet we need modestly better relations with US as well. A difficult ask but, not an impossible one.

The writer is a retired brigadier. He is also former vice president and founder of the Islamabad Policy Research Institute (IPRI)

Published in Daily Times, September 2^nd 2018.