Rethinking ties
It has been a bumpy ride for Pak-US relations
SHAIQ HUSSAIN
It was on March 6th that General James Mattis, the US CENTCOM chief, told the American Senate Armed Services Committee that he was planning a trip to Islamabad in the next 10 days or so to discuss the reopening of blocked supply lines. His statement proved to be partially correct: he was supposed to visit Islamabad to discuss the ?modalities? for a future working relationship between Pakistan and US in the wake of approval of ?new terms of engagement? by the Pakistani parliament. What he actually did, however, was undertake intense negotiations with the generals in Rawalpindi, urging them afresh to reopen the NATO supply routes.
But like the CENTCOM chief and the rest of American leaders, Pakistan?s military leadership, too, is perturbed over the stalemate in the parliament over the recommendations approved unanimously by the bipartisan Parliamentary Committee on National Security (PCNS), which also include the reopening of NATO supplies with added measure of taxation on every truck, container and oil tanker. Contrary to general belief that NATO supplies would be restored - the PML-N and another important opposition party, the JUI-F, shot down the proposals of committee on the very first day of the parliamentary debate in the joint sitting of parliament slated for March 20th.
They made it plain and clear that there would be no formal debate unless and until their reservations were addressed, which they didn?t come up with during several meetings of PCNS.
To do away with the stalemate, the military command sat together with Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani and leaders of the opposition parties in the PM House for hours, after which it was decided that PCNS would meet again to iron out the differences on its recommendations.
Hence, a fresh debate has started over the 35 or so recommendations in the PCNS, which is looking into the fresh proposals by the opposition, such as linking the NATO supplies to a halt in the CIA drone strikes in tribal areas and removal of other objectionable clauses, such as one asking for transparency in the working of foreign spies and another about the use of Pakistani air bases by the US-led coalition forces in future.
The PCNS is tasked again to come up with some recommendations that would be ?acceptable to all? and make them available for debate in the parliament, which commences its session on April 5th. Until then, the committee is supposed to meet daily to thrash out the differences and reshape its proposals.
The fresh PCNS recommendations, though in amended form, are likely to make it through the parliament this time, with Pakistan and US getting back on track of full-fledged counter-terrorism cooperation. But it is also clear that any future relationship between the two major countries in global anti-terror campaign would be devoid of trust and faith in each other.
As the parliament approves, most likely, the amended PNCS recommendations, its adopted resolution will, again, seek a halt to drone attacks, something that is unlikely to happen. The Americans have, however, proposed to go to the extent of reducing the assaults by unmanned spy planes and also that the list of intended targets would be limited only to top Al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders.
According to officials here privy to month-long negotiations, both on the scene and back-channel between Islamabad and US and also among the political forces in the country, the parliament will restore the NATO supplies but the language of resolution on foreign spies would be tough with words like ?no presence at all of foreign intelligence operatives on Pakistani soil? being inserted instead of previous conditionality of only transparency being sought for their working here.
The Obama Administration, for its part, is likely to come up with an unconditional apology for the Salala attack despite its claims that it was not an intentional assault on Pakistani border posts last year but an act in self-defence by the NATO troops.
Another important demand of Pakistan that is also likely to be accepted by US is the acceptance of Islamabad?s key role in Afghanistan?s endgame, an acknowledgement that without its help Washington and its allies cannot succeed in the ongoing peace negotiations with the Taliban and also that its ?legitimate interests? in the war-torn neighboring state will be taken good care of by the United States. Pakistan is worried about the role of India in Afghanistan and it has conveyed these concerns to US many a time in the past.
The parliamentary approval of PCNS? recommendations will resolve the US? major problem of blocked supplies to the NATO troops in Afghanistan but, as mentioned earlier, the relations between the two sides would be marred by deep mistrust and suspicions as it was not merely the Salala attack that derailed ties but the seeds were sown much earlier.
?It all started with spies from the US, the CIA operatives, traveling to Pakistan in large numbers, with their visits going mostly unnoticed because of undercover arrangements. In the process, hundreds of visas were issued by our embassy in Washington to the CIA operatives and defense contractors but that led to deep anger among the security circles here and former ambassador Husain Haqqani became a disliked figure,? said a Pakistani diplomat seeking anonymity. Enter the Raymond Davis episode. Davis, a US intelligence operative and CIA contractor, killed two Pakistani citizens in broad daylight in Lahore on January 26, 2011 which proved to be a turning point in relations between the two states, including ISI and CIA.
?To ISI officials, Davis? presence wasn?t something they were aware of as his status was kept secret from them like hundreds of others assigned on different missions all over the country,? the diplomat said. Hence, Pakistani authorities told the CIA to order a pack up for its agents present in Pakistan and call them back. Even the American military trainers were asked to leave. This bad patch was still going on between Islamabad and Washington when, in another deadly blow to Pakistan-US relations, the US Special Forces took out Al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden in a covert military raid in the garrison town of Abbottabad on May 2 last year.
It was, no doubt, a major victory for the Obama Administration in the war on terror that was, and still is, facing serious difficulties in Afghanistan. It also led to deep anguish among Pakistani military circles, which believe they were stabbed in the back by a friendly nation. The Salala incident in the Mohmand Agency followed this incident.
Pakistan responded promptly by blocking NATO supplies and also ordered the US to vacate ?Shamsi airbase?, an airstrip in Balochistan used for drone strikes, within 15 days. Moreover, Pakistan also refused to attend an international conference on peace and security in Afghanistan held in Bonn. It was then that the PCNS was asked by the government to furnish its recommendations on the nature of future relations with the United States.
The foreign office also gave its input for the PCNS recommendations and so did the army and ISI at an ?envoys conference? held at the foreign ministry for the purpose. The committee completed its job in January this year and the recommendations were tabled a joint session of both houses of parliament on March 20th.
General James Mattis, who had to rush to Islamabad few days back to look for the solution to the deadlock in Pakistani parliament over PCNS recommendations, will now visit Islamabad again to work on the modalities, such as what would be the amount of taxes to be levied by Islamabad on NATO trucks and containers, smooth supply of Coalition Support Fund (CSF) for Islamabad and also the settlement of drones? issue, which would still require to be resolved despite the approval of PCNS? amended recommendations. The two sides have to resolve another vital issue of NATO convoys? security. The US wants Pakistan to arrange for the security of its supplies meant for Afghanistan once the resolution is out of parliament and the supply lines stand reopened. Pakistan is so far hesitant because it is a daunting task owing to the long route involved and also the huge amount of money needed.
If Pakistan agrees to provide security, it would still ask the US to extend required funds for the purpose. When General Mattis and Pakistani officials are done with their job, Islamabad and Washington are likely to reach a new agreement on counter-terrorism cooperation between the two sides, which will replace all the previous verbal and non-verbal agreements.
With all these good things happening between Islamabad and Washington, what would the two sides do to end the deep mistrust and bridge this wide gulf? This is an important and difficult question to answer at this moment. With no immediate remedy, the two sides could decide to leave this problem to the tides of time. Meanwhile, they will have a relationship based on strictly mutually beneficial terms.
In future, that relationship could again become a friendship with both sides working like real allies, which will be good for both sides, especially Pakistan, whose economy is in ruinous condition. The US could walk out again of this alliance in the wake of Afghanistan?s endgame as it did after the defeat of erstwhile Soviet Union on Afghan soil.
SHAIQ HUSSAIN