U.

S-Pakistan Defense Cooperation

Background
US - Pakistan relations in the last six decades have been unstable and moved in a cyclical
pattern with recurrent ups and downs, with frequent alternating episodes of close partnership
and sharp friction reflecting engagement and estrangement in global and regional geopolitics.
They have flourished in periods of international tensions, such as in the fifties, again in eighties,
(and now in the days beyond 9/11), and have…… deteriorated in conditions of détente, as in
the sixties and seventies and again in the nineties. The United States and Pakistan relations,
broadly speaking have been synchronized on the same wavelength during the Eisenhower,
Nixon and Reagan presidencies. During the Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, Bush, and Clinton
administrations, however, policy differences have been more pronounced and significant.
Pakistan came into existence just as the cold war had started between America& Soviet Union
(USSR). The world was split into two camps soviet and US. Infant Pakistan and India had to pick
their camps...

History:
1950:

Liaqat Ali khan (1st PM) was invited by Soviets and Americans. He chose to visit US, thus
starting PAK-US relations. India chose Soviets.

1954:

Pakistan grew closer to US, joining in defense agreement SEATO (alliance against, communism).

1955:

an alliance, the Baghdad Pact, was formed between Britain, Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Pakistan (its
name changed to CENTO)
Late 50s and early 60s:

US aid starts flowing to Pak. with the military govt of Gen Ayyub Khan, Pakistan grew even more
close to US. First US base opened at Badaber near Peshawar. U2 flights originating from
Badaber gained lot of information about Soviet activities across the border.

In May 1960

, the USSR shot U2 reconnaissance plane of US down over Russian soil, it had taken off from
Badaber. The incidence brought lot of embarrassment both for Pak & US. USSR also warned
Pak.

1965

Indo-Pak war ...Pak US relations suffer a setback when US places arms embargo on both
nations, knowing well that Pakistan was totally dependent on US arms and India did not use any
US arms. Soviets speeded up arms supplies to India. Pakistan gained air superiority by using US
supplied F-86 Sabers and F-104 Star fighters. Pakistan’s old enemy

King Zahir of Afghanistan insured safety of Pakistan’s Western borders, allowing Pakistan to
remove it troops from that border. Iran opened her airfields to Pakistan Air force. China moved
her troops close to Indian border but US stopped supplies forcing Pakistan for peace offered
under Soviets. It was the first betrayal by US.

1971: Civil war in Pakistan

. India invaded Pakistan. Massive blood shed supervised by India. Pakistan asks her old-time ally
US for help. US tell Pakistan 7th Fleet is on its way. Now after 25 years declassified documents
revealed that US deliberately wanted to break Pakistan to appease India. It was the second
betrayal by US.

1970s: Pakistan feeling betrayed

by the US decided to move away from US block. Venturing first into NAM (nonaligned
movement) then in OIC and finally started making friends with soviets. Soviets started setting
up steel mills in Pakistan and supplied some military aid (Mi-8 etc.). Pakistan moved on the road
to socialism under Bhutto. US believed that Pakistan was slipping to the other side. US grew
hostile to Pakistan. Bhutto openly challenged US in his speeches....

1977:

CIA organized "Tarik-I-Nizam-I-Mustafa" spearheaded by Jamaat-I-Islami a hardcore Religious

party. BTW no religious party has ever won any significant votes in any elections. They have
always come to power using back doors. The movement gains momentum and army topple
Bhutto, who is finally hanged in 1979. This is what happens to those who oppose USA. US also
pass Symington law thereby stopping aid to countries pursuing nuclear technology (Pak
suffers).

1979:

Iranian revolution...US lose a staunch ally in the region (i.e. Iran). Same year

soviets invade Afghanistan

. It’s a check mate for US as communism expands in Afghanistan.

1980s: Pak-US friendship starts again as US badly needs an ally in the region. Pakistan becomes
a front-line state in war against communism........US takes lenient view of Pak nuclear program
& restores its aid. Pak receives 3.2 billion.

1989-92:

Soviets are finally defeated triggering a massive reaction all over the world which finally results
in fall of communism....US is the sole super power...either u r with the US our r dead...India
quickly jumps ship and prostates before US.... Pakistan is ignored by US.... relations suddenly
become cold... Zia-ul-Haqq is killed in a plane crash which many in Pakistan believe was a work
of CIA...
1990s: US closes it eyes on Pakistan again now that it is no longer needed. India becomes the
blue-eyed baby. Nuclear sanctions again imposed on Pak. Pak aid stopped.

1998:

India exploded nuclear device and threatens to attack Pakistan. World keeps mum. Pakistan
responds by its own nuke tests. India shuts up but US imposes sanctions on Pakistan... Its third
betrayal by US;

1999- 2000:

Gen Pervaiz Musharraf topples Nawaz Sharif’ govt. West condemns Pak. Pak

feels isolated & in serious financial crisis.

2001: 9/11 again pushes US to seek its old ally. Pak, in its war against terrorism

. Pakistan as always agrees......now people in Pakistan see a 4th betrayal in the making as US
assures India that it will help India fight "terrorism" in Kashmir a veiled threat that Pakistan will
suffer same fate as Afghanistan... No one realizes that the terrorism in Kashmir is by Indian
army.... Look at the statistics.... tens of thousands of Kashmir is slaughtered by Indian
occupation forces.... yet when Kashmir is fighting the Indian army, they are labeled
terrorists...by that token George Washington was a terrorist, Charles DE Gaulle was a terrorist,
Nelson Mandela was even declared a terrorist by racist South Africa. Pakistan is always there
when US needed her...but US did not reciprocate.... we are a very emotional nation.... we love
our friends but nobody likes to be betrayed

Post September 11 (9/11)

After the attacks in 2001 in the United States, Pakistan once again became a key ally in the
terror with the United States. In 2001, U.S. President George strongly encouraged Pakistan
government to join the U.S. war on terror. Prior to the September 11 attacks in 2001, Pakistan
was key supporter of the Taliban in Afghanistan, as part of their "strategic depth" objective
vies-a-vies India
After 9/11, Pakistan, led by General Pervez Musharraf, reversed course under pressure from
the United States and joined the "War on Terror" as a U.S. ally. Having failed to convince the
Taliban to hand over bin Laden and other members of AL Qaeda, Pakistan provided the U.S. a
number of military airports and bases for its attack on Afghanistan, along with other logistical
support. Since 2001, Pakistan has arrested over six hundred Al-Qaeda members and handed
them over to the United States; senior U.S. officers have been lavish in their praise of Pakistani
efforts in public while expressing their concern that not enough was being done in private.
However, General Musharraf was strongly supported by the Bush administration.

A common theme throughout Pakistan's relations with the U.S. has been U.S. support of
military dictators to the detriment of democracy in Pakistan. In return for their support,
Pakistan had sanctions lifted and has received about $20 billion in U.S. aid since 2001, primarily
military. In 2004, President George W. Bush designated Pakistan as a major non-NATO ally,
making it eligible, among other things, to purchase advanced American military technology.

2002-2003:

Pak deploys 80000 troops in tribal area (FATA) to crush the militants. The result has been a mix.

2005:

US dis-satisfied over Pak performance in war on terror due to increased insurgency along Pak-
Afghan border. It starts drone attacks in Pak territory violating its sovereignty. Drones lead to
huge collateral damage & death of innocent civilians leading to more

resentment among the tribal people. Militancy spreads. US pressurize Pak to “Do more”.

2006- 2007:

The former President Bush signed off an internal security memo authorizing important
operational changes to the US forces in Afghanistan. Not only could the drone attacks be
increased on the Pakistan side of the border, they could be conducted without prior intimation

to the Pakistanis And, if and when any of the ‘big guns’ (the top three) of
al Qaeda and the Taliban were located, the US forces were authorized to attack them without
being inhibited by the Pak-Afghan boundary. The first signs of a changing US operational
application emerged with the increasing frequency of drone attacks in the FATA region and
absence of any prior coordination of intelligence.

2008: When Obama took over in January 2008

, one of his first orders of business was a brief on the Afghan situate

ion. He was briefed on President Bush’s authorization of

enhanced operations. Reportedly, he expressed surprise at why such facilitation was not being
fully exploited. He ordered an immediate increase in the frequency of drone attacks. This has
remained the principal plank of the US strategy to counter al Qaeda and Taliban groups lodged
in the mountainous recesses of the Pak-Afghan border. It has also subsequently been proposed
as the main underlying strategy for the counter-terrorism (CTR) approach by Vice President
Biden as an alternate to the currently ongoing counter-insurgency (COIN) campaign in
Afghanistan. For Pakistan, since 2008, the

drone attacks

have acquired a different dimension: its blowback and retaliatory suicide bomb blasts by
militant organizations have risen in proportion, causing widespread death and destruction in
the major cities of Pakistan. The CIA also believed at that time Laden to be hiding in Pakistan.
U.S time to time accused Pakistan of giving safe-haven to the Taliban & for not conducting the
military operation sincerely. In order to increase pressure US has started demanding pack
to DOMORE & has shown its displeasure over Pak performance almost constantly.

2009: $7.5 billion of non-military aid (Kerry Lugar bill)

Pakistan over the next five years. But the disbursement of aid was made conditional to Pak
performance. Various other humiliating terms were also included in the bill.

2010:
US demands Pak to launch an operation against Haqqani group (in North Waziristan)
responsible for dangerous attacks on American forces. Pak shows reluctance. No of drone
attacks cross over 85 (highest) in this year producing no result.

Important Events in PAK-USA Defense Relationship

Jan- Feb, 2011

Raymond Davis case:

He was an American contractor who killed 2 citizens in Lahore & was arrested. Under
tremendous public demand he was tried according to our law. US wanted Pak to release him
immediately. Pak ultimately succumbed to American pressure & released him. US proving it
might over Pak.

Haqqani group:

American pressure increases on Pak to ‘Do more” against the

militants. US continuously asking for operation against Haqqani network.

May 02, 2011, Abbottabad operation

: The “unilateral and unauthorized”

Operation was carried out by US forces in Abbottabad, ultimately killing Osama BinLadin, the
most wanted fugitive of the century. The operation turned out to be a watershed in the context
of US-Pakistan relationship. Despite the fact that there is a compulsion for Pakistan - as well as
US, to keep the partnership in war on terror on an even keel, the brash American action,
regardless of Pakistani priorities and sensitivities, has driven the mounting tension between the
two nations ever close to the limits of a breaking point. Pakistan’s credibility also torn apart.

July, 11: Congress discusses at cutting aid to Pak. $800 million aid blocked for Pak.
July- Aug, 11: Halfhearted efforts are under way by Americans to minimize thedamage to the
relations as Pakistan army takes a tough stance & refuses to cooperate with US.

July, 12: Ending a bitter stand-off, Pakistan agreed to reopen key NATO supplyroutes into
Afghanistan. The action was taken in lieu of the US Secretary of State

Hillary Clinton’s statement, commenting that she was sorry for the loss of life in the

botched air raid on Sillala Check Post.

December, 12: The United States assures Pakistan of an early release of $600 million in
Coalition Support Fund (CSF) arrears, increasing OPIC support for projects in Pakistan from $100
million to $1 billion, launching an $80 million Pakistan Investment Fund for SMEs in January
2013. It also reaffirms a $200 million commitment for the Diemer-Basha Dam.

My Analysis Pakistan- USA Defense Relationship

Historically, the US has dominated Pakistan’s external affairs and internal politics, of course in
collusion with its ‘obliged’ civilian and

military leadership, thanks to apolitical vacuum created by authoritarian regimes. As revealed

by WikiLeaks, the US continues to play a key role in our national affairs, be it the PPP-Musharraf
deal, restoration of judges, or the recurring patching up of the civil-military power centers. No
wonder the CIA-run drone operations go on unabatedly violating our sovereignty, disregarding
the parliamentary resolution against them. True, in the recent Pasha-Panetta talks, Pakistan has
sought to work out a narrow framework within which to restrict the CIA’s drone and other
operations in

Pakistan. But it is unlikely that the Obama administration would scale down the drone attacks,
which are billed as the ‘most lethal weapon’ against terrorism. But the US unilateral actions are
bound to prove counter-productive for the war on terror and political stability in Pakistan. If the
Gallup polls are any indicator, there has grown a groundswell of anti-US public opinion, which in
the coming weeks and months may prove too difficult for both the US and the civilian-military
leadership to ignore. Already, the Raymond Davis case has vividly exposed the combined
government-US power vis-à-vis public opinion. More alarmingly, the general perception is
gaining ground that Pakistan has suffered $ 68 billion in economic losses and more than 35,000
civilian and military causalities because of this ‘US war’. Moreover, the rising anti-US sentiment
is increasingly merged with the public discontent on the deteriorating socio-economic and
security environment in the country, providing an easy handle to the rightwing politicians and
the hardline Islamists to beat the US and the coalition government with. The circumstances
require that the US must dispel these impressions. It must realize that the war is pushing the
country to an economic abyss and needs massive economic assistance, a new Marshall Plan.
Our leadership should also be realistic. Riddled with a leadership crisis and eternally tied to the
US economic lifeline, the country cannot possibly have an equal say in prosecuting the war but
it can protect its own interests within the mutually agreed strategic framework. The US has
been enjoying undocumented & unclear rules since Musharraf regime. But now Pak wants
clear& specified engagements with US in the war on terror, which is good sign. Pak is a
sovereign state & US cannot keep defying our laws with impunity. The frequent movements of
US diplomats have caused serious problems in Pak as several unwarranted incidents have
occurred in past where these diplomats have to be given relaxation despite their inappropriate
conduct. Besides Raymond Davis issue US consulate cars with fake number plates have been
caught many times. There have been reports of resistance& failure of US Diplomats in
disclosing their identity to the security agencies in Pak.The US sudden & unexpected raid on
Osama’s hide out at Abbottabad was also an encroaching attempt in Pak territory. The
incidence caused immense embarrassment to both the governments & military of Pak. US
found another opportunity to humiliate our military forces & blamed them for either protecting
Osama or incompetent to find him out. We disregarded our contribution& services in war on
terror. It threatened Pak with aid cutoff & other consequences. Similarly drone attacks have
also been a bone of contention between the US & Pak as these attacks are being carried out
without respecting the sentiments of our people & openly damaging our sovereignty. Last year
85 attacked were conducted while over 45 strikes have been made this year so far. Pakistan is
worried over not only at the increase in their number but also due to huge civilian losses. Pak
then also has to face the resentment of the people in tribal areas. US have threatened to strike
Baluchistan with drones as well & even to go for unilateral actions in Pak. On the night of
November 25/26, US/NATO airplanes and helicopters made a pre-dawn attack on two Pakistani
border check posts at Salala in Mohamd Agency and killed 24. soldiers, besides injuring 13. It is
the most serious tragedy to date. The Abbottabad and Salala attacks have turned the public
outcry Against blatant acts like the broad day light killing of two young men by Raymond Davis,
a lowly hired hand of American intelligence, into deep Seated dismay and resentment against
US policies. Pak-US relations Have hit an all-time low. The NATO supplies have been blocked
and The Shamsi airbase has been got vacated. Pakistan boycotted the Bonn Conference on the
future of Afghanistan. Pakistan eventually succumbed to the US diplomatic-cum-economic
pressures. Apparently, the Defense Committee of the Cabinet’s decision to re-open the NATO
supply line is a ‘compromised’ reaction after US officials agreed, in a backdoor

dialogue after US Secretary of State apologized on July 3, 2012 for the Salala incident.

PAK-US Relations: Solutions

The prevailing opinion in Pakistan is that after Obama’s re

-election one would witness more of the same in Pakistan-US relations in the next few years.
However, there is also the possibility for the two countries to make a new beginning. The
important question is whether the two sides would have the wisdom and the courage to realize
this possibility for the improvement of Pakistan-US relations on a sustainable and mutually
beneficial basis. Five main factors will determine the substance and direction of Pakistan-US
relations in the coming years. They are the issues of terrorism, Afghanistan, nuclear
proliferation, US-China relations and US-India relations. In principle, the positions of the
two countries on terrorism are similar. Both are opposed to terrorism in any form or
manifestation. Both Pakistan and the US have been the victims of terrorism. In fact, Pakistan
has suffered far more than the US at the hands of terrorism, in terms of material destruction
and loss of precious human lives. In order to keep Pakistan bridled, the US coined ‘do more
mantra’, kept leveling unsubstantiated allegations, resorted to coercive diplomacy and
subjected it to drone strikes. It made Pakistan a convenient scapegoat to hide its failures. Pak-
US relations, which remained lukewarm because of bossy and mistrustful attitude of American
officials and their outright leaning toward India and Afghanistan, nosedived after the incidents
of Raymond Davis in January 2011, stealth attack in Abbottabad on 2 May, Admiral Mullen’s
diatribe in September describing Haqqani network as the ‘veritable arm’ of ISI, and brutal
Salala attack on 26 November. In utter frustration, Pakistan was forced to close Shamsi airbase,
block NATO supply routes for over seven months and cease military cooperation. These steps
meant to impress upon the US to respect Pakistan’s sovereignty and to treat Pakistan as an ally
rather than a target further widened the trust gap and brought Pak-US relations to a near-
breaking point. In the wake of security situation in Afghanistan spinning out of control of US-
NATO-forces despite the two US troops surges, depleting US economy and increasing home
pressure to end the unwinnable war, the US initiated a political prong to induce the Taliban to
negotiate for a political settlement. This initiative enhanced Pakistan’s importance and in order
to lure Pakistan to help in convincing the hard-liner Taliban leaders, the process of strategic
dialogue was started in 2010 which provides a platform to both Pakistan and the US to convey
their expectations and demands. The main purpose behind the Pak-US strategic dialogue was to
understand and address the interests and concerns of each other. The US interest was to find a
way for a safe and honorable exit from Afghanistan with Pakistan’s assistance. Pakistan on the
other hand was mainly interested in US assistance to improve its faltering economy, overcome
its energy crisis and to address its military imbalances. It is unfortunate, therefore, that there
should be misunderstandings between the two countries. These misunderstandings have arisen
because of policy differences between the two governments in fighting terrorism. It also shows
that the two sides have not been able to convey to each other convincingly their respective
points of view on the subject. Obama’s re-election offers new opportunities to the two sides to
understand each other’s point of view and better coordinate their respective anti-terrorism
policies. From the perspective of Pakistan, Pakistan has been seeking a civil nuclear deal like the
onus concluded with India and considers it imperative for restoring balance in the region. It
wants this agreement to overcome the energy crisis it is facing. Pakistan wants to have
balanced relationship with the US and not a discriminatory one. It expects from the US to
restrain rather than encourage Indian meddlesome role in Pakistan using Afghan soil. Pakistan
was not given an improved US trade access for its textile exports. It is crucial for Pakistan’s
economy to restore its declining industrial sector through trade access which is more effective
than aid. The US has been making tall promises but has failed to deliver. Pakistan didn’t receive
from the US the support it expected over its national security concerns. Rather, it squeezed
Pakistan by stopping the payment of committed aid installments and even withheld $1.2

billion which it had to pay against CSF for services rendered by Pak Army. Pakistan’s request for
a free trade agreement has not been ceded to. The Reconstruction Opportunity Zones (ROZ)
legislation that would give market access and trade concessions to Pakistan and Enterprise
Fund Projects and construction of two hydroelectric dams in FATA are still pending. As against
total $ 18 billion Pakistan received from the US since 2002, it lost $70billion in fighting the war
on terror. Human losses have crossed the figure of 35000. 5000fatalities suffered by Pakistan
law enforcement agencies are far more than the casualties suffered by 48 countries involved in
war on terror. That is unfortunate for the simple reason that post-Afghanistan withdrawal,
Pakistan will need the US more than the US will need Pakistan. After the Americans have pulled
out, their interests in Central and South Asia will be better served by maintaining close and
friendly relations with Afghanistan and India. The Americans are interested in obtaining access
to the fabulous energy and mineral riches of Central Asia. A Pentagon report estimated
Afghanistan’s mineral wealth at over a trillion dollars. The Central Asian states have known
reserves of gas and oil as well. America’s other geopolitical interest in the area is containing the
rising China. That is better served by a close association with India. This logic, therefore,
essentially marginalizes Pakistan in the eyes of the policymakers in Washington. But Islamabad
must find a way of staying on the right side of America. This is for good economic reasons. For
as long as the country is unable to generate a greater amount of domestic resource for
investment and for as long as it fails to exploit the riches available. from taking what should be
its share in expanding international trade, Pakistan will remain dependent on external flows of
capital. Foreign savings are needed to close the domestic investment-savings gap, as well as the
gap between export earnings and expenditure on imports. In the past, America has played very
important roles in helping the country with these two gaps. It has provided both direct
assistances, as well as pressured institutions such as the International Monetary Fund to come
to Pakistan’s assistance. With the palpable cooling of relations, help from America may not be
as readily available as was the case during several balance of payments crises in the past. It is
recognized in Pakistan that the country, as it moves towards another general election, will face
a new balance of payments crisis. There will be only two ways of solving it. Islamabad could
severely tighten its belt and thus slow down even more its tepid rate of growth. Hence, we can
conclude that defensive relationship between Pakistan and USA from start is full of comedy of
errors and both sides wants to out do each other one way or another.

References
Joseph, M. (2004). Pakistan in Changing Strategic Contest. New Delhi: Knowledge World.

Khan, M. A. (1967). Friends Not Masters. London: Oxford University Press.

Kissinger, H. (1979). White House Years. Bostan: Little Brown and Company.

Kroastodt, K. A. (2004). Pakistan - US Relations. Washington D.C: Congressional Research

Service.

Mahmud, F. (1991). A history of US - Pakistan Relations. Lahore: Vanguard Book Pvt Ltd.

Maitra, R. (2002). Indian Military Shadow over Central Asia. Asia Times on Line .

Marchchi, V. a. (1975). The CIA and the Curt of Intelligence. New York: Dell.

Mazari, S. M. (2004, December 18). The Reality of Nuclear Soth Asia . The Nation .

Muqeem, M. G. (1963). The Story of Pakistan Army. Lahore: Oxford University Press.

United States Treaties and other International Governments,. (1959). 317-319.

White House Press Release,5 January1957, Text also in United States Department of State
Bulletin.