Trump & Pakistan

WRITING about Pakistan-US ties is like penning literary criticism of a Shakespearean play. One constantly reinterprets and looks for new answers to old questions.

How does one evaluate Pak-US ties under President Donald Trump? Do Trump’s extravagant compliments to Pakistan’s leadership reflect happy relations between the two countries? The short answer is no. American leaders routinely indulge in hyperbole. Add to it the sales pitch of a marketing ‘genius’, and you get Trump’s effusive but effervescent compliments.

Compared to Joe Biden’s time, US-Pakistan ties have no doubt been elevated, but not upgraded. The uptick stems from more than Trump’s bonhomie with Pakistan’s leadership. The relationship is largely a function of his experimental foreign policy. He is reassessing America’s China policy and relations with Russia, rebalancing ties with traditional allies and partners — to America’s advantage — and deprioritising, though not abandoning, the traditional foreign policy establishment’s overweening ambitions to maintain US global primacy. The emphasis is on unilateralism, the naked use of military power, and economic warfare.

This foreign policy stems from his whims, with his politics oriented towards the MAGA movement and the rich class, especially tech billionaires; tariffs used as leverage not only for trade but also for geopolitical gain; and a search for greater market share for America, as well as potential investment and business deals with China and Russia.

Geopolitical positioning and defense ties

Pakistan has been an incidental beneficiary of Trump’s policies, good or bad. It has again tried to play its historical role of rescuer in America’s adventures. It has gained by dramatically enhancing its diplomatic profile in the Middle East and its image in America. Washington appears to appreciate the need to maintain Pakistan’s defence capability for regional stability, especially in South Asia, and to use it as leverage against India.

Pakistan, a populous country and a nuclear power, occupies an important geostrategic position between the subcontinent, Iran, Arabia, Central Asia, Russia, and China. Its strength is an asset, and its weakness a liability. One makes it a useful partner; the other makes it hard to ignore, much less alienate. Washington wants to contain China’s political and economic profile in Pakistan. Alienating it would shut the door on all US influence.

The US benefits from a tangible relationship with Pakistan.

America benefits from a tangible relationship with Pakistan in various areas of cooperation. The Trump administration approved a $686 million upgrade and sustainment package for Pakistan’s F-16 fleet. Separately, a $488m foreign military sales contract was awarded to Northrop Grumman for APG-66 and APG-68 radar engineering and technical support, covering 21 countries, including Pakistan.

Economic cooperation and regional security

Pak-US cooperation is also developing in the economic area, mainly in energy, IT, crypto, agriculture, renewable energy, and critical minerals, where Pakistan is drawing attention as a significant source. America is also the top destination for Pakistan’s exports. The US needs Pakistan’s cooperation to act against transnational terrorists who endanger regional, American, and global security. Counterterrorism cooperation thus continues. Lastly, Washington has always been concerned about a Pakistan-India conflict and will continue to play a crisis management role.

Behind the veneer of Trump’s rhetoric and personalised foreign policy, however, traditional foreign policy seems to be at work, led by China hawk and pro-India Secretary of Sta-te Marco Rubio, which may be circumscribing Pak-US ties. Oth-erwise, how do we explain that neither he, nor the deputy secreta--ry, nor an under-secretary of state has visited Pakistan? There’s no semblance of a strategic relationship, despite Rubio’s lip service to the idea.

So, is Trump pursuing a dual-track policy, especially regarding the China policy and its derivative India policy, that influences the administration’s approach to Pakistan? Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent hinted at the ‘real’ China policy when he said in an interview that the relationship with China poses an unprecedented national security challenge. “China is … the biggest economic threat, and they’re the biggest military threat,” he said.

The reality is that Trump hasn’t done anything extraordinary for Pakistan that we might fear losing. Much of his freelance foreign policy will likely depart with him, but the impact on Pak-US ties might be minimal. US-Israeli wars in the Middle East have dented America’s standing in the region, providing a fresh rationale for continued engagement with Pakistan in the post-Trump world.

Bottom line: The relationship with the US is necessary but not indispensable. We should keep it that way to safeguard our strategic autonomy.