&w=3840&q=100)
US-Pakistan bonhomie: Why India should not be surprised
Should India be surprised by the latest turn in US-Pakistan relations under the Trump 2.0 administration? Analysts of Indo-US relations have often characterised this relationship as the one with 'ups and downs' or 'peaks and valleys', particularly during four decades of the Cold War.
But US-Pakistan relations have witnessed more extensive fluctuations in history, and that pattern continues until today. Pakistan is yet to learn lessons from the extreme oscillations of its ties with the United States, and currently Islamabad seems excessively jubilant over the latest turn in its ties with the Trump White House.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
President Donald Trump, who had accused Pakistan of offering nothing but 'lies and deceits', is all praise for the Pakistani Army Chief Asim Munir. He truly honoured a terror-sponsoring field marshal by hosting lunch for him in the White House—a rare gesture in US history—and thanked him for ending Pakistan's war against India that could have gone nuclear.
There is recorded evidence that it was the Pakistani Army's DGMO who called India's DGMO requesting 'ceasefire'. Field Marshal Munir has openly expressed President Trump's intervention in ending the armed conflict and even suggested that Trump should be awarded the coveted Nobel Peace Prize. What he has not revealed is Pakistan's SOS call to Washington to push for a ceasefire with India after the Indian military not only destroyed several terror camps in Pakistan but also severely damaged Pakistani military bases. When advised by Washington to speak to the Indian side and ask for a ceasefire, Pakistan's DGMO did that.
President Trump is right that he played a role in the India-Pakistan ceasefire, but that role was confined to giving sane advice to Islamabad to seek a ceasefire agreement. India thus is right as well in repeatedly asserting that the ceasefire agreement was the outcome of conversations between the DGMOs of the two countries and it was not because of any mediation by Washington.
The whole irony of the Trump-Munir luncheon meeting lies in the fact that it took place so soon after the Pahalgam attacks by Pakistan-sponsored terrorists that forced India to punish the terrorists and their sponsors. It was wise on the part of President Trump to advise Pakistan to seek a ceasefire agreement with India, but it was ill-advised on his part to sing praise of Pakistan's contribution to counterterrorism efforts. First, the CENTCOM head General Michael Kurilla described Pakistan as a 'phenomenal' counterterrorism partner in his Congressional testimony. Now the president of the US bestows all praise on the Pakistani field marshal.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Washington is well aware of Pakistani duplicity in counterterrorism operations undertaken by the US in Afghanistan. How Pakistan under General Pervez Musharraf was taking billions of dollars of economic and military assistance from the United States and diverting some of the wealth to strengthen the anti-Western Haqqani network in Afghanistan is not unknown to the policy community in the US.
How a Pakistani nuclear scientist once visited Al Qaeda supremo Osama bin Laden in the caves of Afghanistan is also not a secret. Nor is the place where Osama bin Laden was hiding, and the Obama administration captured him without informing Islamabad and by violating Pakistani sovereignty, also known to the world. That even a few American citizens were killed in the Pakistan-sponsored terrorist attack on the Taj Hotel in Mumbai could not have been an unfamiliar event to the Trump advisors.
Why is there then this renewed praise for Pakistan's contribution to counterterrorism so soon after the Pakistani hand in the brutal and inhuman terror attacks in Pahalgam? It is because the Trump administration may need Pakistan's endorsement for probable US military intervention in Iran. Pakistan's memory of its engagements with the US is too short. It willingly joined the US-backed regional collective security groupings, such as CENTO and SEATO, and soon found that these two alliances were of no use in its anti-India misadventures in 1965 or 1971. Pakistan played the key role of being a conduit for America in its anti-Soviet proxy war for 10 years in Afghanistan, from 1979 to 1989, only to be abandoned after the Soviet withdrawal of troops in 1989.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Pakistan expected the US to quietly look the other way at its clandestine nuclear activities for serving so well the US interests in Afghanistan in the 1980s. But Washington imposed the Pressler Amendment and cut off all assistance to Pakistan after the end of Soviet military intervention in Afghanistan. Pakistan went to the extent of offering its troops for US operations during the Kuwaiti crisis of 1990-1991 with the hope that Washington would show leniency on nuclear issues. But it failed in its attempt.
The US used Pakistan as a frontline state as long as its troops remained in Afghanistan until their full withdrawal by the Biden administration. But after the return of the Taliban in Afghanistan, Pakistan's strategic relevance ended, and it was almost abandoned by the US. President Joe Biden described Pakistan as the 'most dangerous' country in the world. Pakistan has learnt no lesson, and yet again it seems to be offering its help for any probable military operations in Iran by the Trump administration.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
It is clear that the Iran-Israel war figured prominently in the conversation between Pakistan's strongman and President Trump. In Trump's views, Pakistan knows a lot about Iran. Pakistan's knowledge about Iran could be useful to any future American intervention in Iran. After all, Pakistan shares about 900 km of border with Iran. Pakistan would prefer to have a monopoly over the 'Islamic Bomb', and that would be possible if Iran's ability to go nuclear is erased.
In the game of periodic mutual love and hate, friend and foe, and embrace and divorce equations between Pakistan and the United States, India faces the collateral damage, and it should take timely steps to safeguard its national security. There is thus no surprise that Pakistan may yet again become a frontline state for the US strategy in the South and West Asian region.
The author is founding chairperson, Kalinga Institute of Indo-Pacific Studies, and editor, India Quarterly. The views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
12 minutes ago
- Time of India
Trump, EU's Von Der Leyen cite conflicting details on trade deal
President Trump and European Commission President Von der Leyen's new trade agreement reveals discrepancies in key details, highlighting the challenges in its implementation. The EU agreed to a 15% tariff on most exports to the US, but disagreements persist regarding pharmaceuticals, steel, and aluminum. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads President Donald Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen appear to differ on some key details in their new trade agreement, underscoring the difficulty they may have in turning this deal into a European Union said it would accept a 15% tariff on nearly all its exports to the US. Trump told reporters that the bloc also agreed to open up its 'countries to trade at zero tariff.'After he met with von der Leyen Sunday, Trump said that the deal would not include pharmaceuticals, a contentious point in the negotiations, seeming to imply they would be subject to a higher a separate news conference, von der Leyen said, 'The EU agreed we have 15% for pharmaceuticals.' But she added, 'Whatever decisions later – by the president of the US – that's on a different sheet of paper.'Senior US officials later said that the two sides agreed on a 15% tariff level for the EU's pharmaceutical exports. A separate Section 232 probe on pharmaceuticals is still coming over the next three weeks, but the EU tariff level will remain at 15%, the officials US has initiated investigations into whether the import of certain products, such as aerospace and semiconductors, poses a national security threat to the country. This could lead to separate tariffs on some accords typically require years of negotiations and can run thousands of pages long. Talks on the preliminary agreement clinched on Sunday began in April and concrete details appear EU and US also diverged on another controversial sector, with Trump saying that the 50% tariff on steel and aluminum 'stays the way it is.' Von der Leyen said that metal 'tariffs will be cut and a quota system will be put in place.'The deal doesn't cover the EU's steel and aluminum exports, which will remain subject to 50% tariffs, according to senior US officials. Aerospace tariffs, meanwhile, will remain at 0% pending the outcome of a Section 232 probe, the officials der Leyen argued that she won certainty and stability for companies on both sides of the Atlantic. But it's far from clear that the EU and US will be able to iron out all their differences on the many contentious issues yet to deal with.'The focus will now turn to interpretation and implementation risk, posing a mix of political and technical questions,' Carsten Nickel, deputy director of research at Teneo, wrote in a note. 'Given the nature of the deal, major uncertainties are likely to persist.'
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
12 minutes ago
- First Post
Kim Jong-Un's sister rejects new South Korean president's outreach to North Korea
Kim Yo-Jong, the powerful sister of North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un, has rejected the outreach of new South Korean President Lee Jae Myung. She said that North Korea has 'no interest' in engaging with South Korea as it continues to be blindly part of American hostilities against her nation. read more The influential sister of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un rebuffed overtures by South Korea's new liberal government, saying Monday that its 'blind trust' in the country's alliance with the US and hostility toward North Korea make it no different from its conservative predecessor. Kim Yo Jong's comments imply that North Korea —now preoccupied with its expanding cooperation with Russia— sees no need to resume diplomacy with South Korea and the US anytime soon. Experts say she likely hopes to drive a wedge between Seoul and Washington. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'We clarify once again the official stand that no matter what policy is adopted and whatever proposal is made in Seoul, we have no interest in it and there is neither a reason to meet nor an issue to be discussed,' Kim Yo Jong said in a statement carried by state media. It's North Korea's first official statement on the government of South Korean President Lee Jae Myung, which took office in early June with a promise to improve badly frayed ties with North Korea. Lee's government has halted anti-Pyongyang frontline loudspeaker broadcasts, taken steps to ban activists from flying balloons with propaganda leaflets across the border and repatriated North Koreans who were drifted south in wooden boats months earlier. North Korea complains of South Korea-US military drills North Korea has shunned talks with South Korea and the US since leader Kim Jong Un's high-stakes nuclear diplomacy with President Donald Trump fell apart in 2019 due to wrangling over international sanctions. North Korea has since focused on building more powerful nuclear weapons targeting its rivals and declared a hostile 'two-state' system on the Korean Peninsula to terminate relations with South Korea. Kim Yo Jong called Lee's steps 'sincere efforts' to develop ties, but said the new government still 'stands in confrontation' with North Korea. She mentioned the upcoming summertime South Korea-US military drills, which North Korea views as an invasion rehearsal. South Korea's Unification Ministry responded that it will steadfastly seek reconciliation with North Korea to realize peaceful co-existence. Spokesperson Koo Byoungsam told reporters that the statement shows North Korea closely monitors the Lee government's North Korea policy despite deep mistrust. Moon Seong Mook, an analyst for the Seoul-based Korea Research Institute for National Strategy, said Kim Yo Jong's statement shows North Korea is holding out for South Korea to abandon the US alliance. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Moon said that Kim likely sees little upside in engaging with the South since it cannot restart economic projects that previously benefited the North as long as international sanctions remain in place. North Korea focuses on Russian ties North Korea built cooperation with Russia, sending troops and conventional weapons to support its war in Ukraine, and likely receiving economic and technological assistance in return. Since beginning his second term in January, Trump has repeatedly boasted of his personal ties with Kim Jong Un and expressed intent to resume diplomacy with him. But North Korea hasn't publicly responded to Trump's overture. Leif-Eric Easley, professor of international studies at Ewha Womans University in Seoul, said that Kim Yo Jong's statement had a domestic audience. 'Kim Yo Jong's comments are an effort to advance national pride by portraying North Korea in a superior position, despite its economic struggles and international pariah status,' Easley said. 'She also seeks to justify Pyongyang's weapons programs and divide Seoul and Washington by criticizing upcoming military exercises.' Still, there is a limit on what North Korea can get from Russia, and Pyongyang could change course at a major upcoming meeting of the ruling Workers' Party, likely to be held in January, said Kwak Gil Sup, the head of One Korea Center, a website specializing in North Korea affairs. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'I think North Korea may formulate a Plan B and Plan C in relations for South Korea and the US,' Kwak said. (This is an agency copy. Except for the headline, the copy has not been edited by Firstpost staff.)
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
12 minutes ago
- Business Standard
INDIA bloc holds meeting ahead of discussion on Operation Sindoor in LS
The floor leaders of the Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance (INDIA) bloc on Monday held a meeting to discuss the strategy for the second week of the monsoon session and the issues that need to be raised. This meeting comes as the Lok Sabha gears up for a 16-hour-long discussion on Operation Sindoor today. Union Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju has appealed to the opposition not to use language reminiscent of Pakistan. He said that there was a need to be mindful and maintain the dignity of the Indian armed forces. "I request the opposition, especially the Congress, not to do anything to harm India's interests and not speak Pakistan's language. We have to be mindful. We have to maintain the dignity of the Indian armed forces," Rijiju told ANI. The Union Minister stated that the opposition, including the Congress, should refrain from making any statements that could harm national interests. "The Congress and the Opposition should not say anything that could harm the national interests. Whatever they speak against India is used by the Pakistanis and India's enemies outside," Rijiju said, adding, "It was the wish of the people of India that the PM decided to launch Operation Sindoor through the Indian Army. Today, the Lok Sabha will take up the discussion on the Operation Sindoor in response to the Pahalgam terror attack." Defence Minister Rajnath Singh is expected to address the Lok Sabha at around noon. Lok Sabha is set to hold a special discussion on 'Operation Sindoor', India's military response to the Pahalgam terror attack. A fiery debate is expected to unfold in Parliament between top leaders from the ruling alliance and the opposition. Lok Sabha's listing for the Business for Monday, "Special Discussion on India's strong, successful and decisive 'Operation Sindoor' in response to terrorist attack in Pahalgam". Twenty-six civilians were killed in the April 22 terror attack in Pahalgam in Jammu and Kashmir, after which India retaliated through precision strikes under Operation Sindoor, targeting terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). Even since the monsoon session began on July 21, the Parliament has witnessed constant adjourments amid uproar over the demands of the opposition to push for a debate on issues of public importance, including the ghastly Pahalgam terror attack and the ongoing SIR exercise being carried out by the Election Commission in Bihar ahead of the upcoming assembly elections. The opposition has also demanded that PM Modi respond to the repeated claims made by US President Donald Trump of initiating a "ceasefire" between India and Pakistan following Operation Sindoor. The first week of the Monsoon session of Parliament was marked by major disruptions, including the surprise resignation of Jagdeep Dhankhar as Vice President.
