☰
Foreign policy adrift
CHARACTERISED by drift, Pakistan’s foreign policy appears to be rudderless. It has neither clarity nor coherence to meet complex regional and international challenges or respond to fast-moving global developments.
Lacking any vision or strategic direction, the country’s foreign policy consists of sporadic, ad hoc and reactive endeavours. Compounding the incoherence is the tendency to deal with individual issue areas in silos, overlooking their link with other areas, rather than evolve an integrated policy keeping in view the overall external environment.
This is mainly the consequence of the absence of an overarching policy framework with clearly spelt-out and prioritised goals. Rhetoric has often substituted for policy, while goals have outmatched diplomatic resources. The inability for many years to frame long-term policy objectives has often led to muddled goals reflecting tactical, short-term considerations.
Policymakers work with outdated paradigms and mental maps of the past. They have not been replaced by a framework that is predicated on the country’s present domestic strength and international relevance, while adapting that to new global realities. True, efforts at policy reorientation have been stymied by domestic political instability and economic difficulties. But they have also been impeded by other factors, including lack of focus and imagination.
A new government is expected to take stock of the country’s foreign relations, offer a foreign policy vision and spell out future priorities. Five months on, Shehbaz Sharif’s government has done none of the above. A broad foreign policy review is essential, given the geopolitical changes sweeping the world. With power shifts and realignments taking place in an unsettled, multipolar world marked by mounting geopolitical tensions, this big picture has to be carefully assessed. This would help to adjust policy to these changes and reshape the country’s strategy to more effectively pursue goals. A review would inject clarity both about goals and strategy and encourage a proactive approach that leverages opportunities.
It is ad hoc, reactive and spasmodic and lacks any vision or strategic direction.
Despite these obvious benefits, the Sharif government has shown no interest in such a review. The prime minister and even foreign minister have given episodic attention to foreign policy, mistaking obligatory overseas visits for policy. No political direction has been provided to a ministry that today is institutionally at its weakest — and most demoralised — as a cumulative result of years of neglect and lack of resources. Moreover, having a foreign minister with additional responsibilities as deputy prime minister and chair of dozens of economic committees means his attention is divided, leaving the foreign ministry with a part-time head.
Above all, the government has decided, in the hybrid governing arrangement that prevails today, to cede more space on foreign policy to the military establishment, judging this as a ‘safe’ course to follow.
This has resulted in fragmentation of the decision-making process, confusion about who is responsible for what, exclusion of the foreign ministry from key policy areas (including Afghanistan) and weak implementation of policy goals. The military has always had a key role in foreign policy, which has long been security-oriented. This is not unusual. But today, that role has become far more extensive.
Against this backdrop, what is the state of Pakistan’s two key bilateral relationships?
Relations with strategic ally China are facing challenges. Several issues have emerged that require deft handling to keep ties on a positive trajectory and prevent backsliding. The most important is allaying Beijing’s security concerns about Chinese personnel working in Pakistan. A spate of attacks and killings of Chinese workers this year have prompted China, Pakistan’s biggest investor, to publicly urge Islamabad to guarantee the safety of thousands of its workers. During the visit of a senior Chinese official to Islamabad in June, Beijing’s message was delivered publicly in an unusually sharp manner. He warned that security issues could threaten CPEC’s future and said the deteriorating security situation was “shaking the confidence of Chinese investors”. Privately, he politely reiterated Beijing’s concern about the country’s instability driven by unceasing political squabbles.
Adding to challenges is the high-profile manner in which the government recently asked China for loan rollovers and rescheduling of debt to independent power producers. Publicly making these requests put China in an awkward position, because this has implications for its lending to other countries. The prime minister himself went public saying he had written to the Chinese leadership requesting “debt reprofiling”.
Moreover, public controversy, reflected in the media on the IPP issue, further disconcerted China, already frustrated over the non-repatriation of IPP dividends. Inconclusive discussions on IPP debt relief indicate the Chinese want to know what Pakistan’s long-term plan is, for which they still await a response. The government has also failed to see that its constant requests for financing/rollovers are overburdening relations with its closest ally.
Pakistan’s other critical bilateral relationship, with the US, has been at an inflection point since the American military withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021. This diminished Pakistan’s importance and geopolitical relevance for Washington, while Islamabad’s strategic ties with China placed obvious limits. The changed context needs an imaginative approach by Islamabad to engage Washington to reset ties, which currently have little substantive content. Any reset has to now wait for the outcome of the American presidential election. It is yet to be determined whether a government with no foreign policy vision will be able to find space between the Pakistan-China strategic relationship and US-India partnership to rebuild ties with Washington.
In the immediate neighbourhood, the foreign policy drift is reflected in the fact that Pakistan has troubled relations in varying degrees with all three neighbours. For decades, Pakistan’s security and foreign policy aimed to prevent a two-front scenario of hot borders with neighbours. Today, it has ended up with unstable or insecure borders with two neighbours and unresolved border problems with a third one. While with India there are severe limits to what can be done, it is important to stabilise the Afghan front rather than leave the situation in a state of dangerous drift, especially with Balochistan under fierce militant attack.
Space prevents a discussion of Pakistan’s other key relationships. But what is apparent is the need for the country to raise its diplomatic game. This can only happen if it addresses policy deficits and evolves a well-thought-out foreign policy designed to achieve clearly defined national objectives.
The writer is a former ambassador to the US, UK and UN.
Published in Dawn, September 2nd, 2024
Read Comments