A REPORT by the US Department of Defence with critical comments on Pakistan’s alleged use of “proxy forces to hedge against the loss of influence in Afghanistan and to counter India’s superior military” has elicited a sharp response by the state — and perhaps rightly so.

With army chief Gen Raheel Sharif due to visit the US this month, following an equally important visit to Afghanistan yesterday, the report is being perceived here as a snub to an important military ally that has at long last launched a military operation in North Waziristan and has consistently asserted in recent months that the long-term goal is to eliminate all terrorist and militant sanctuaries on Pakistani soil.

As ever, the truth lies somewhere in between American petulance and Pakistani prickliness.

First, the basic facts. The report in question, Progress Towards Security and Stability in Afghanistan, is a biannual one compiled by the Pentagon after consultation with other senior US officials, including the secretary of state, director of National Intelligence and the administrator for USAID.

The last report, published in April 2014, had much the same language on Pakistan, but did not have a reference to “proxy forces”, ie non-state actors/militants, or “India’s military superiority”.

Clearly, whoever inserted the newer language meant to send a stronger message. At the same time, the last report, in March, before the launch of Operation Zarb-i-Azb, contained the following comment, “Pakistan did not take significant action against Afghan or India-focused militant groups”.

So while the language has somewhat hardened in the current report, the overall sentiment is the same: Islamabad is not doing enough to promote regional stability. That is, the threat of militancy and terrorism emanating from here towards Afghanistan and India is not diminishing, even as the country is progressively taking on terrorists and militants focused on attacking Pakistani state and society.

Even if true, and arguably the Pentagon’s characterisation has some truth to it, it is only part of the story. A more balanced view would have taken into consideration Islamabad’s legitimate security concerns, not least the issue of reverse sanctuaries, ie Pakistan-centric militants finding refuge in Afghanistan and launching attacks inside Pakistan from across the border.

In addition, the issue of Afghan forces firing into Pakistan has become one of the main concerns in the military-to-military relationship in recent months.

The “irritants” in the Afghan-Pakistan bilateral relations are bidirectional, rather than the unidirectional as the Pentagon report has suggested.

On the Pakistan-India relationship too it is worth asking why a US report on the situation in Afghanistan has throwaway comments on “India’s military superiority” and proxies that are “India-focused”.

In 13 years of seeking, needing and enjoying Pakistan’s cooperation on certain issues in Afghanistan, the US foreign policy establishment still does not appear to have much a clue of when it comes to broaching difficult subjects with Islamabad.

Published in Dawn, November 7th, 2014