Ali Imran Atta<\/p>\n
The United States of America emerged as the first country to develop formal relations with Pakistan on August 15, 1947, one day after Pakistan gained independence through the partition of British India. These relations are a critical component of the US state\u2019s overarching framework in Central and South Asia, as well as in Eastern Europe. However, the relationship between the two sovereign states has been termed a \u201croller coaster,\u201d with highs marked by productive collaboration and depths marked by profound bilateral estrangement between 1948 and 2013.
\nThis month, the United States has not attempted to conceal the fact that it is actively watching progress in Pakistan, both on the political and economic fronts, in recent weeks and months. Over the last four months, almost a dozen remarks have primarily or in passing mentioned Pakistan, and in every case, the timbre and intention reflect a level of apprehension rarely seen in the past. The most recent US State Department statement expressed hope for financial stability in the country, emphasizing that America was not only aware of Pakistan\u2019s financial problems, but also supported efforts to revive the national economy. When asked if Washington shared the country\u2019s concern that Islamabad is on the verge of economic crisis, a US State Department spokesperson said that the nation needed to collaborate with international financial institutions to enhance its economy.
\n\u201cWe incentivize Pakistan to keep on working with the World Monetary Fund (IMF) on implementing programs, particularly those that will improve Pakistan\u2019s business environment,\u201d the US official said. \u201cDoing so will increase the competitiveness of Pakistani businesses and help Pakistan attract high-quality foreign investment.\u201d When Foreign Minister Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari was asked a similar question, he replied, \u201cAs long as we remain willing to help ourselves,\u201d others would continue to help Pakistan. \u201cWe must assist them by taking the necessary steps at home.\u201d The young minister noted that the rest of the world had vowed to provide roughly half of the financing Pakistan needed for regeneration following the 2022 floods at the latest conference in Geneva.
\n\u201cNow Pakistan must contribute the remaining 50%.\u201d The foreign minister also emphasized the importance of reaching a \u201cconclusion with the IMF\u201d and following up on the offer to renegotiate our debt made by French President Emmanuel Macron and UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres. To put things in context, a State Department official stated, \u201cPakistan\u2019s economic stability is a subject of discussion between the Pakistani and US government agencies, including the United States State Department and our counterparts, the Department of Treasury, and the White House.\u201d But why is Washington so concerned about Pakistan\u2019s economic and political stability? According to conventional wisdom, the determinant is our nuclear program, and the world cannot perhaps afford to view a nation with a nuclear arsenal on the verge of annihilation. However, conventional wisdom only exposes the tip of the iceberg. Pakistan is the fifth largest country in the world, and the second largest Muslim country, with a large army and extensive nuclear infrastructure.
\nThe economic collapse in Pakistan has the potential to be extremely damaging for everyone concerned with international stability and the preservation of the current international order. As a significant international power, the United States is worried. Secondly, the US does not want Pakistan\u2019s economy to collapse while it is led by a democratic system that is working hard to stabilize relations with the US. The South Asian great power rivalry phenomenon is such that it would be in the US\u2019s interest to articulate to Pakistan that it intends to remain involved and work cooperatively where applicable so that Pakistan does not lean too heavily in the direction of China. This viewpoint is shared by John Ciorciari, a professor at the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy at the University of Michigan. He observes that while funders such as China and Saudi Arabia may well not include any explicit conditions in their aid, there are always implicit strings attached.
\n\u201cChina will look to Pakistan for favourable incentives, such as the power generation passageway moving from the Arabian Gulf to China\u2019s western region and the strategically located port of Gwadar. China will indeed seek Pakistan\u2019s assistance on geostrategic issues ranging from Taiwan to Afghanistan and Ukraine.\u201d Michael Kugelman, director of the Woodrow Wilson Centre\u2019s South Asia Institute, concurs. \u201cThe risk of such a struggling economy is a serious risk to [Pakistan\u2019s] overall stability. As a result, it\u2019s comprehensible that Washington would want Islamabad to pull away from the edge and get the economy growing. I\u2019m not sure if the US is concerned about the Pakistani economy collapsing, but I believe it is eager to help avoid that outcome, which values compressive strength efforts to either get things moving again with the IMF, he says. Since the 1950s, the Pakistan-US relationship has been linked to various stages of US defense interests in the region in the 1950s and 1960s, it must have been strongly linked to Regional Politics; in the 1980s, the Iranian revolution and the Communist invasion of Afghanistan took the spotlight. After the events of September 11, 2001, this relationship was reawakened in the early 2000s. Throughout these phases, the US government was the closest to Pakistan\u2019s defence department (and related civilian elite)\u2026 It also accepted and backed military governments in Pakistan, which received military and non-military assistance.
\nWith the transformation in Afghanistan throughout 2021 and the switch within the US to a China containment policy, it has shifted its regional preference to India. People must recognize, for the sake of the country, that Pakistan has had severe problems with governance, social change, democratization, and development, for which we are primarily responsible. The United States did not create these conditions but rather took advantage of them. However, he contends that economic uncertainty may imply a less sustainable Pakistan government, which may have an impact on Washington\u2019s often long-term companion in the nation, the military. One could argue that Pakistan\u2019s economy would benefit from a consistent representative democracy with checks and balances.
\nAs a result, an unstable political environment combined with an economic crisis could result in a chaotic situation in which Pakistan could once again become a breeding ground for extremism. The diplomatic process respectively Pakistan and the United States must become natural if it is to progress, and it should. Both parties benefit from a strong relationship. However, this normalcy cannot be achieved unless Pakistan becomes a normal country and Washington shifts its fixate of interest away from the political elite and toward the people.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Ali Imran Atta The United States of America emerged as the first country to develop formal relations with Pakistan on August 15, 1947, one day after Pakistan gained independence through the partition of British India. These relations are a critical component of the US state\u2019s overarching framework in Central and South Asia, as well as […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[10],"tags":[3752],"class_list":{"0":"post-310136","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-article","7":"tag-ali-imran-atta"},"yoast_head":"\n