The WikiLeaks files won’t destroy ties between the two. The US decision to withdraw from Afghanistan has made sure of that.
At first glance it appeared that the smoking gun had finally been found. That was certainly the initial impression when, on July 25, Internet whistleblower site WikiLeaks posted official documents claiming extensive Pakistani support for the Taliban in Afghanistan.
But, as the dust has gradually settled, surprisingly little appears to have changed.
Undoubtedly, tensions between Pakistan and its closest ally have risen, albeit in an unlikely fashion. Although the White House described the revelations as ‘unacceptable,’ Britain—not the US—has borne the brunt of Pakistan’s frustrations following British Prime Minister David Cameron’s criticism of the garrison state for apparently playing a double game, with Pakistan ceasing key intelligence sharing with the United Kingdom in response.
With Cameron’s comments having come hot on the heels of his visit to the United States, there’s been speculation that he was merely delivering a message on behalf of Washington. But if this is the case, then Pakistan’s decision to momentarily end intelligence sharing with Britain sends a message to the White House too—that Pakistan remains the pivotal guarantor of a credible US withdrawal from Afghanistan.
So what do the WikiLeaks disclosures mean for the future of Pakistan’s engagement with the US, and, by extension, its role in Afghanistan?
Although the documents actually held few surprises, the extent to which they confirmed so many existing suspicions about the troubled war in Afghanistan was indeed a defining moment. It’s difficult to determine the veracity of most of the claims about Pakistani support for the insurgency, if only because the primary sources for the most explosive allegations are either Afghan agents or Afghanistan’s intelligence services. These include claims that retired Inter Services Intelligence chief Hamid Gul, a 74-year-old who left the post nearly two decades ago, was personally working with al-Qaeda and the Taliban to arrange attacks on US-led forces. Another report claims an ISI hand in an attempt to poison beer supplies to Western troops.
Yet although the ethnic Tajik-dominated National Directorate of Security is notoriously anti-Pakistan, the fact that both foreign powers and many Afghans believe Pakistan is assisting the Taliban is itself still significant—and the fact that the US has remained closely bound to Pakistan’s military despite this perception is arguably even more significant.
Setting aside any uncertainties over the documents, though, some obvious conclusions can be reached. For a start, the war is clearly not going well for US-led forces in Afghanistan, and if the United States is seeking Pakistani assistance at a time when it really does feel Pakistan is supporting the insurgency, then clearly it’s not fighting from a position of strength.
Photo Credit: ISAF Media
View as Single Page
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
SMJ
The article carries no substantive analysis except an already known fact that US and Pakistani Army are still not daggers drawn after the damaging revelations in the wikileaks report. US and Pakistan army have both needed each other and this is why it has been such a long marriage of convenience with one bad patch just before 9/11 and the chances are that it will continue that way. I think more views and articles are needed on how this interaction has affected the people inside Pakistan, the region and the US rather than what is obvious.
Muin Chowdhury
One (and may be the only) justifiable rationale for continuing relationship with Pakistan is that if America dumps Pakistan, it will go with China. That outcome is unacceptable to America and India (more critically to India). In the absence of that possibility, a good method to contain threats that channel to the West with the blessing of Pakistan could have been controlled by de-linking Pakistan from the West. The method worked in the case of Iran, it would have worked for Pakistan too.
SilkRouteTrader
China may not view Pakistan on the same level as India. China may get more strength by improving diplomatic and military relations with India given the state of US. China and India bilateral trade is growing stronger. Increasingly, China may view pakistan as an ally of its staunch enemy US. China-Russia relations (Energy, UN security peers, and neighbours)are also improving and Russia- an ally of India may broker more relations between China and India. Also, China instead of letting Japan and South Korea side with India may let itself. At the end of the day China will ask – Is allying with Pakistan more beneficial to China than allying with India?
Marc
A useless article with even less useful analysis. Fails to inform about anything really. Who is this Qadri guy kidding? Closest Ally? Really? I believe Mr Qadri were to ask Paks they would enlighten him that China is closest ally. Then if Pakistan is a garrison state then so is Turkey, Korea, Iran, and so many more. That Mr Qadri is an oxymoron because acts of terrorism and anti-state activities tolerated in Pakistan show it is a state in search of security. However I would like to inform you that in fact there were elections held recently with a peaceful transition of power-a hallmark of democratic state. Otherwise Iraq, Nigeria, Kenya, are all not democratic either.