Pakistan’s Ambassador to the United States, who ironically enjoys the reputation of being an American Ambassador to Pakistan, based in Washington, has recently quipped: “The most hated country in Pakistan is our top trading partner, top aid donor, top weapon supplier and top remittance source.”

Perhaps, the significant reason behind this anomaly is the snowballing India-US nexus at the cost of Pakistan. De-hyphenating India-Pakistan in the American strategic calculus has, indeed, created more problems for America and this region, rather than it intended to resolve. The obsession to sponsor the rise of India, as a major player on the Asian geopolitical canvas, has severely curtailed USA’s leverage over India; President Barack Obama dare not pronounce ‘K’ for Kashmir once again!

The US President’s visit to India had left a negative impact on the whole region, which has been reinforced by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s recent rhetoric. By prompting New Delhi to bite more than it could chew, Washington is well on its way to sow the seeds of perpetual destabilisation of this region at the expense of China as well as India itself.
Although, in the past, the US administration played an effective role in diffusing Pak-India tension and did not allow the matters to degenerate into tactical showdown, yet it allowed New Delhi to maintain strategic pressures on Islamabad through military deployments, diplomatic manoeuvres and resource squeezing.

At the same time, the leaderships in Islamabad and Washington differ considerably on issues of vital interest to Pakistan; nuclear policy, energy acquisition from Iran and China, end game in Afghanistan, and the Kashmir dispute are some major areas of divergence. Most of these issues are intricately linked to India. Hence, a Pakistan-India-America triangle has emerged. It is also a fact that the US administration retains a cunning balancing leverage between India and Pakistan, and uses the pressure points aptly to make the two countries do its bidding.

Recently, the US lawmakers have rejected the bill about the stoppage of aid to Pakistan, but have agreed to attach strings. However, public opinion is gaining strength that the aid should be refused and to make up for the loss the federal government should proportionately enhance the transit fee on NATO’s supply containers and aircrafts destined for the Afghan war zone through Pakistan.

Furthermore, America frequently partners the Indian effort in maintaining a high-pitched tirade against Pakistan’s armed force and the ISI; this has scaled new heights since the cowardly Abbottabad attack and all the guns are being directed against Pakistan. The political leadership, however, is being spared by the propagandist of any wrongdoing with a clear objective of creating a wedge between the political and military echelons of national leadership.

Timed with Hillary’s recent visit, Americans took a well calculated step to appease India by arresting the Director of the Kashmir American Council, Dr Ghulam Nabi Fai. Certainly, the arrest was a setback to the legitimate rights of the people of Kashmir, and their struggle for self-determination. While New Delhi was overwhelmed, Islamabad’s response was aggressive. Our Foreign Office announced: “A démarche was made to the US Embassy in Islamabad to register the concerns, in particular the slander campaign against Pakistan.”
To mitigate the defeat in Afghanistan, the US is working overtime to shift the blame for every wrong to Pakistan, while it is all set to involve India in Afghanistan militarily. In India, Hillary sought to reassure it that the US administration has no plans to cut and run when it comes to Afghanistan, but she certainly was bluffing. Those familiar with the Obama administration’s thinking believe that the White House wants to be able to point out concrete achievements in the run-up to the 2012 elections, while wrapping things up in Afghanistan “at any costs”.

Ms Clinton played another pressure card by projecting India as the leading power in Asia. This effort was launched to coax it into a proxy role to counterbalance China. She called upon India to become a “more assertive” leader in Asia, in Southeast Asia, the Pacific Rim, Central Asia and Pacific Ocean. The fact is that India is having a hard time holding its own in its immediate neighbourhood, as Beijing is expanding its links with Sri Lanka, Myanmar and Nepal. Hence, to expect India to match China in Southeast Asia and the Pacific Rim, where the latter has built-in advantages, is a pipedream. The Indians will indeed remain cautious while siding with the Americans against the Chinese. It needs China’s nod to realise its aspiration for a permanent seat in the UNSC.

Also, in the context of terrorism, India needs to understand that militants are well organised from Somalia to Afghanistan and from the Central Asian Republics to the Occupied Kashmir. The international security analysts are already predicting that India is on the brink of becoming a battleground of these transnational groups. Because the outreach of these elements is much broader than Pakistan’s logical capacity to handle them; even America is unable to contain them. For this, Pakistan has already proposed the setting up of SAARC police and pooling up regional resources.

Under these settings, the fate of Pak-India Foreign Minister level talks was correctly prejudged by the analysts in the two countries. There was unanimity of opinion that parleys would remain at the cosmetic level, routines would be discussed and core issues be sidestepped. Travel, trade and terrorism would be in the forefront, while water and Kashmir in the background. Mumbai would be highlighted and Samjhota Express would get a passing mention. Matters have moved in the same way. Nevertheless, some functional dialogue process is always better than none!

In an assessment after their meeting, the Indian Foreign Minister said ties were back “on the right track”, while the Pakistani Foreign Minister spoke of a “new era” of cooperation. Nevertheless, there was little in the way of substantive agreements to back up the general mood of optimism: The joint statement was monotonous, envisaging a general bilateral effort to combat terrorism, increase trade and keep the peace dialogue going.

One must understand that now America is in the driving seat of Pak-India interactions, and the talks are likely to follow the pattern of ‘sound good but solve nothing’. After all, America has a long experience of sponsoring a futile dialogue process between arch rivals – Palestine and Israel. So, it remains for India and Pakistan not to get locked into a zero sum game. Both the countries need to strengthen their bilateral institutions to absorb sporadic crises and move on.

__________________
When Problems are so Big & Your Strength is no Longer enough to CaRRy them, Don't Give uP; Because where your Strength Ends the Grace of Almighty ALLAH Begins