What Americans Think of Pakistan
By Dr. Adil Najam
Tufts University
US


I was talking recently to an American scholar affiliated with a prestigious US policy think tank who had called wanting to discuss the current status of US-Pakistan relations. It was, for most part, a routine conversation. The questions he asked were not particularly surprising to me and, I am sure, my answers were not surprising to him. Except at the very end – as if as an afterthought – he asked my assessment of what Pakistanis really think of America. I quickly retorted that what Pakistanis think about America is exactly the same as what Americans think about Pakistan, or vice versa. This is an answer that I have also been giving to Pakistani officials and friends who wonder what Americans really think of Pakistan.
Let me explain my proposition by looking first at what Pakistanis think about America. Irrespective of official proclamations, it is evident that neither the Pakistani public nor our policy elites would really consider the United States as a particularly reliable partner. A majority of Pakistanis, certainly amongst the policy elites, would describe the US as a useful, even necessary, ally. But no Pakistani would really accuse America of being a trustworthy friend. Any Pakistani you ask, and many who you do not, will detail the long history of American ‘bewafaai’ (infidelity). They will detail, for example, how the promised American fleet never showed up in 1971 or how Pakistan was callously used when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan and promptly forgotten afterwards. Given the tenor of the moment we live in, they will probably also throw in a lecture about American imperialism to make the point that the US is untrustworthy not just towards Pakistan but as a general rule, and especially towards Muslim countries. However, you will find as many – and often the same people – who will explain that an alliance with the USA is not just important but necessary; that the alternatives are all much worse; that walking with a superpower you do not trust is still better than angering a trigger-happy giant who cannot be trusted; and that trustworthy or not, an alliance with America can yield important economic and societal benefits for Pakistan.
In short, Pakistanis view their relationship with the US as a pragmatic necessity rather than a meaningful friendship.
Looking at it from the perspective of an American viewing Pakistan, one finds a strikingly similar picture. The designation as ‘non-NATO ally’ (whatever that means!) notwithstanding, Pakistan is viewed by much of the US public, media and establishment through multiple lenses of distrust, and some of outright disdain. This is balanced only by the grudgingly made assumption that Pakistan is geo-strategically useful to US interests. American commentators will eagerly cite Pakistan’s cavalier nuclear adventures, its history of flirtation with religious extremists, its spotty human rights record, and its aversion to established democracy, as evidence that not only can Pakistan not be trusted, but that its activities need to be vigilantly monitored. Given the current climate of hysteria in the US, they will probably also throw in the labels ‘Muslim’ and ‘Islamic’ as if simply being so makes a country all the more unreliable. Of course, you will also hear – often from the very same commentators – the argument about the ‘utility’ of Pakistan, particularly in America’s war against terror. They will argue that support for a military government and lenience in the face of irresponsible nuclear behavior is a small price to pay for getting an important Muslim country on America’s side and keeping the passions of its religious fanatics in check.
In short, Americans also view their relationship with Pakistan as a pragmatic necessity rather than a meaningful friendship.
And therein lies my point: what Americans think of Pakistan is exactly the same as what Pakistanis think of America. Each considers the other to be unreliable, but useful. This is why we find so many commentators on both sides constantly surprised and sometimes embarrassed at how close their country is to the other. Each country has the sensibility of a jilted lover when it comes to this particular relationship. Like couples bickering at the precipice of divorce, each feels that it deserves to be treated better. The truth, of course, is that both have gotten much less from this relationship than they had hoped for. Each side exaggerates its case, but there is an inherent merit in both arguments. The fact of the matter is that the US has – repeatedly – let Pakistan down. Equally, Pakistan has repeatedly embarrassed its American patrons.
There is a minority of extremists on both sides – mostly religious zealots in Pakistan and mostly neo-con fanatics in the US – who actually believe the differences to be irreconcilable and have been advocating outright divorce. They should best be ignored because the stakes are, in fact, too high for both countries, and possibly for the world. More than that, the logic of each country needing the other is actually sound. The problem, of course, is that the basis of the relationship between the two countries has been and remains totally instrumental, even transactional. While there is nothing wrong or unusual with instrumentality in international affairs, instrumentality has its limits. A sense of profound usefulness in the face of deep distrust, can certainly trigger alliances but it is not a recipe for a meaningful partnership. The problem is compounded when one side (the US) is quite comfortable with an instrumental relationship, while the other (Pakistan) deems mere instrumentality to be an insult. Consider, for example, the consensus amongst Pakistanis that American advances towards Pakistan will last only as long as it is in America’s self-interest to make those advances. Importantly, most Pakistanis posit this as an accusation and as evidence that Pakistan is somehow being (ab)used for US self-interest. Interestingly, most Americans would say that is exactly how it should be. The real difference, then, is not in what the two countries think about each other, but the type of relationship they seek with the other. From a Pakistani perspective, America has repeatedly failed to be a good friend. From an American viewpoint, Pakistan has consistently failed to deliver the services it promised. One searches for long-term friendship, the other seeks transactional instrumentality. The conundrum, of course, is that it is not possible to get the one without the other. And therein lies the challenge for what has been, and is likely to remain, an uneasy, uncomfortable, but enduring relationship.
(Adil Najam is an Associate Professor of International Negotiation and Diplomacy at The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, USA)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Editor: Akhtar M. Faruqui
© 2004 pakistanlink.com . All Rights Reserved.