Approaching the end BY Saleem Safi

[niazikhan2]

Pak-US ties are the best example of a love-hate relationship between two countries. These relations cannot be termed "relations between the people of Pakistan and the people of the US." Unlike the US, where the establishment co-opts the political leadership when it decides about the nature of relations with other countries, our establishment, from the very beginning, has arrogated to itself the sole authority to decide our relationship with the US. This status has made it well-versed with the pros and cons of relations with the US.
Our establishment does not let the political leadership disturb this equation. Anyone in our political leadership who tried to intrude into this area was not only repulsed but even expelled from politics. When this relationship was decided and run by the generals, Ayub, Zia or Musharraf, none had any objections. But when Bhutto tried to decide about relations with the US, keeping in view his priorities, he was executed. Similarly, when Nawaz Sharif made attempts to come closer to Bill Clinton through visits or various agreements, he was expelled from the corridors of power and interned in Attock Jail.
More often than not, the thinking of the US political leadership regarding Afghanistan, Pakistan and India varies from the priorities of the Pentagon and the CIA. In Pakistan too, our political leadership and the establishment have hardly been on the same page as regards relations with the US, Afghanistan and India. Previously the visits of Musharraf to the US and now of Zardari, the military and civilian aid, the frequent visits of American emissaries and donations for the flood-affected people, etc., are manifestations of love relations.
On the other hand, the soft corner for India on Afghan soil, drone attacks, helicopter shelling, the strategic-cooperation agreements with India, dragging in the Durand Line issue instead of resolving it, covert support for anti-Pakistan elements and the mystifying activities of the CIA on Pakistani soil, are manifestations of a hate relationship.
In response, the frontline status in the war on terror, the bombing and killing of its own people, etc. represent Pakistan's love, while nursing a soft corner for the Taliban, causing "go-America-go" movements and at times the obstruction of NATO-supply routes, etc, betray the existence of hate relations between the US and Pakistan.
This dual nature of relations has cost the US its plans for the region. Similarly, these complex relations have specifically destroyed the Pakhtun belt in Pakistan, and have generally affected the whole country. The political leadership too is a victim of this phenomenon. This has consistently denied it the ability to devise a non-conventional policy vis-à-vis India, Afghanistan and the US.
The PPP and ANP leaderships have committed the same mistake. They thought that if our establishment was a US ally, then why they couldn't establish their own direct contacts with Washington. The leadership of the PPP has been assuring Washington that it will accomplish things for the US which even Musharraf failed to do. So the US decided to support the PPP and the ANP. After assuming power, when the ANP leadership felt that close relations with the US were not being appreciated by the powers that be, it completely cut itself off from the US and came into the fold of the establishment.
However, Asif Zardari remained a victim of misunderstandings. He tried to become number one in Washington through more services, bypassing the establishment. For this very reason he invited the Afghan president for his oath-taking ceremony. In meetings with the Americans he would support the idea of crushing the Taliban as there was no hope of their being reformed. For the same reason, he tried to bring the ISI under the control of Rehman Malik and actually gave many concessions to the CIA and Blackwater (now Xe Services) for activities in Pakistan. The acceptance of the Kerry-Lugar Bill and its staunch public defence by PPP loyalists were also a manifestation of this thinking.
Zardari and his cohorts thought that they had no need for the support of the establishment or the people who voted them into power, because the US was firmly behind them and would support them through thick and thin. Zardari was of the view that the US had installed him in the presidency and would save him in the time of need. But he forgot the fact that the US never sticks around with a domestically unpopular leader, even if that leader be Musharraf. The US does not waste time in withdrawing its support when even persons like Musharraf become a burden for his people and the establishment. He ignored the fact that when all issues of interest to the US are in the hands of the establishment, how can a political leader become valuable for Washington? And why would the Americans embrace an unpopular leader against the establishment?
Of late, Zardari and associates have felt the heat, which has made them recognise their mistakes. This realisation has compelled Rehman Malik to publicly state that the government is being destabilised through international conspiracies. And in private meetings the president is heard complaining that the Americans have deserted him. It is disheartening that even Zulfikar Ali Bhutto's heir needed the Americans to keep his government in Islamabad. And surely this government is fast approaching the same end as the one met by its predecessors. It is absolutely true that history repeats itself and men never learn from history.

http://thenews.com.pk/13-10-2010/ethenews/e-9683.htm