Old ties, new promises

Old ties, new promises

It has been three days since the US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton issued an apology to her Pakistani counterpart for the November 26, 2011 Nato attack on a Pakistani military check-post in the tribal regions, which led to the death of 24 Pakistani soldiers. While the apology has led to the reopening of Nato supply routes to Afghanistan, it has also raised a plethora of questions and issues over Pakistan’s relationship with the US and how it will or will not change over the course of the coming months.

The decision to allow the resumption of supplies to Nato forces in Afghanistan has come under severe criticism, which keeps on growing, from the opposition and religious parties. It has been, at the same time, hailed as a much-needed breakthrough in the deadlock with the world powers.

Prime Minister Raja Pervaiz Ashraf has insisted that the decision was taken “in the best interest” of the country, it is not clear if any major gains are to be achieved for Pakistan. As things stand, Pakistan will not be charging the US any fee barring the commercial costs of clearing and transporting the shipping containers. The PM also highlighted the importance of this decision in the light of the withdrawal of Nato and Isaf forces from Afghanistan and its ramifications on regional peace. However, there has been no apparent change in the Pak-US policy Vis-à-vis Afghanistan. Pakistan finds itself at risk with local Taliban (Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan) as well as attacks and incursions from Afghan militants across the border. How will the renewed ties improve the security situation along the border?

Much furore has also been created over the wordings of the apology issued by Secretary Clinton. The use of the word ‘sorry’ for the second time in the statement comes where the US secretary says: “We are both sorry for losses suffered by both our countries in this fight against terrorists,” where ‘both’ refers to herself and Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar. Some observers have been critical of Khar’s inclusion in the apology. How important, really, were the exact words of the statement? Will the apology go a long way in actually strengthening Pak-US ties? What will Pakistan gain from the mending of ways?

Dawn.com invites its readers to share their opinion and suggestions..

 

Comments Guide:
Dawn.com encourages its readers to share their views on our forums. We try to accommodate all users' comments but this is not always possible due to space and other constraints. Please our read our comments guidelines below for more information:

1. Please be aware that the views of our bloggers and commenters do not necessarily reflect Dawn.com's policies.

2. Though comments appear to have been published immediately after posting, they are actually forwarded to a moderation queue before publication.

3. Dawn reserves the right to remove or edit comments that are posted on this blog.

4. Language that is offensive to any race, religion, ethnicity, gender or nationality is not permitted.

5. Avoid posting comments in ALL CAPS. Commenters are also encouraged to avoid text contractions like 'u r.'

6. Do not cross-post comments across multiple blog entries.

7. Any comments posted to a blog entry should be relevant to the topic or discussion.

8. Do not spam the comment section.

33 Responses to “Old ties, new promises”

  1. AL KHAN says:

    Pakistan has been set up by corrupt and weak leadership. They have sold Pakistan before and they have done it Gain. We do not need America and its money. It is time for change in Pakistan. Lets get rid of the corrupt leaders.

  2. Cyrus Howell says:

    ” Diplomacy means to do and say,
    the nastiest things in the nicest way.”
    +
    Don’t trust the media.

  3. Noor Chaudhry from Canada says:

    Thanks keeping me listed.
    Pak US new relations will not satisfy each other, because of long time ” MASTER’S FRIENDSHIP”. It must change otherwise it will not long last for due to long distance between both countries. Pakistan’s geo- political changed. Masses of Pakistan dislike US’s master type of friendship & exploitations in dealing with Pakistan.
    Pakistan has moved away & found better foreign relationships with it’s neighbours. It’s cheaper for Pakistan to have normal relations & do business with them in the future. Pakistan’s needs are also changed because of self reliance on it’s own and it’s neighbours. It’s better for Pakistan in the long run.

  4. Ranjan says:

    It is time foreign policy maker from both Pakistan & US start evaluating , what exactly they want from eachother in the long term , how they view each other in the long term.
    Both Pakistan & US need each other.
    US need Pakistan as a strategic partner , who can out weigh both India & China’s supremacy in South Asia,this may sound like a sweeping statement , but just think , how Pakistan is placed Geopoliticaly in South Asia.
    Pakistan needs US to stabilise their internal situation ,this statement too may sound ridiculous , but Pakistan should remember in long run , they are tieing knot with a democracry, with a super power like US , whose association will not only benefit them economicaly , but it will also benefit them otherwise too.
    The space I have right now is too short to elaborate.
    Right now though, the relationship seems ” patchy ” , & heading no where.

    • Riaz says:

      Ranjan, we have become far too accustomed to following western paradigms with a servile mindset. We need original thinking. Pakistan and India must come together as natural friends. Pakistan to play a constructive role in bringing India and China together, like it did with USA and China. Russia can never be trusted in an Asian block, they will eventually form part of the west as the west declines. Apart from stupid Arabs, and they have been this way all through history, Muslim world will always prefer Asia over west.

Dawn.com on Facebook


dawn.com on Facebook

Advertisement