President Trump’s New Year’s Tweets included a double-barreled blast at Pakistan. The president called out that country for its “lies and deceit” over the last 15 years, “giving us nothing,” Trump said, after the U.S. “has foolishly given Pakistan more than 33 billion dollars in aid.” Immediately thereafter, the U.S. suspended its security assistance programs to Islamabad. Of course, the Tweet produced the predictable Pakistan response: anti-U.S. riots and official condemnation.
But why this sudden Trump blast? The most likely explanation lies in SECDEF Mattis’ December visit to Islamabad. Mattis tried once again to coax Pakistan away from its support to the Afghan Taliban and Islamic militants like the Haqqani Network, groups bent on destabilizing Afghanistan and killing U.S. troops. But like Tillerson and other U.S. emissaries over the last six months who were pushing the same agenda, Mattis got nowhere.
- It’s no secret that Pakistan provides safe harbor, not just to the Afghan Taliban and the Haqqani Network, but to other radical Islamist groups who operate across the border separating the two countries. For over a decade, as obvious as this support is and as destructive as it is to U.S. strategy in the region, Pakistan remains in total denial.
- Like Jim Mattis, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen spent years of painful cultivation with the Pakistan military and senior political officials. Mullen also got nowhere; and he concluded his decades of military service by stating publicly that the Haqqani Network is a "veritable arm" of Pakistan's Inter-Service intelligence agency. For senior U.S. armed forces officers like Mullen and Mattis, trying to break the impasse in Afghanistan and minimize U.S. casualties, their deep frustration with Pakistan is not hard to decipher.
Nor is Pakistan’s stance; and not surprisingly, it is focused on India. Since its inception in 1947, Pakistan has feared strategic encirclement by its southern neighbor. And when the U.S., for its own strategic calculus, deepens its ties to new Delhi, Pakistan paranoia, never in short supply, shifts into overdrive.
- In outlining its Afghan strategy last summer, the White House encouraged deepened Indian investment in Afghanistan, to aid in that country’s economic recovery. Alarm bells immediately tolled in Islamabad.
So, where will this lead? Most likely, after more pained expressions from Islamabad, to a return to the status quo ante. Trump is clearly walking a fine line: a complete rupture with Pakistan moves that country closer to China and increases the chances of yet another military coup -- a frequent event in that troubled country. But ignoring the duplicity renders any Afghan strategy meaningless: insurgents can’t be defeated if safe havens exist along a 2000-kilometer border. We’ll probably witness the “rounding up of the usual suspects” by Pakistan over the coming months, and at least a partial restoration of US security assistance. But don’t expect the U.S.-Pakistan relationship ever to blossom into a true strategic partnership; Islamabad will always view the 20-year U.S. outreach to New Delhi as existential.
Bottom Line: despite the odds against success, the president is not wrong to call out Islamabad and condition future U.S. assistance on a change in Pakistan's behavior. One might quibble with the wording and the public nature of his Tweet, but not on the goal. One of the most respected Pakistan diplomats, and one who has not succumbed to the "total denial of everything" mind-set in Islamabad is Husain Haqqani (no relationship, by the way, to the Afghan insurgent group!). Haqqani, a former Pakistan Ambassador to the U.S., authored in 2005 an insightful treatise, Pakistan: Between Mosque and Military. In this work, Haqqani, concluded:
- "The U.S. must use its aid as a lever to influence Pakistan domestic policies. Washington must not ignore Pakistan's state sponsorship of Islamic militants, its pursuit of nuclear weapons, and its refusal to democratize; each of these issues is directly linked to the future of Islamic radicalism."
President Trump and his team can do far worse than to heed the advice of this seasoned diplomat, whose conclusions mirrored the intent of the New Year’s Tweet.
