US weighs dropping Pakistan as an ally

[Insight]

Subscribe to read

US weighs dropping Pakistan as an ally

Trump administration accuses country of housing militants as relations hit new low
Read next
Pakistan warns on US threat to downgrade relations
updated Sunday, 17 September, 2017












September 15, 2017 by Katrina Manson in Washington

The Trump administration is considering dropping Pakistan as an ally as it examines tough measures to quell more than 20 terrorist groups it says are based in the country.
Officials familiar with the Pakistan prong of Washington’s new “AfPak” strategy — which involves an open-ended commitment in Afghanistan and praise for India — say it has yet to be fleshed out. But they have plenty of levers.
President Donald Trump last month promised to get tough on Pakistan, accusing it of “housing the very terrorists that we are fighting”. It was the most public breach yet in an often rocky relationship.
“No US president has come out on American national television and said such things about Pakistan,” said Husain Haqqani, former Pakistan ambassador to the US.
“US policymakers are at the end of their tethers about what they see as Pakistan not helping them while promising to help them.”
The administration has already put $255m in military aid on hold after Mr Trump announced the policy shift. It is eyeing an escalating series of threats, which include cutting some civilian aid, conducting unilateral drone strikes on Pakistani soil and imposing travel bans on suspect officers of the ISI, the country’s intelligence agency. It could also revoke Pakistan’s status as a major non-Nato ally or designate it a state sponsor of terrorism.
The latter options would limit weapons sales and probably affect billions of dollars in IMF and World Bank loans, along with access to global finance.
“Thinking of Pakistan as an ally will continue to create problems for the next administration as it did for the last one,” Lisa Curtis, former CIA analyst who now leads South Asia policy in the National Security Council, wrote in a joint report with Mr Haqqani earlier this year.
Ms Curtis, who works closely with the state department, believes the Obama administration “erred” by relying on personal ties and aid packages to try to change Pakistan’s behaviour.

In 2011 when we killed Bin Laden, relations were at their worst, but on the face of it, it’s worse now just because we haven’t talked to them much
Mike Mullen, former chairman of the joint chiefs of staff

Mike Mullen, former chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, visited Pakistan more than 25 times during his 2007-11 tenure, seeking close ties with powerful army head and former spy chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani. He became disillusioned, lambasting an Afghan Taliban group known as the Haqqani network as “a veritable arm” of the ISI.
“It was my belief and continues to be my belief that unless we had an ally that we could work together to greatly eliminate the threat then our efforts in Afghanistan were going to fail,” said Mr Mullen.
“In 2011 when we killed [Osama] Bin Laden, relations were at their worst, but on the face of it, it’s worse now just because we haven’t talked to them much.”
Some who recall being beguiled by late nights spent with military and civilian leaders over Johnnie Walker Blue Label — the expensive whisky beloved by Pakistan’s elite in the officially dry country — say even forceful private conversations regularly disappoint.
James Dobbins, special envoy in 2013-14, became frustrated by failed promises from army chief Gen Raheel Sharif to go after militant groups
“It’s very difficult to deal with an interlocutor who says he agrees with you but actually doesn’t,” he said.
“The Pakistanis originally saw the Taliban as an instrument that they could manipulate to their advantage and since view it as a monster they’ve created but can’t afford to suppress.”
The state department, which has long been reluctant to cut aid or censure Pakistan in public, and which previously pushed Mr Mullen to “tone down” his rhetoric, is adapting to the harsher line set by the White House.
“We look to the Pakistani government to take decisive action against militant groups based in Pakistan that are a threat to the region,” said a state department official, adding that it will address major concerns “privately”.
Zalmay Khalilzad, a former US ambassador to Afghanistan, applauds the tougher line. “Pakistan has reacted publicly harshly but I believe we have got their attention and this is now serious and they are making noises privately to the Afghan government about getting together to talk,” he said.
Pakistan cancelled a planned visit this month from Alice Wells, the state department official in charge of south Asia policy, in protest at Mr Trump’s announcement. But Ms Wells met Pakistan’s ambassador to the US this week and a state department official said the pair has regular contact.
Recommended

• New York regulator kicks Pakistan’s Habib Bank out of US
• Pakistan looks to China as it turns away from Washington
• Trump has bowed to the generals on Afghanistan

Relations are expected to take a further blow from US efforts to forge closer ties with rival India. “We need to respect and trust India — they have not leaked nuclear secrets or shared sensitive nuclear technology with rogue countries,” said Tim Roemer, former US ambassador to India, a reference to Pakistan’s nuclear proliferation.
Pakistan prime minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi said this week it is “unfair” to blame his country for troubles in Afghanistan, adding that the US should have greater respect for its efforts to combat militancy.
Ryan Crocker, former US ambassador to Pakistan in the wake of 9/11, says Pakistan resents the wild oscillations in support from the US.
“They went from our most allied of allies to our most sanctioned of sanctioned,” he said, recalling that the US worked with Pakistan to defeat Soviet Russia during the 1980s Afghanistan invasion but, once it had won, cut aid and imposed sanctions over its emergent nuclear programme.
“Their narrative about us is here today, gone tomorrow and it has deeply affected their strategic thinking.”

[Insight]

Subscribe to read

PM warns on US threat to downgrade relations with ally Pakistan

Abbasi says hardline approach could backfire on America’s efforts in Afghanistan
Read next
US weighs dropping Pakistan as an ally
Friday, 15 September, 2017












September 17, 2017 by Kiran Stacey and Farhan Bokhari in Islamabad

Pakistan’s new prime minister has warned the US that it risks fuelling terrorism in the region and undermining military efforts in Afghanistan if the Trump administration follows through with a threat to downgrade its relationship with Islamabad.
Just days after the Financial Times revealed that the US was considering stripping Pakistan of its status as an ally because of a perceived failure to tackle terrorism, Shahid Khaqan Abbasi said the hardline approach risked backfiring.
In an interview with the FT he also threatened to drop the US as supplier of military aircraft to apply pressure on its ally. Pakistan currently buys F-16 fighter jets, which are made by American company Lockheed Martin and have become the mainstay of the Pakistani air force.
“We would like to buy more F16s, but we do have other options,” said Mr Abbasi. “We have a long relationship with both the French and the Chinese, and we have been developing the JF-17 alongside the Chinese, which in may ways meets or even exceeds the specifications of the F16.”
But while he did not go into detail about which other levers Pakistan might pull, others in Islamabad were clearer. One person close to the powerful Pakistani army said: “We could make it harder for the US to use supply routes through Pakistan to serve its troops in Afghanistan, and we could stop co-operating on drone attacks. That would make the war in Afghanistan a lot more difficult.”
Speaking as he prepared to fly to New York to attend the UN general assembly, Mr Abbasi said he found Washington’s Pakistan policy “confusing”, adding that he had to rely on media reports to find out what President Donald Trump’s plans were for the region.
“The signals we get from Washington are confusing, but our message is very clear: we are committed to fighting terror and we will continue to fight terror,” Mr Abbasi said.
“All it will do [if the US downgrades Pakistan as an ally] is degrade our efforts to fight terror, and I am not sure if that will work for the US.”
Mr Abbasi has been in power for just over a month after the Supreme Court disqualified his predecessor, Nawaz Sharif, who was found “not honest” in disclosing his assets in nomination papers for the 2013 parliamentary election.
Mr Abbasi has not committed to staying on longer than next year's general election, but even if his term is short, it is likely to prove crucial in shaping the future of US policy in both Pakistan and Afghanistan.



Just three weeks after Mr Abbasi took over, Mr Trump announced a reversal in the US approach to Afghanistan. Instead of continuing the gradual drawdown of troops started under former president Barack Obama, Mr Trump said he would maintain, if not increase troop levels. During that speech, Mr Trump also criticised Pakistan, accusing it of not doing enough to tackle cross-border terrorism emanating from its own soil.
Since then, many in the region have been trying to work out what the new US policy means in practice. Mr Abbasi told the FT he thought the number of American troops was likely to increase from 8,400 today to 12,000-13,000. But he admitted he found it hard to get clear information from the Trump administration: “We mostly find these things out by reading them in the newspapers.”
The prime minister is reported to be hoping to meet Mike Pence, the US vice-president, while in New York; another meeting is being planned between Khawaja Asif, Pakistan’s foreign minister, and Rex Tillerson, his American counterpart.
Pakistan insists it is doing all it can to eliminate terror groups such as the Taliban and the Haqqani Network, which operate around the border with Afghanistan. But Mr Abbasi also admitted the limitations of its operations, saying the bombers who killed more than 90 people in the attack in Kabul in May were likely to have come from Pakistan.
“I don’t know all the details, but it seems three or four people crossed over the border. There was a vehicle which travelled from that area to Kabul and was parked in an embassy compound before it blew up,” he said.
“We have 250,000 troops fighting there, but we don’t have control of the full area. [Militants] often cross the border from the other side and attack our people. If the Afghan army cannot control them, and US forces cannot control them, what are we supposed to do?”