1. Geo-Politically
2. Historically and Ideologically
3. Economically
4. Externally
5. Internally

Introduction
•
The emergence of Pakistan as a sovereign and
independent state in 1947, was a unique event of
the sub-continent.
•
Pakistan , therefore, was born in chaos and crisis.
It had to face the security problems since
beginning.
•
In early 50’s the US had defined a program known
as ‘ Marshal Plan’ which aimed at the recovery of
Europe and extending assistance to various Asian
countries.
•

Contd.
•
PM Of Pakistan got invitations from both
superpowers, but Liaquat Ali Khan preferred
to visit which confirmed Pakistan’s tilt towards
the west.
•
Korean Crisis further paved the way for the
close relationship b/w Pakistan and the US.

Period Of Alliances (1950s And 60s)
•
As a first step US brought about the "Turkish-Pakistani Mutual Aid Agreement" in
February 1954. Iran and Iraq were also sounded to join.
•
A bilateral agreement called "U.S.A - Pakistan Mutual Defense Agreement" was
signed on May 19, 1954. One immediate step that Pakistan Government took in
July 1954 was the banning of Communist Party in Pakistan.
•
A multilateral agreement named Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) was
signed on 8th September 1954. !t included besides Pakistan and U.S.A, Philippines,
Thailand, UK, France, Australia and New Zealand.
•
Another multilateral agreement called Baghdad Pact, which developed out of the
Turkish-Pakistan bilateral agreement of Feb 1954, was signed on 4 April 1955. Iran,
Iraq, Turkey and Pakistan pledged to assist each other to meet aggression from any
quarter. Baghdad Pact was renamed as CENTO.
•
A comprehensive agreement, at bilateral level, was signed between USA and
Pakistan, in March 1959 during General Ayub khan regime.

Distressed Relationship Period
•
Due to the American role in the 1965 war and its
pro-India policy, a great deal of resentment
developed in Pakistan.
•
The US role during the 1965 war and its open
supply of arms to India seriously weakened
Pakistan’s defense potential and was meant to
encourage Indian aggression against Pakistan.
•
During the 1971 crisis, America did not support
Pakistan and never condemn India on its
aggression.

Contd.
•
Pak-US relations became stressed once again in
1976-77 when Pakistan desired to acquire
nuclear technology. America strongly opposed
and suspended aid to Pakistan.
•
America always exploited Pakistan’s weak
economic condition and exerted tremendous
pressure on her to drop nuclear program and to
sign NPT.
•
In 1979, Soviet Afghan war gave a chance to
America to develop bilateral relations with
Pakistan.

Contd.
•
In 1980, Ronald Reagon won the US
Presidential election. With the change of
administration in Washington, also changed
American perception towards Asia. Reagon
administration made an ambitious aid to
Pakistan. Pakistan decided to respond to the
US offer positively. As Pakistan was not able to
face Soviet Union alone.

Following the 9/11 attacks on USA, Pakistan's foreign
Policy took a U-turn after the American President George
W. Bush told President Musharraf that "either you are
with us or against us" on war against terrorism. Pakistan
abandoned the Taliban's in Afghanistan and cooperated
fully with the US and its allies by making air bases
available, sharing intelligence and providing logistics to
USA.

Contd.
•
The terrorist attacks of September 11 on the
United States have qualitatively transformed
Pakistan- U.S. relations. Pakistan has moved from
the margins of U.S. foreign policy to center stage
and has become a key player in the war on
terrorism
•
This is a reflection both of Pakistan's pivotal
geostrategic position in the region and the Islamic
world, and of the key decision made by Pakistani
president Pervez Musharraf to join the
international coalition against terrorism.

The War on Terrorism
•
There is a widely held but erroneous belief in
the United States that after September 11
Pakistan had to be coerced to join the war on
terrorism. In fact, counterterrorism
cooperation between the two countries had
already been underway for more than a
decade.

Afghanistan and Central Asia
•
The United States needs to signal its commitment
to sustained engagement in Afghanistan. With a
hostile India to the east, Pakistan has consistently
sought a stable and friendly Afghanistan to the
west to avoid having enemies on two fronts.
•
Pakistan's Afghan policy has also been guided by
the need to ensure the safe return of 3 million
Afghan refugees and end the inflow of terrorists
and arms into Pakistan.

Conclusion: The Way Forward
•
The September II tragedy has acted as a catalyst
to revitalize Pakistani -U.S. relations. Thus far,
their counterterrorism cooperation has achieved
major successes.
•
The critical decision made by President
Musharraf to join the international coalition
against terrorism and the pursuit of his vision for
Pakistan have added to Pakistan's significance as
a pivotal country, both at the crossroads of South
and Central Asia and within the Muslim world.

Contd.
•
Six months into the Biden administration, amid the U.S. withdrawal
from Afghanistan and increasing violence on the ground there, the
U.S.-Pakistan relationship stands in uneasy limbo. Pakistan has
indicated repeatedly that it wants the relationship to be defined
more broadly than about Afghanistan — especially based on “geo-
economics,” its favored current catch-all for trade, investment, and
connectivity — and has insisted that it doesn’t want failures in
Afghanistan to be blamed on Pakistan.
•
At the same time the U.S. has made it clear that it expects Pakistan
to “do more” on Afghanistan in terms of pushing the Taliban toward
a peace agreement with the Afghan government. Pakistan responds
that it has exhausted its leverage over the Taliban. The result is a
relationship with the Biden administration that has been defined by
Pakistan’s western neighbor, as has been the case for U.S.-Pakistan
relations for much of the last 40 years. And the situation in
Afghanistan may define the future of the relationship as well.

Pakistan-India Relations
•
Pakistan and India share a critical relationship.
In addition to several limited border clashes,
they have fought three major wars since 1947,
•
However, they have also a history of joint
efforts for resolving difference through
peaceful means.

Introduction
•
The relations between Pakistan and India started
on a bitter note because of the partition of the
Indian subcontinent.
•
The immediate cause of tension was the
bloodshed of millions of Muslims, Hindus and
Sikhs, moving across the new borders to settle
either in India or Pakistan. The communal
violence, at the time of independence, set the
•
stage for a permanent future rivalry between
Pakistan and India.

Overview of Past Confrontations: A
Zero-sum Game
•
Unmitigated confrontation ─ a kind of zero-sum
game. Till date, the relations have not fully
recovered from the first conflict over the
Himalayan region of Kashmir
•
First War on Kashmir
•
Soon after partition, Pakistan and India clashed
over Kashmir. It was a Muslim majority state
ruled by a Hindu king called the Maharaja Hari
Singh. Ignoring the sentiments of most people
and guidelines for the accession of states decided
on October 26, 1947, the Maharaja

Contd.
•
announced to join India. It resulted in an uprising.
The local Kashmiris were joined by the Pakistani
tribesmen who launched an armed struggle to
•
liberate Kashmir from India. India sent its regular
army to control the situation. As the unrest
increased, Pakistan’s government came under
•
pressure to intervene and finally sent its troops in
May 1948. It resulted in the first war between
Pakistan and India over Kashmir.

•
The war-like situation was stopped after the
UN intervened. Meanwhile the UN passed a
resolution to decide the final status of Kashmir
through a plebiscite and both countries
agreed to it. However, India refused to hold
the plebiscite till yet.

Second War on Kashmir
•
The second war over Kashmir was fought in September
1965. Compared with the first war, it had a slightly
different context. India was defeated by China in 1962.
Pakistan, after receiving western military hardware,
had improved its defense and gained the upper hand
over India in the Rann of Kutch9 clash in 1965.
Meanwhile, the unrest in Kashmir was increasing
•
due to various factors. India’s founding leader
Jawaharlal Nehru’s death in1964, had left a power
vacuum in the political arena of the country.

Contd.
•
These factors prompted the Pakistani policymakers to play a final
round in Kashmir.
•
Code-named as Operation Gibraltar, a plan was prepared to provide
aid to initiate a rebellion against India in Kashmir.
•
It was based on the assessment that the situation in Kashmir was
ripe for change and India will not be able to launch any major
offensive against Pakistan.
•
The plan did not achieve success and soon, the two countries were
engaged in a major conflict after the Indian forces crossed the
international border on September 6, 1965.
•
For Pakistan, the situation was saved by its brave troops and timely
intervention of the international community to arrange a
•
ceasefire.

1971 War
•
The immediate trigger of the 1971 war was the elections of
1970.The Awami League Party won majority votes after
sweeping the polls in East Pakistan (present-day
Bangladesh).
•
Since power was not transferred to the Awami League by
March 1971, as was initially announced, its supporters
resorted to violence and created a rebellion like situation in
the country.
•
The central government retaliated by launching a military
crackdown to quell the disturbance.
•
The situation steadily slipped out of control until India
intervened, resulting in the third Pak-India war. Pakistan
suffered a defeat and lost its eastern wing permanently.

Kargil War
•
The Kargil conflict lasted from May to July1999.
Though it was confined to a small geographical
location, it got a great deal of attention at the
global level as it could have easily spread and
even result in a nuclear exchange.
•
As usual, the US played a key role in de-escalation
after Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif visited
Washington and met President Bill Clinton. The
crisis came to an end but not the tensions that it
unleashed..

Kashmir on Fire
•
Kashmir is a longstanding dispute between India and
Pakistan. The area was once a Princely State called Jammu
and Kashmir, but in 1947, it emerged as a boiling point of
South Asia.
•
Pakistan and India have fought several wars on this burning
issue since the partition of the Subcontinent.
•
Most recently, in August 2019, India annulled the special
status of Jammu and Kashmir granted under Article 370 of
the Indian constitution and put illegally occupied areas
under vicious lockdown.
•
Pakistan has raised the issue at all possible international
forums to resolve the issue within the ambit of UN
resolutions.

Contd.
•
However, India is consistently denying the Right of Self-
determination to the Kashmiri people and Indian security
forces are continuously killing innocent Kashmiris while
violating ceasefire at LOC.
•
India’s action to abolish Articles 370 and 35A clearly
indicates a lack of vision and shows that Indian leadership is
totally unaware of the after-effects of such an
unconstitutional and undemocratic move, which is having
serious implications for the region.
•
IOJK has now become the most hazardous place in the
world where the common man faces unjust and a cruel
•
atmosphere to live every single day at the hands of Indian
forces, thus, jeopardizing the peace of the region.

Conclusion
•
South Asia is the region, where consequences of enmity among the
existing geopolitical fault lines are gradually becoming evident.
•
According to Bruce Riedel of the Brookings Institution, the region is
moving towards a bipolar alliance system between the US and India on the
one hand, and Pakistan and China on the other.
•
While the Chinese are building an economic corridor in Pakistan that will
attach its landlocked Xinjiang region to the Arabian Sea and allow it to
bypass the strategic chokepoint at the Strait of Malacca.
•
In response, the US is heavily investing in India as a counterbalance.
•
In short, the love and hate relationship has increased economic
competition as well as security threats for the region in one way or the
other.