US President Bush's March 4 visit to Pakistan consolidated an already robust bilateral relationship. Despite policy differences in key conflict zones like Iraq, Palestine and Afghanistan Islamabad and Washington share a common view of Pakistan's internal reform agenda. This common view can potentially help Pakistan's reform process.
Does this then mean that the classical dialectics can be at work? Can a solution emerge from what has often been viewed as part of Pakistan's problem - Islamabad's relations with the United States? Can the partnership in a "joint international jihad" that in the eighties laid down the structures for and systematically promoted a militarized and militant religious passion now facilitate a genuine homegrown reform process within Pakistan? Yes, it can - within the limits set by Pakistan's current reform agenda and Washington's own strategic interests in Asia.
The Bush trip reaffirmed the relationship. A strategic dialogue mechanism to address each country's concerns and to strengthen long-term strategic cooperation has been set up. A senior policy level framework for a regular strategic dialogue has been established. Pakistan's Foreign Secretary Riaz Mohammad Khan and US Under Secretary Nicholas Burns will conduct the dialogue. An energy security dialogue will begin in April with the arrival of the US energy secretary in Pakistan. New sectors of cooperation have been set up in education.
The two specific agreements reached involved the setting up of a US-funded entrepreneurs' training institute and Pakistan's participation in the US-initiated non-proliferation container security initiative. The Bilateral Investment Treat (BIT) got delayed as the two sides have yet to agree on the arbitration modalities for American investors. Once signed, the BIT would be the US government's green signal to its investors that Pakistan's investment environment is OK. Free trade agreement would follow a US audit on matters like child labor, judicial security, human rights etc.
On the four high-profile issues - nuclear arms, democracy, anti-terrorism and Kashmir - there were clear messages from the Musharraf-Bush meeting. Pakistan is continuing its cooperation with the United States to re-establish its non-proliferation credentials but without undermining its nuclear deterrence. For now there is no US-Pakistan nuclear cooperation - even for peaceful purposes. Democracy is a topic of discussion, not a priority issue. On democracy Washington's punch line is that Musharraf is doing fine. On anti-terrorism the partnership is to continue and the coordination will be enhanced. On Kashmir, bilateralism remains the way forward. The Bush administration will only "encourage" the two principals to resolve the conflict.
Bush's dealings in India however raise questions of security for Pakistan. The US-India nuclear deal can cause problems for Pakistan. The deal, if it goes through, will enable India to multiply its nuclear arsenal. Pakistan will have to closely watch and accordingly respond if India's growing nuclear arsenal undermines Pakistan's security.
Within the US-Pakistan partnership on the "war on terror" Islamabad has found an opportunity to pursue its own objectives. It is through the non-force dimension of Washington's anti-terrorism strategy that Pakistan seeks to promote its own interests.
The preamble of the Joint Statement on the United States-Pakistan Strategic Partnership issued on March 4 which acknowledges "political injustice, poverty, corruption, ignorance and hopelessness" as the root cause of terrorism and extremism, is reflective of the non-force dimension of the US anti-terrorism strategy.
Yet with its often paradoxical content, the US-Pakistan relationship is a complex one to steer. The US is often both a useful and a problematic partner. For example there are still major problems with Washington's war on terror. The popular perception is that the US war on terrorism has promoted global Islamophobia and Islam-bashing. It has led to Bajaur, Guantanamo, Iraq and Abu Ghraib. These negatives have become the Bush administration's identity themes in much of the world.
While the government of Pakistan may opt to ignore Washington's high-handedness when it comes to Pakistani lives and territorial sovereignty, the popular sentiment will always remain highly critical of Bajaur-like incidents. The Americans chose neither to apologize nor to regret the accidental killing of at least ten Pakistani civilians - reinforcing the ambivalent popular attitude toward this relationship. Apart from the cartoon controversy it was this resentment that got Pakistanis protesting during the Bush visit.
Pakistan's political health and reform agenda will also determine the extent to which Pakistan can benefit from this relationship. Pakistan suffers a weak political health. In the political arena reform is at its weakest. The gaping anomaly in a Pakistan on the path of reformation is the friction between the reform-minded military strong man and the divided political opposition. Also in a generally free environment a critical mass of Pakistani opinion-makers are now increasingly advocating accountability and transparency in the exercise of power. Genuine constitutional democracy is the answer. Pakistan's growing middle class is also beginning to believe this. There is a consensus that the military belongs in the barracks. There may be occasions when they may also be at the high policy table but always with civilians in the driving seat.
Given this continuing political polarization, Pakistan's reform context is unstable though the reform effort is real.
Unless parliamentary democracy proceeds ahead on the basis of a non-manipulated constitution, the political context for reform will remain shaky. But for Islamabad and Washington Pakistan's political reform agenda remains secondary. For Washington Musharraf's reform agenda should focus on Pakistan's ideological reorientation, foreign policy reorientation, internal security and economic development.
If being the world's largest democracy and a booming economy are India's identity themes being on the global radar terrorism and nuclear proliferation have been the principal identity themes for Pakistan.
Yet Pakistan's decisive journey away from these themes has already begun. Pragmatic calculations have forced a strategic course correction in these areas. Pakistan's new identity themes are in the making. If backed by a more credible and stable political system, this journey could soon give Pakistan its new identity themes - a democratic, economically strong, progressive and egalitarian Muslim state, as envisaged by the Father of the Nation Quaid-e Azam. With its many problems, this is what is exciting about Pakistan today.
And while, China as Pakistan's principal strategic partner is a central factor in this excitement, the US too is a relevant factor. It can be a useful facilitator in Pakistan's socioeconomic reform. While differences remain, the two countries will proceed forward on a mutually advantageous path. As their interests crisscross to create common spaces to pursue their respective interests, this partnership is likely to strengthen.
