Diplomacy sans mystique

In an extraordinary turn of events, the United (no longer) Kingdom faces bigger crises than this feuding young republic. But home is home and first things first.

Pakistan’s statecraft, particularly the foreign type, has lost its mojo and nobody knows where it has gone. While the army chief keeps scoring by engaging foreign leaders, the Foreign Office is busy fielding. No wonder then, the polemic about the absence of a foreign minister has assumed mysterious proportions.

In a noteworthy development, Sartaj Aziz has affirmed that he is the foreign minister albeit given the title of adviser. I was almost ready to sign a disclaimer on my earlier comment about the prime minister being the titular foreign minister when the media began displaying tweets by Maryam Nawaz about her father’s latest achievements in the domain of foreign affairs. So by the grace of God, we are blessed with triplets to keep everybody busy on foreign policy.

The nation is still holding its breath because the media heavyweights immediately took to questioning Aziz’s inventory of Pakistan’s successes in diplomacy. This is very much in line with the media’s dictum of ‘good news is no news’. The Pakistani media is somewhat unique in their tendency to reject the official narrative on security issues. How I wish that the Indian and the US media take a leaf from their counterparts here in not parroting what is dished out by Delhi and Washington.

In this unfriendly environment, our security and foreign policy planners and diplomatic players find it difficult to get their story out. That, however, is only part of the problem. Pakistan made some fundamental choices and finds it hard to bring about a paradigm shift fast enough. Like asking the Afghan refugees to go home while hosting the Afghan Taliban leaders. If the latter are genuine representatives of the Afghan people, they should move back home along with their countrymen.

There is also a recurring problem with the Haqqanis. Washington keeps telling us to go after the Haqqanis at the border but Aziz relentlessly targeted the one with enviable ratings in the US. This time, though, the former envoy in DC reacted, saying that if he was so mightily effective then the Pakistani government should be approaching him to have the desired effect on matters like the F-16 package.

Diplomacy is often described as the first line of defence. But diplomats cannot achieve this particular goal unless their narrative is backed by sound policies. Take the case of India’s bid for membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group. The Indian leadership and diplomats are hard pressed to persuade the Chinese to drop their opposition to India’s quick entry into the NSG. It is unrealistic to expect China to listen to Indian pleas while the latter appears keen to become an instrument of the US policy of containing China.

This is just one dimension of the wider strategic alignment wherein Pakistan is the iron brother of China and vice versa. There was no urgency for us to declare victory over India’s discomfiture with regard to its application to join the NSG. We have not made a big deal of China’s opposition to India’s claim for a permanent seat in the UN Security Council. China’s stance regarding India is based on strategic considerations. Pakistan’s position on those issues certainly counts in China’s calculations but does not provide the critical mass for Beijing’s principled stand.

Pakistan’s diplomatic narrative is also hamstrung by the nine lives of its erstwhile assets like the Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad. Musharraf had declared that the spy agencies of India and Pakistan were carrying out similar agendas. Gen Raheel came close to that description by calling for an end to proxy wars.

But here is the question. India and Afghanistan are getting away with their narrative against Pakistan because we seldom hear Washington advising Delhi and Kabul to refrain from their operations of terror and destabilisation against Pakistan. Have we failed to provide matching proof of hostile actions by those indulging in proxy wars against us? Or is the US suffering from a case of double standards?

Both India and Afghanistan have been reportedly helping the TTP and its affiliates to carry out horrendous acts of terrorism on Pakistan’s soil. Yet, Washington’s propaganda, euphemistically called public diplomacy, is directed with hammer and tong against Pakistan. Ditto for Congress and the think tanks ably assisted by the likes of Hussain Haqqani. His appeal does not necessarily lie in what he says but rather because he says it as a Pakistani.

I am more and more inclined to believe that while the embassy in Washington has not failed in projecting Pakistan’s viewpoint to the US administration and Congress, they are handicapped by the scarcity of resources as compared to the Indian lobby. It is not normal that after terminating services of the lobbyist engaged by the PPP, the PML-N did not act to hire a new lobbying firm.

There are reports about a possible visit by US senators, including John McCain, today. This interaction should be used to air Pakistan’s genuine grievances about Washington’s pro-Delhi disposition, the latest demonstration of which came in the enormous pressure on some NSG members to change their principled position on criteria for the group’s membership. Expecting Pakistan to help stabilise Afghanistan while showering praise on India does not sound like good practice.

Email: saeed.saeedk@gmail.com