NATIONAL SECURITY OF PAKISTAN AND THE US WAR ON TERROR: IMPLICATIONS ON PAKISTAN-US RELATIONS

Dr. G. M. Chaudhry

Policy, Governance and National Security Analyst

Parliamentary Council and Legislative Draftsman

ISLAMABAD

E-mail: drgmchaudhryg@gmail.com

ABSTRACT

The United States’ Global War on Terror or simply War on Terror is the combatant action which is without any boundaries throughout the world. Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen and other countries of the world are main focus countries and being as such are also facing threats to their national securities, political stability and governance. Terrorists, militants and non-State actors are playing havoc with lives of people and their properties establishing a reign of terror wherein none is feeling secure. To secure its national security objectives, the demands of the US administration are high and constant without effective action over and above the priorities of the governments within their countries. There are huge losses of human lives of innocent people due to state actions as well as due to terrorist activities. Rise of militancy and terrorist activities is an uncontrollable menace. There is need to minutely study and examine the impact of War on Terror on Pakistan-US relations and implications of operations combating militant and terrorist acts on the national security of Pakistan. It is also relevant to analyse reasons and factors for militancy, insurgency and terrorist activities and to find out the possible way outs to get rid of surging militancy, insurgency and terrorism by adopting appropriate means and methods.

Key words:    War on Terror (WoT), Global War on Terror (GWoT),militancy, insurgency, terrorism, Pakistan, USA, relations, national security, economic, political,  trade.

____________________

Introduction :

The Soviet armed forces invaded Afghanistan apparently on the invitation of Afghan President on December 26, 1979. BabrakKarmal belonging to Parcham Party was installed as the President[1] deposing the HafeezUllah Amin. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was highly condemned by the world states and the international community. As apparently, it was on the invitation of the so-called political governments of Afghanistan, thus, no country had right to intervene although there was no such mandate from the people of Afghanistan to Parcham Party as it was not a representative political party. The people of Afghanistan had not accepted the Soviet invasion and started an armed struggle against the so-called Afghan Government as well as against the Soviet armed forces.

It was an indigenous struggle against the government of the country. Due to massive bombing and military operations by the Soviet armed forces millions of Afghans fled from Afghanistan and entered in the bordering tribal areas of Pakistan i.e. Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA). As there are historical relations between the people of Afghanistan and the FATA as well as the bordering province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa of Pakistan as both the people belong to same race with social, cultural and linguistic similarity. People of the FATA and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa are known for their traditional and cultural hospitability and religious nature welcomed their Afghan brethren who were also kith and kin in some cases as some tribes are divided into both countries and residing in both sides of border with unhindered and unrestricted mobility without any visa restrictions or governmental controls by both the governments i.e. Pakistan and Afghanistan.

This was the beginning of Afghan Jihad i.e. holy Islamic war, against the religions as the Soviets were considered as heretics and such holy war was a religious obligation for all Muslims. It was also obligatory for Pakistan to provide shelter to fleeing refugees under International Law as well.

In the circumstances, Pakistan was left with no option except to provide boarding, lodging and other possible facilities to large scale muhajreen i.e. Afghan refugees. Although Pakistan was not financially so stable to bear such financial responsibility, however, there was no other alternative.

As it was the height of Cold War and the United States of America (USA) was still following the policy of containment of communism under President Eisenhower’s Domino Doctrine. The US National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski recommended to the President Carter for review of the US Policy towards Pakistan as sanctions were imposed against Pakistan due to non-proliferation policy[2]and for allowing military and financial assistance to Pakistan.

Reaction on Afghan Intervention : Rise of Militancy and Jihad

After Soviet intervention in Afghanistan, the UN General Assembly adopted a Resolution on January 14, 1980, by a vote of 104 in favour, 18 agaisnt and 18 abstentions, deploring armed intervention in Afghanistan and called for immediate, unconditional and total withdrawal of the foreign troops in order to enable its people to determine their own form of government. It was further stressed that Afghan people be allowed to determine their own form of government and choose their own economic, political and social systems free from outside intervention, subversion, coercion or constraints of any kind whatsoever.[3]Similarly, Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) Foreign Ministers in their meeting also took a stronger and tougher position with suspension of Afghanistan’s OIC membership. Non-aligned Movement (MAM) also condemned the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan.[4] The USA revived its relationship with Pakistan with an offer of $400 million which was rejected by President General Zia-ul-Haq of Pakistan.[5] The US feared plunging Pakistan into the Cold War when the Pakistan had already helped the USA in Tehran Hostage case.[6]

Making Afghan War as a Jihad and Participation of Islamic Mujahideen

However, the scenario was changed after President Ronald Reagan in office as new Assistance Package was about $3 billion over a period of five years.[7] However, off the record there was a broader collaboration between the US CIA and Pakistan’s ISI which had sponsored the religious euphoria in Pakistan and in the entire Islamic world inviting the hard core Muslims for a Jihad (Holy War) against the Soviet forces successfully. Fundamental Muslims financially supported and trained by the intelligence agencies waged a Jihad (Holy War) with the most modern weaponry and military training for use of such weapons like Stinger Missiles, etc. The Soviet Union was never in such a pathetic condition in its warfare.

Diego Cordovez, a senior UN official from Ecuador was appointed as a personal representative of the UN Secretary-General in 1981. Cordovez called all stakeholders for negotiations in Geneva in early 1981. After initial refusals from different countries, the negotiations began in Geneva in June, 1982, for exploration of the structure of a settlement that would integrate the components of the Resolution of the UN General Assembly. So many sessions of talks held during a period of six years in Geneva. However, till late 1986 all issues were settled except a timeframe for the withdrawal of the Soviet forces and boundary between Pakistan and Afghanistan. Texts of the agreements were also ready.[8] Finally, Gorbacheve and Shevardnadze, his Foreign Minister, succeeded in winning endorsement of the Politburo for the policy of terminating military involvement in Afghanistan.[9]

Ultimately, the Soviet Union unilaterally withdrawn from Afghanistan in 1988 after signing of final Geneva Accords in March, 1988, suffering a loss of about 13,000 lives, 35,000 injured and financial loss of about 100 billion Rubles becoming a classic example of “imperial over-stretch”.[10] In this way, the Afghan people suffered heavy loss of life including about one million perished and six million forced to take refuge in different countries like Pakistan and Iran with a large scale devastation of Afghan infrastructure.[11]

Remnants of Afghan Jihad: Osama bin Laden and Other Islamic Jihadists

Withdrawal of the Soviet forces was not the end of the game but it was the beginning of the worst chapter of the world history. It was the birth of terrorism in its present form and intensity. The last Soviet tank rolled across the Hairatan Bridge over the Amu Darya on February 14, 1989, in pursuance of the Geneva Accords of 1988.[12] There was a need of an Afghan government which could withstand the ideological diversity and fanaticism. Afghan political factions began warring with each other. It was also the beginning of Afghan Civil War till the rise of the Taliban in the year 1995 under the leadership of Mulla Omar. The US policy was of hostility against the Taliban due to their record of human rights and following the bombing in Kenya and Tanzania by Al Qaeda which was given a full support and hospitality in Afghan Taliban Government. There was no formal but informal contacts of the Taliban with the US government as different functionaries visited Taliban Afghanistan from time to time. Due to their conservative and fundamental policies there was a seclusion of the Taliban in the western world and particularly in the USA due to its support to Osama bin Laden and the Al Qaeda.[13] After Osama bin Laden’s return to Afghanistan from Sudan, the US administration requested the Saudis and Pakistan to approach Mullah Omar for handing over Osama to the USA. However, the Taliban had taken a strong position and refused Osama’s surrender to the USA.[14] Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif agreed for an operation against Osama bin Laden after the US assistance and training for the purpose.[15] However, that plan could not be materialized due to dismissal of Nawaz Sharif. Then it was the President Pervez Musharraf who was facing an international isolation due to overthrow of a democratic government in Pakistan but it was the 9/11 which brought legitimacy for Pervez Musharraf as the President Bush declared the 9/11 attacks as a war and not a crime and not just America’s war but for entire civilization.[16]

Declaring Holy War Against the America and its Allies

After the 9/11 incident, the US administration again demanded for handing over of Osama bin Laden to America. However, the Taliban government in Afghanistan asked for evidence with further observation that surrender of Osama bin Laden is non-negotiable.[17] However, nothing directly incriminating Osama bin Laden to 9/11 incident was available and provided by the USA either to Pakistan or Taliban government in Afghanistan. Ultimately, within four weeks of 9/11, the US administration launched Operation Enduring Freedom on October 7, 2001. Taliban government announced a holy war against the America and its allies as a retaliation but the Taliban was having nothing to wage such a war. Finally, the Kabul fell to advancing forces of the United Front with Abdullah Abdullah as its Foreign Minister on November 12, 2002. It was the end of Taliban rule in Afghanistan. Osama and a large number of Al Qaeda men moved towards Tora Bora mountains east of the border at Parachinar in Pakistan tribal areas.

Incident of 9/11: Change of the World – The US Global War on Terror (GWoT)

The US had already waged a Global War on Terror (GWoT) or War on Terror (WoT) with full scale and use of all available resources including the most modern weaponry. Due to assertions by President Bush it was looking like a civilizational war for creation of a new order in the world.[18] There was the end of the Soviet Union as a Super Power and now it was the era of a Sole Super Power: the United States of America. The most discussed and talked about “The Great Game” had begun after the end of advance by the Soviet Union[19] as it was the march of the west. A new sole super power had already started its march in the twenty first century with all preparations for the twenty first century.[20] In this regard history itself provided an opportunity to the USA to dictate its terms and reshape the new world order after the end of containment of communism by its logical death till the emergence of new forces of culture and economic on the world scene. The collapse of the Soviet economy after its involvement in Afghan War proved a Global Downturn without any challenger in world economy and technology to the USA for the time being.[21] The world powers of the twentieth century have been changed with an only super power the United States of America with a policy of indirect confrontation even taking the revenge of Vietnam War.[22]

It was, however, the dawn of a new era. It was the Global War on Terror (GWoT) or War on Terror (WoT) launched and waged by the USA and its allies throughout world on the pretext of menace of terrorism which is even not so far defined with an acceptable definition world over or by the United Nations. There are serious questions about the concept of terrorism from the perspective of the states’ point of view in the light of their national interests. Thus, the US administration is having its own definition which is provided briefly in The 9/11 Commission Report. However, it is necessary to at least determined the parameters of the terror or terrorism to assess its implications with reference to the USA and its relations with other states and Pakistan is the one of such state which is the worst victim of the US WoT being coerced to dictates of the USA with routine emphasis of “do more” mantra.

Concept and Definition of Terrorism

The Latin term “terrere” means “to frighten”. In political sense, the terror was first used to describe the methods of the French Revolutionary Government against its adversaries during the period from September, 1793 to July, 1794, when civil and foreign wars were continuing followed by a wave of executions known as the “Reign of Terror”. There is not internationally recognized definition of “terrorism” so far. However, terrorism is consisting on violent actions inflicted upon secondary targets that may be conducted by an individual, group or government with the wider purpose of attracting attention, gaining support or forcing concessions from the primary target on personal or political issues.[23] Terrorists, ordinarily, target innocent civilians and non-combatants with bombings, hijackings and other violent or coercive methods. Intermediary targets are used for achievement of primary targets with the overall objectives. Such acts create fear, violence and uncertainty. Nowadays, terrorism may be a state or by private persons, whether citizens of the state or not. Such private persons are called as Non-State Actors. Russian Czars also used terrorism as a technique for waging war in the 1870s.

“International Terrorism” denotes actions conducted by groups outside the country of their origin, residence, or the location from which their activities are co-ordinated.[24] In recent years, Al Qaeda is known as the most dangerous terrorist network with autonomous sleeper cells operating in different countries. The US Global War on Terror (GWoT) or War on Terror (WoT) is mainly focused the Al Qaeda and other Islamic militant groups or persons aligned with them and involved in terrorist activities against the USA throughout the world or the US allies. Incidents of 9/11 are major terrorist acts in this context.

Modern history of terrorism began with World War I which was reached to its extreme during the World War II. Since then terrorism is being employed as an effective weapon against the nations and states nationally or internationally. However, there is no internationally agreed upon definition of “terrorism”.For rulers or regimes, terrorism is “rule by a fear caused by unjust mass arrests and arbitrary trials and executions in which the guilt of the individual matters less than the political intimidation of the populace”.[25] There are different types of terrorism including nationalist terrorism, revolutionary terrorism, far-right terrorism, single-issue group terrorism, religious extremism or terrorism, domestic terrorism, international terrorism, state terrorism or non-state terrorism, etc. However, there is no end to different shades and names of modern derivatives of terrorism.

A US Army manual defined the terrorism as “the calculated use of violence or threat of violence to attain goals that are political, religious, or ideological in nature…through intimidation, coercion, or instilling fear.” and similarly the British Government has also defined it as “Terrorism is the use, or threat, of action which is violent, damaging or disrupting, and is intended to influence the government or intimidate the public and is for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, or ideological cause.”[26]

It is notable that the World War I was the result of a terrorist act when a Serbian terrorist assassinated Austro-Hungarian Archduke Franz Ferdinand at Sarajevo, on June 28, 1914.[27]

Terrorism, being a complex phenomenon, is difficult to encompass all its contexts and shades. Individuals and states have their own points of view and perspectives. However, Yonah Alexander defined the terrorism as “The use of violence against random civilian targets in order to intimidate or to create generalized pervasive fear for the purpose of achieving political goals”.[28]

US Attack and Instability in Afghanistan

The UN Security Council imposed sanctions against the Taliban under Chapter VII of its Charter requiring compulsory compliance by a Resolution of December, 2000. Pakistan reviewed its relations with the Taliban by curtailing official contacts. NATO invoked its treaty provisions for joint defence. Canada, UK, Germany, France and Denmark offered military contingents for a coalition force to attack the Taliban. China, Japan and Russia expressed solidarity with the coalition. Turkey and the states of Central and South Asia including the India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka were willing to provide logistic support to the coalition. Many Arab countries also offered their services and facilities.

The USA also completed its homework for attacking Taliban Afghanistan. The US Congress, in a joint resolution, authorized the President to use force against two targets i.e. nations, organizations or persons responsible for the attacks of 11 September and states, organizations or persons “who harbored” the terrorists responsible for the attacks.[29]President Bush imposed a deadline of October 7, 2001, for handing over Osama bin Laden to the USA by the Taliban Afghanistan which was never met. Finally, the US-led coalition attacked Afghanistan on October 7, 2001.[30]It was a massive carpet-bombing offensive by the US forces assisted by Northern Alliance. Kabul was surrendered after some resistance and the Taliban opted for guerrilla warfare from countryside and the same struggle is still going on. Religious parties in Pakistan reacted and called for demonstrations which were not supported by the people of Pakistan.However, the US-led coalition easily able to capture the control of Afghanistan. Thereafter, on 5 December, 2001, the Bonn Agreement was signed by a group of twenty-two notable Afghans, who represented supporters of the former King Zahir Shah (the Rome Delegation), moderate Peshawar-based Mujahedin factions (the Peshawar Group), the Northern Alliance and prominent Afghan émigrés including those based in Iran (the Cyprus Group) which was endorsed by the UNSC on December 7, 2001.[31]Lakhdar Brahimi invited all of them for a meaningful political process and designated Mr. Hamid Karazai as Chairman of the Interim Government in Afghanistan supported by the Northern Alliance with major chunk of governance power.[32] The Northern Alliance had since long suspicions of Pakistan’s preference for Pushtun predominance in Afghanistan. Thereafter UN-mandated International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) to help the interim administration was created which was consisted of mainly the US, NATO and Australian forces. Later on in June 2002, a Loya Jirga was held which nominated the Hamid Karazai to head the transition government with change in ministerial portfolios inducting a few more Pushtun faces with two Vice Presidents. Later on January 4, 2004, a new constitution was adopted and in October elections for the President was held which were won by Hamid Karazai sweeping 21 out of 34 provinces. The Constitution created the Wolesi Jirga (Lower House) with 249 members and Meshrano Jirga (Upper House). This was a political structure which was never owned and honoured by the people of Afghanistan.

The Afghan Government adopted a hard line towards Pakistan tilting to India.  Afghanistan, dominated by anti-Pakistan Northern Alliance had inclined towards India and finally signed a Strategic Partnership Agreement with India in 2011.[33]

The US attack was able to regime change but there was no change of hearts of the people of Afghanistan. The US administration spent a huge amount on Afghan armed forces and infrastructure development but could not mend estranged relations with Afghan people who are still supporting the Taliban and other Islamic Jihadi groups. Thus, the US and ISAF forces are facing hardships in Afghanistan. Afghanistan is only the name of the Kabul, the capital city, adjacent areas and few other cities. Terrorist activities against the US, ISAF and Afghan forces and public functionaries are an order of the day. Insecurity and instability are still looming large. The US had planned to leave the Afghanistan and withdraw its forces but in such eventuality the Afghan government will fall like a house of cards within days after the withdrawal of the US forces as happened earlier during the previous regimes.

Pakistan fully participated and cooperated in the US War on Terror but the US administration failed to realize the socio-cultural-religious factors while imposing a liberal cultural and governance of Northern Alliance with a mix of Indian-US culture which is not acceptable to people of Afghanistan day by day increasing resistance level against the US forces. There are constant and continuous failures to the US and ISAF forces in Afghanistan which are being thrown on Pakistan with a continuous demand of “do more”.

Therefore, socio-cultural-religious factors are multiplying insurgency, militancy and terrorist attacks in Afghanistan increasing fear and instability. However, how the Pakistan can take responsibility of socio-cultural-religious transformation of Afghan people when the US-led coalition helped by India had failed to do the same with spending of huge funds. Thus, there will be no end to insurgency, militancy and terrorist activities against the US forces and other alien elements and interest in Afghanistan.

The continuous US failures and lack of governance and administrative infrastructure in Afghanistan is breeding a sense of alienation and insecurity among the people of Afghanistan and they are reorganizing and regrouping around the Taliban and other religious factions against whether causing any threat to the US interests internationally or not but nothing in Afghanistan is secure from them. In this way, there is a constant psychological shock to the US ego and military might which may lead to another Soviet Union like abrupt withdrawal from Afghanistan. However, whether Afghanistan is a victim or not but the Pakistan-US relations are constantly victim of the US frustration and failures in Afghanistan as the entire gauntlet is being shifted to Pakistan without any justification. In this way, there are serious implications on Pakistan-US relations which are already in shock and at the lowest ebb historically.

Terrorism in the USA

Acts of terrorism cannot only be linked with Muslim extremists, militants, Taliban, terrorists or Al Qaeda with its sleeper cells, etc., as the history of terrorism and terrorist acts in the USA is very old. It could be traced with the foundation of Ku Klux Klan (KKK), a racial terrorist organization founded in 1865 in Pulaski, Tennessee by ex-Confederate officers, to maintain supremacy after the end of the Civil War in America.[34] The Molly Maguireschallenged the unfair labour practices and ethnic strife in coalfields which resorted to different means like murders and strikes. Black Panthers Party founded in October, 1966, in Oakland, California, for protection of the black community from police persecutions. Weathermen were a left-wing student faction struggled for destruction of American imperialism and the achievement of a classless world. Symbionese Liberation Army (SLA) born in Berkeley at the end of 1972 which worked for national revolution without any class distinction. Anti-Abortion Activists’ was another terror outfit since 1994 who resorted to terrorist acts in the USA from time to time.[35]

The World Trade Centre (WTC) suffered from terrorism from time to time. February 26, 1993, it was struck by a truck laden with 1200 pounds of dynamite which was exploded in the basement parking lot linked with an Islamic Group namely Al-Gamaa al-Islamiyya, a splinter group of Al-Jihad (Holy War) movement in Egypt. Later it was also targeted by Afghani Mujahideen (Holy Warriors) with minor acts. However, the attacks on September 11, 2001, finally shaken the WTC and turned it into rubles. Similarly, Oklahoma City Bombing on April 19, 1995, was an important terrorist outrage killing about 169 and injuring more than 500 persons.[36]

The US suffered the worst ever terrorism on September 11, 2001, when the World Trade Centre (WTC), New York, the most visible symbol of international trade in the heart of Manhattan and thereafter Pentagon were struck by terrorist attacks by using two passenger aircrafts after their hijacking.[37]President George Bush on September 11, 2001, immediately after the terrorist attacks said, “Freedom itself was attacked this morning by a faceless coward… Make no mistake: The US will hunt down and punish those responsible for these cowardly acts… Full resources of the federal government will go to help the victims and their families. A full-scale investigation will be conducted. Terrorism against our nation will not stand.”.[38]reportedly about 2152 individuals were died in addition to numerous injured in the WTC complex.[39]

The national Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States also known as the 9/11 Commission was established vide Public Law 107-306, November 27, 2002, by the US Congress consisting on ten Commissioners i.e. five Republicans and five Democrats chosen by elected leaders, to examine the facts and circumstances surrounding the September 11, attacks, identify lessons learned and provide recommendations to safeguard against future acts of terrorism.[40] The Commission identified transnational danger of Islamist terrorism and recommended for a broad-based political-military strategy on firm tripod of policies to :

• attack terrorists and their organizations;
• prevent the continued growth of Islamist terrorism; and
• protect against and prepare for terrorist attacks in future.[41]

The 9/11 Commission had also given a short definition of terrorism as “Terrorism is a tactic used by individuals and organizations to kill and destroy” with a recommendation that the US administration’s efforts should be directed at those individuals and organizations further calling such struggle a war for American and allied armed forces to find and destroy terrorist groups and their allied in the field, notably in Afghanistan by evoking national effort. It was given a heading “More Than a War on Terrorism” later on the reason for using the expression “War on Terrorism” by the US administration. [42]However, the policy adopted by the USA for eradication and combating terrorism is hegemonic as it is just like a world policeman for a new international order instead of adopting transparent measures towards international terrorism.[43] The Commission further recommended different measures to end terrorist sanctuaries throughout the world in addition to take special steps in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia.[44] In this way, the Commission had provided complete guidelines and strategy for combating terrorism within America and internationally by using aggressive means and methods to avert existence of such threat to the USA in future. The US administration is following the recommendations of the Commission by making all out efforts with massive use of its administrative, military and political apparatus nationally and internationally by crushing anything coming into their way.

It is important to note that Pakistan unconditionally cooperated in American War on Terror and there are direct implications on national security and stability of Pakistan of the WoT. However, the US administration is miserably failed to understand that introduction of alien cultural and social values will not work in any way due to conservative nature of Afghan people and social structure of the society. Indoctrination of Afghan people according to the US ambitions will remain a dream forever as it remained in the case of the Soviet Union. Indian factor is another aspect which itself is breading instability as due to hatred towards the Hindu culture and religion, the Indian role will never be gaining support in Afghanistan. Thus, in the light of present strategy, there will be no end of insurgency, militancy and terrorist activities in Afghanistan.

Another important factor in the US efforts in Afghanistan is about the nature of struggle. The US administration is having strategic, political and administrative ambitions compared with social, cultural, religious and national ambitions of the people of Afghanistan. The former can never win until there is complete transformation in Pakistan which is feasibly impossible and impractical in near future.

The resistance and struggle of Afghan people is laden with a cause which is a sacred one for them endorsed with religious force and sanction. Muslims of Afghanistan will never accept an unjust regime either supported by the USA or the entire world and where there will be an unjust regime it is mandatory on the Muslims to resort to Jihad (Holy War). However, there is no relation with terrorism and the Jihad as both are two different phenomena. The Holy Quran provides, “Whoever murders a soul unjustly is similar to whoever kills all humanity”(32:5), therefore, there is no concept of terrorism in Islam or in Muslims. However, the Muslims have every right to resort to peaceful or otherwise struggle if there is question of their survival.[45] The US is punishing the people of Afghanistan for such sins or wrong which they had never committed. Thus, there will be legitimate reaction to such coercive use of force. Due to such factors the US War on Terror is not becoming result-oriented in Afghanistan as there is communication gap between the US policy-makers and the people of Afghanistan. The US had to realize that the similar acts of terrorism in the USA or in the western world by their own natives were never considered terrorist acts. Thus, the US War on Terror will never be a success if it will not be truly a War on Terror. Therefore, bridging the gap of thinking is the most important aspect for the US policy-makers and strategists. Even there are divergent views on the concept of just war as whatever the President Bush said, “chaos and constant alarm” may be experienced by any other state and then which might be the response of such state in the similar circumstances. However, the entire world sided with the US after the 9/11 incidents as there was no difference of opinion but latter actions could not easily justifiable.[46]

Role of Pakistan in the US War on Terror

There is a misperception in the west and particularly in the USA that the Talibanisation means attempts by armed groups in Pakistan and Afghanistan to wrest political power for the purpose of implanting their particular brand of Islamic government.[47] However, it is not true meaning and interpretation of Talibanisation in any way. Even there is no such phenomenon like Talibanisation in Pakistan. However, it is also not the agenda of Afghan Talibanisation as they had waged a war of resistance firstly, against the Soviet invasion forces and secondly, against the US attacking forces, due to no fault of them as the Al Qaeda and other Islamic Jihadists were brought the US intelligence themselves from other countries of the world. This is the reason that from day one the Pakistan is standing with the US’s War on Terror as the worst victim of terrorism is Pakistan itself since the year 1979. There is no doubt that there is a need for disruption of terrorist infrastructure[48] and Pakistan is the US partner in the US War on Terror.

The US efforts in Afghanistan are not producing the desired results as what Afghanistan needsmore is a political settlement which brings the insurgents and key political and social forces, including civil society, on board.[49] There is a deep-rooted impact of the US War on Terror in Afghanistan and there is a fallback effect on Pakistan as well. However, Pakistan learnt a lesson from the USA and devised a National Action Plan (NAP) with a comprehensive counter-terrorism strategy.[50]The US adopted a new strategy in the year 2012 which meant for effective partnerships with key allies like Britain and France and other friends instead of using its own military force and resources.[51] Similarly, the US is well aware that Pakistan had suffered huge losses in terms of lives, property and economic loss due to insecurity and insecurity which is estimated about $123 billion.

Therefore, there is an expensive cost of Pakistan’s partnership in the US War on Terror which had adversely affected Pakistan-US relations with deep rooted implications for future of these relations.

Mistrust and Disenchantment

There is a constant mistrust and disenchantment about relations between both partners. The level of this mistrust and disenchantment always wavered. It is presumed that Pakistan-US interests are deadly embraced with good and bad options which go together all the time.[52] Pakistan and the US can still go alone or together. However, according to realist approach both the states will cooperate and collaborate whenever there will be convergences or compulsions in international relations, as the past remained. But the way to a success in Afghanistan leads through Pakistan instead of India. The US policy-makers are wrongly calculating their options when they are banking upon their South Asian regional interests on India while ignoring history of Pakistan’s role with the USA. War on Terror is not a short term or periodic engagement but a long term engagement and long term engagements requirepatience and consistency instead of mistrusts and disenchantments. There is the need of information and intelligence sharing which is not possible if there is the crisis of confidence. Present state of affairs between Pakistan and the US is only due to such mistrust and disenchantment which is going to sabotage the entire efforts and financial expenses of the USA.

War on Terror and its Implications for National Security of Pakistan

National security of any state is dependent on the national power of that state. The US War on Terror in Afghanistan pushed the entire terrorist elements in the adjoining areas of Pakistan i.e. the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and in all other parts of the country in the form of militancy and acts of terrorism. There is a huge loss of life, properties and economic activities and only loss of economic activities is estimated about $123 billion since the years 2001-2017. There is a flight of capital, investment and closure of industries throughout the country creating unemployment, insecurity and instability. The level of mistrust between two countries is like riding the roller coaster. Now after a long time it has been realized that the inability on the part of the Carter administration to reach any understanding with Pakistan in the immediate aftermath of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was a negotiating and policy failure. The carrot and stick policy is a celebrated and often used policy between unequal partners in international relations but still there is need to realize when the carrot and when the stick be used. The US threats are a culture of negotiating with Pakistan but that ultimately harmed the Pakistan-US relations severely instead of breeding a high level of trust and confidence. Aid always played the role of a carrot and effectively used by the US administration to induce the Pakistan but still the relationship remained estranged.[53] Thus, there is a need for realization of state interests and there is a harsh reality that the geostrategic location of Pakistan is an asset for it and the US has to take care as its stakes which are linked with geostrategic position of Pakistan instead of people in authority and their way of conduct of government affairs.

Cost of an Unhappy Alliance

As there is no end of this enstranged and disenchanted relationship between the two partners of War on Terror, thus, it is impossible to finally estimate the cost of this disenchanted and unhappy alliance. However, according to crude estimates Pakistan suffered a loss of more than $123 billion in economic terms since the year 2001 after becoming the US ally in its War on Terror whereas the US economic assistance was too less comparatively.[54]

Conclusions :

Pakistan-US relations always remained based on geo-strategic interests of the USA in the South Asian Region although Pakistan was always in search of security due to its threat perception from India. Historical facts prove that only the US interests led and dictated the US relationship with Pakistan whether it was the US policy of containment through alliances or intelligence gathering of the Soviet Union. Pakistan was also the facilitator when the US administration realized the need of the Peoples Republic of China. It was the battlefield facilitated by Pakistan whereat the Soviet super power died down.

Pakistan always served the US interests upto mark but left in lurch and frustrated by the USA when it was no more required. In fact, traditional and realist models of friendship and international relations were working side by side although there is no concept of traditional friendship in international relations.

Therefore, Pakistan-US relations have serious implications for Pakistan’s national security, stability and political governance as during the periods of active partnerships the US influenced in all policy and governance decisions in Pakistan by using different means and strategies.

____________________

Author

Dr. G. Chaudhry, Policy, Governance and National Security Analyst, Parliamentary Council and Legislative Draftsman. He is based in Islamabad and heading a Research and Consultancy Firm namely Chaudhry and Chaudhry Associates, Islamabad.He is the author of more than two dozen Books in the field of Law, Legislative Drafting and Process in Pakistan, Intellectual Property Rights, Military Laws and Constitution of Pakistan in addition to a collection of essays on Law, Justice, Human Rights and Legal System. He also worked as Legislative Adviser/Draftsman in the Ministry of Law, Justice and Human Rights and participated in drafting of hundreds of laws.  His books titled “Practical Approach to Legislative Drafting” and “Legislative Process in Pakistan” are like text-books in the field of legislative drafting and law-making process and working of Parliament in Pakistan. “Essays on Law, Justice, Human Rights and Legal System” is a collection of essays on different topics as apparent from the title. Presently, he is heading a firm which is providing consultancy services and dealing with matters relating to Law, Governance, Management, Legislative and Parliamentary Drafting and Counselship in addition to delivering lectures as a Visiting Faculty Member in different Colleges and Universities.

____________________

[1]Abdul Sattar, Pakistan’s Foreign Policy 1947-2012: A Concise History (Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2013), p. 172.

[2]Steve Coll, ‘This Ghost War: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan and bin Laden’ quoted in Dawn, Islamabad, November 19, 2004.

[3]UNGA Resolution dated January 14, 1980.

[4]M. Riaz Khan, Untying the Afghan Knot, pp. 18-20.

[5]President Zia-ul-Haq’s interview with CBS TV Correspondent Walter Cronkite for “Face the Nation” programme on May 18, 1980, America-Pakistan Relations: Documents, (Islamabad: Vanguard Books Ltd., 1984), Volume I, ed. K. Arif, p. 394.

[6] K. Arif, ed., Vol. I, America-Pakistan Relations: Documents, (Islamabad: Vanguard Books Ltd., 1984), pp. 392.

[7] K. Arif, ed., Vol. I, America-Pakistan Relations: Documents, (Islamabad: Vanguard Books Ltd., 1984), pp. 424-426. “Arms Transfers and the National Interest” address by James L. Buckley, May 21, 1981.

[8]Press Briefing by Diego Cordovez, December 9, 1986, Barnett R. Rubin, The Fragmentation of Afghanistan: State Formation and Collapse in the International System (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995), p. 77.

[9]Barnet R. Rubin, The Search for Peace in Afghanistan (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1997), p. 83. Shevardnadze told US Secretary of State George Shultz on September 16, 1987.

[10]Paul Kennedy, The Rise and Fall of Great Powers (New York: Random House, 1988), pp. 447-533.

[11] Institute of Regional Studies, Islamabad, AFGHANISTAN: Past, Present & Future (Islamabad, PanGraphics (Pvt.) Ltd., 1997), p. 476.

[12]Riaz Mohammad Khan, Afghanistan and Pakistan: Conflict, Extremism, and Resistance to Modernity (Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2012), p. 15.

[13]Riaz Mohammad Khan, Afghanistan and Pakistan: Conflict, Extremism, and Resistance to Modernity, pp. 76-83.

[14] S. IftikharMurshed, Afghanistan: The Taliban Years, (Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2008), pp. 300-302.

[15]The 9/11 Commission Report: Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2004), p. 126.

[16]President Bush’s remarks in his Diary on September 11, 2001, The Washington Post, January 27, 2002.

[17]Guardian (London), October 14, 2001.

[18]Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilization and the Remarking of World Order (New York, N.Y.: Touchston, 1997), pp. 312-318.

[19]Peter Hopkirk, The Great Game: On Secret Service in High Asia (London: John Murray (Publishers), 2006), pp. 502-541.

[20]Paul Kennedy, Preparing for the Twenty First Century (New York: Random House, 1993), 329-349.

[21]Steven Solomon, The Confidence Game : How Unelected Central Bankers are Governing the Changed Global Economy (New York: Simon & Schuster Inc., 1995), pp. 471-496.

[22]Harriet Ward, World Powers in the Twentieth Century (London: British Broadcasting Corporation and Heinemann Educational Books, 1985), pp. 223-224.

[23]Christopher E. Miller, A Glossary of Terms and Concepts in Peace and Conflict Studies (San Jose: University for Peace, 2005), p. 75.

[24]Christopher E. Miller, A Glossary of Terms and Concepts in Peace and Conflict Studies, p. 75.

[25]International Encyclopedia of Terrorism (New Delhi: S. Chand & Company Ltd;, 1999), p. 13.

[26]188Noam Chomsky, Hegemony or Survival: America’s Quest for Global Dominance (Crows Nest NSW: Allean& Unwin, 2007), p. 188.

[27]International Encyclopedia of Terrorism, p. 25.

[28]Yonah Alexander, ed., International Terrorism: National, Regional and Global Perspectives (New York, N.Y.: Praeger Publication, 1976), p. 3.

[29]Hafeez Malik, US Relations with Afghanistan and Pakistan: The Imperial Dimension (Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2008), pp. 186-187.

[30] Pervez Musharraf, In the Line of Fire (London: Pocket Books, 2008), pp.216-217.

[31]Riaz Mohammad Khan, Afghanistan and Pakistan: Conflict, Extremism, and Resistance to Modernity, p. 102.

[32]Abdul Sattar, Pakistan’s Foreign Policy 1947-2012: A Concise History (Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2013), p. 292.

[33]Abdul Sattar, Pakistan’s Foreign Policy 1947-2012: A Concise History, p. 293.

[34]International Encyclopedia of Terrorism, p. 543.

[35]International Encyclopedia of Terrorism, p. 558-560.

[36]International Encyclopedia of Terrorism, p. 561.

[37]Verinder Grover, ed., Encyclopedia of International Terrorism: Terrorism in World Countries (New Delhi: Deep & Deep Publications Pvt. Ltd., 2002), p. i-iv.

[38]George Bush, President of the United States of America on the Terrorist Attacks in New York, Washington and Pittsburg on 11-09-2001. A Press Release of President’s Office and State Department.

[39]The 9/11 Commission Report: Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2004), p. 316.

[40]The 9/11 Commission Report,p. xv-xviii.

[41]The 9/11 Commission Report,p. 363.

[42]The 9/11 Commission Report,p. 363.

[43]Verinder Grover, ed., Encyclopedia of International Terrorism: Terrorism in World Countries (New Delhi: Deep & Deep Publications Pvt. Ltd., 2002), p. 32. SaleemKidwai, “US and International Terrorism,”,Journal of Peace Studies, Vol. 6, Issue 4, July-Aug., 1999, as Chapter 3.

[44]The 9/11 Commission Report,pp. 365-383.

[45]Nedzad Basic & Anwar Hussain Siddiqui, eds., Rethinking Global Terrorism (Islamabad: International Islamic University, 2009), pp. 215-231. Amany M. El-Hedeny, “Islamic Terrorism: Mythical Or Real Dichotomy,” pp. 215-231.

[46] Alex J. Bellamy, Roland Bleiker, eds., Security and the War on Terror (London: Routledge, 2008), p. 93. Cian O’Driscoll, “New thinking in the just war tradition”, pp. 93-104.

[47]Dhruv C. Katoch and Shakti Sinha, eds., Terrorism Today: Aspects, Challenges and Responses (New Delhi: Pentagon Press, 2016), p. 96. Marvin G. Weinbaum, “Confronting Talibanisation in Pakistan and Afghanistan,” pp. 96-103.

[48]Paul R. Pillar, Terrorism and U.S. Foreign Policy (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2011), p. 222.

[49]  Joachim Krause and Charles King Mallory, eds., Afghanistan, Pakistan and Strategic Change (Oxon: Routledge, 2014), p. 299. “Internal and regional preconditions and assumptions for peace in Afghanistan”, pp. 299-320.

[50] Saeed Shafqat and Raheem ulHaque, Pakistan, Afghanistan & US Relations: Implications and Future Directions (Lahore: Centre for Public Policy & Governance), 2011), pp. 41-51.

[51] Anthony H. Cordesman, Changing US Security Strategy: The Search for Stability and the Non-War” against “Non-Terrorism” (Washington, D.C.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2013), p. 68.

[52] Bruce Riedel, Deadly Embrace: Pakistan, America, and the Future of the Global Jihad (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2011), pp. 106-126.

[53]Howard B. Schaffer and Teresita C. Schaffer, How Pakistan Negotiates with the United States: Riding the Roller Coaster (Lahore: Vanguard Books, 2011), pp. 163182.

[54]MehtabHaider, Pakistan bore $123b cost of war on terror since 2001 (Islamabad: The News), October 16, 2017.