When it comes to gauging the stature of a state, two facets of policy come to mind: on one hand is domestic policy that directly governs the behaviour of the citizens as they interact with each other and the state, and on the other is foreign policy that determines the state’s conduct in its interaction with other states. The two are not mutually exclusive; in fact, they are tangled up with each other in all kinds of interesting ways where shifts in one produce changes in the other as well. This is precisely why the study of foreign policy is given so much importance, since it can inform us not only about a state’s conduct in international affairs but also provide important insight into its domestic policymaking structures. In the case of Pakistan, the presence of excellent diplomats has more often than not been overshadowed by shoddy and confused foreign policy positions that have ended up impacting the country’s domestic environment in harmful ways. But, every now and then, there appear chances for redemption. The start of the new year this time round has brought with it opportunities for Pakistan to take the initiative in its foreign policy endeavours and make corrections in the wake of past mistakes. Challenges like fighting terrorism and countering extremism present ubiquitous concerns for all global players but, in the coming days, this all-encompassing concept will be useful for the decision makers in Islamabad to take charge of the country’s destiny. If careful decisions are made, Pakistan can end up impacting the face of the future international order in a massive way. However, it all depends on how we conduct our relations with the following countries, and how well we can commit to long-term, realistic goals that have the country’s best interests at heart. The militancy and terrorism issue is specially highlighted in Pakistan’s foreign relations for historical reasons, where it impinges more on final outcomes than even economic concerns. As far as relations with India are concerned, Pakistan’s resolve to curb militancy is a key pre-requisite before any progress can be made in the upcoming comprehensive talks. In the wake of the Pathankot incident that threatened to derail the peace process between the two South Asian neighbours, calmer minds have prevailed and there is talk of not letting such unfortunate events take their toll on relations between the two countries. But there is a long way to go before words can be seen translated into action. The rapid pace with which events are unfolding all around us are bound to impact Pakistan and India’s resolve in sticking to the peace talks as an effective mode of conflict resolution. But that being said, if Pakistan can convince India through its actions that it means business when it comes to tackling militant organisations, there is no doubt that its efforts will be reciprocated from the eastern side of the Line of Control (LoC). Similarly, Pakistan-Afghanistan relations have, for the past few decades, been decided under the backdrop of militancy and terrorism. This time, too, amidst the on-off bonhomie and empty gestures, efforts to counter terrorism will largely set the agenda. In this regard, it is crucial for President Ghani to shore up his domestic support and engage with Pakistan as the sole representative of the Afghan people. As things stand, Pakistan has had to interact with multiple domestic actors in Afghanistan, which only results in a lack of credible commitment. To rectify this, it will be helpful for Pakistan to extend all necessary support in bringing the stakeholders to the negotiating table so that a common path can be carved out. Interestingly, the counter-terror tenor will also impact Pakistan’s policy with other countries such as the US, China and Turkey. Regarding the US, the threat of Islamic State (IS) is bound to keep US foreign policymakers busy at least for the foreseeable future, which means that there should be plenty of opportunities for Pakistan to show its commitment towards eradicating terrorism. This time though, it would be imperative that commitment is not shown through a proxy war but rather through a much more transparent process of interaction whereby attainable goals in curbing extremism are given prime importance. As far as China is concerned, Pakistan has been able to secure large-scale concessions in the form of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). However, its implementation will hinge upon how effectively the Pakistani government can generate consensus over not just the economics of the corridor but also the security situation. Moreover, in recent times, Turkey, with its relatively peaceful domestic situation, has been the target of terror-related activities. Resultantly, Turkey is looking for allies in its own domestic conflict, which is an opportunity for Pakistan to align with a key regional player for the foreseeable future. Lastly, the brewing Iran-Saudi conflict is threatening to engulf a sizeable majority of countries into a whirlpool of irate and hasty decisions that benefit no one. But the outcome of this confrontation will ultimately also depend upon the measures taken to curb militancy and extremism. In this regard, refraining from taking clear sides can appear to be a good strategy but, sooner or later, Pakistan will have to put its money where its mouth is and choose. At that time, as long as policymakers can keep Pakistan’s best interests in mind instead of letting past loyalties dictate their conduct, then we should be able to wade through the precarious waters of this regional rivalry. Now, all this is fine and dandy but the nature of the international system dictates that a country’s influence through its foreign policy cannot overcome weaknesses in its domestic structure. In other words, a country’s foreign policy can be no better than its domestic policy. Going by these standards, Pakistan’s potential to make its mark international remains spurious and debatable. For one thing, elected governments have always had to operate under the larger rubric of the military when it comes to conducting foreign policy, and even when chances for leaving a civilian imprint on foreign policy have presented themselves, they have been squandered because of incompetence, corruption, or both. With this in mind, it is crucially important to pay heed to the fast-changing international arena, and make efforts to produce favourable outcomes for Pakistan. In this regard, regime survival and hedonistic institutional goals will have to give way to a different way of approaching foreign policy where raising the country’s stature as a deserving player takes precedence. The author is a freelance columnist with degrees in political science and international relations