WASHINGTON, March 20: The White House said on Tuesday that it continued to view Pakistan as an important ally because of its role in Afghanistan and in the war against terrorism.

Earlier, the US State Department supported Pakistani parliament’s call for mutual respect but avoided giving a formal response to its recommendations which includes a demand for a formal apology.

Also on Tuesday, Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar told a US television channel that the parliament’s recommendations, tabled at a joint session on Monday, should not be seen as a “grievance”.

“One of the reasons why the relationship with Pakistan remains extremely important to us is the role that Pakistan plays in our efforts to achieve our objectives in Afghanistan and achieve our objectives in terms of taking the fight to and ultimately defeating Al Qaeda,” White House Press Secretary, Jay Carney, told reporters.

Like the State Department, the White House too refused to respond to parliamentary recommendations, noting that the process was yet to be completed.

“There is a parliamentary-led process under way in Pakistan, and we respect that process. And we will continue awaiting the outcome of that process, to hear formally from the Pakistani government about how they would like to engage moving forward,” the spokesman said.

“I think it’s important also to note that the United States has critical national security priorities that we continue to pursue, including counter-terrorism efforts aimed at Al Qaida, strengthening Afghan security and supporting Afghan-led reconciliation, all are areas where we believe we have common goals with Pakistan,” Mr Carney said.

The United States would continue to move forward on those areas, because they’re in its national security interest, he said.

At the State Department, spokesperson Victoria Nuland told reporters her department also was waiting for the completion of the parliamentary process.

“We’ve seen this first set of recommendations. Our understanding is that the procedure now will be that, having tabled these recommendations, there’ll be a parliamentary discussion of them; that that will resume on March 26th,” she told a news briefing.

“So I don’t think we’re going to comment until we see the outcome of the full parliamentary debate and let their process go forward,” Ms Nuland said.

She noted that like the Pakistani parliament, the United States also believed that its relations with Pakistan should be based on mutual respect and common interest.

“We believe that we have a lot to do together, not only in combating terrorism and creating more security but in strengthening and promoting economic prosperity, democratic development inside Pakistan, and in strengthening Pakistan as a good neighbour throughout the region, strengthening its ties in the neighbourhood,” she said.

“So all of those things are the work that we have to do together and that’s in our interest to contribute to,” Ms Nuland said.

The United States supported all moves to bring stability and prosperity to the region, said the US official. “We have been supportive, for example, of warming ties between India and Pakistan, between Pakistan and Afghanistan. So it’s an ongoing work in progress,” she said.

In an interview with MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell Reports, Foreign Minister Khar said it was wrong to define Monday’s parliamentary recommendations as Pakistan’s grievances against the US.

“I don’t think it’s a matter of grievance as much as it is about a matter of building a type of partnership which is lasting, which has the ownership of the people of Pakistan, and of course the parliament of Pakistan,” she said.

The foreign minister said that Pakistan wanted a partnership which could achieve results that were in the joint interest of both countries and also helped the Nato-led war in Afghanistan.

The interviewer reminded her that Osama bin Laden’s discovery had become an election issue in the United States and was bringing a lot of negative publicity against Pakistan.

“One thing that you missed in talking about grievances, which I think is an unfavourable word to use in the first place, but you missed the Salala incident of November 26 in which, just to remind your audience, Pakistan lost 24 of its soldiers to what is considered to be friendly fire, fire coming in from allies,” the foreign minister responded.

These deaths, she noted, were “in many minds in Pakistan unaccounted for”.

“I would like you to put yourself in those shoes for a moment and think that if 24 body bags were to return to the United States, and your public was told that they lost their lives because Pakistani troops fired on them, what would be the level of hostility in the United States of America?” the foreign minister asked.