WHILST at the Sandhurst Military Academy, Pakistan’s military officer is given honour by Her Majesty, the Queen Elizabeth of the United Kingdom, the Trump administration has announced a cut in American support for professional training of the Pakistani army officers in the United States. This decision by the Trump’s administration sets no good policy departure since this move — against an army which has played a commendable role in the US-orchestrated war against terror — puts a glaring question mark on the US defence policy appraisal. The said move also pushes US on the brink of a policy adrift, thereby diminishing hard power US military’s soft power image while posing big challenges vis-à-vis US catered strategic interests in the South Asian region.
The US military has traditionally sought to shield such educational/training programs from political tensions, arguing that the ties built by bringing foreign military officers to the United States pay long-term dividends. But conversely to this ascribed policy credo, President Donald Trump’s administration has quietly started cutting scores of Pakistani officers from coveted training and educational programs that have been a hallmark of bilateral military relations for more than a decade, U.S. officials say. Pakistani officials warned it could push their military to further look towards China or Russia for leadership training. The effective suspension of Pakistan from the U.S. government’s International Military Education and Training Programme will close off places that had been set aside for 66 Pakistani officers this year, a State Department spokesperson said.
The suspension of the training first became apparent when the US National Defence University or NDU in Washington, which has had reserved seats for Pakistani officers for more than a decade, told the outgoing Pakistani officers that the varsity has been asked to fill the positions for the next year with officers from other nations. According to Dan Feldman, former US Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, ‘’this is a very short-sighted, myopic move. It will have lasting negative impacts, limiting bilateral relations well into the future’’. Pakistan and Russia signed an agreement on last Tuesday in Rawalpindi, during which the two sides discussed bilateral defence relations and agreed that Pakistani troops will receive training at the Russian military training institutes. The Trump administration earlier this year decided to withhold military aid to Pakistan in an effort to pressure the country to ramp up its fight against Islamic extremists. The US Congress already passed a bill to slash Pakistan’s defence aid to $150 million, significantly below the historic level of more than $1 billion per year. Pakistani officers have been receiving military training and education in the US since early 1960s, which were suspended in the 1990s but restored after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. However, the unnamed US officials are reportedly worried that the move could undermine the relationship and push Pakistan to seek other foreign partners, including U.S. adversaries China and Russia, for military training.
“If the U.S. policy is to further isolate Washington from the mainstream world, then they are going the right way about it,” said Brian Cloughley, an author, analyst and former Australian defense attaché to Islamabad. Claude Rakisits, an expert on Pakistan and senior fellow at Georgetown University, believes that ‘’…. this will strengthen its hand vis-à-vis the military…’’ To the China obsessed western analysts, if the theory suggests anything, it is that various factors including US and Pakistan’s behaviour contribute in channeling the relationship towards its apparent demise. Most important within these is China’s central role in helping Pakistan indigenize its military production and diversify its arms supply. In that sense, then, China has colluded with Pakistan in indirectly limiting US influence in Pakistan and the trend suggests that this collaboration will further reduce US leverage over Pakistan. But a trust-deficit between US and Pakistan is the real cause of this decaying relationship. Michael Kugelman, an expert of Pakistan affairs at a Washington think tank, the Wilson Centre, is of the opinion: “The fact that these educational exchanges have suffered this blow now suggests that the relationship could be entering into a new phase where even the supposedly safe and protected dimensions of the relationship can become casualties of wider tensions and ill will”. En fait geopolitically and geo-strategically, this gradual and systematic cut in Pakistan-US defence cooperation could have triggered some profound far-reaching repercussions. As for Pakistan, despite Pakistan’s overwhelming dependence on US military assistance over the years, the US policymakers and theorists in the international relations tradition have found the United States able to exercise only a limited degree of influence over Pakistan’s revisionist orientations towards the WOT.
As long as the Indian influence continues to be the pivot of the US military interests in Afghanistan, Islamabad could hardly play any future role in the US-waged war on terror. Euphorically, the Hawks in Washington are bracketing US-Pakistan defence cooperation scope. In the changing Afghan scenario where the Taliban force is regaining its lost power in Afghanistan, this ill- conceived US initiative could backfire and result in providing a recipe for US strategic failure in the region. In this backdrop, US would have to redraw its policy: focusing on a full-scale exit strategy in Afghanistan. Given the geopolitical reality that Turkey, Iran, Russia, China and Pakistan are weaving a new strategic gamut, US policy strategists could hardly afford to prefer a policy of isolation over engagement towards Pakistan. While in 21st century US needs to be a global power with a soft power image, the stoppage- of training and educational programs for Pakistani officers – hammers a big dent in the domain of skill learning and enhancement partnership between two professional militaries. Should not a policy of constructive engagement, collaboration and cooperation be felt exigency for a bilaterally sustained relationship between Washington and Islamabad? Surely, for American and Pakistani pragmatists, this argument holds leverage.
— The writer, an independent ‘IR’ researcher-cum-analyst based in Karachi, is a member of European Consortium for Political Research Standing Group on IR, Critical Peace & Conflict Studies.
Source: https://pakobserver.net/us-policy-adrift-vs-pakistan/
