merica seems to be in a desperate bid to perpetuate its influence in South Asia. The pattern of voting in the UN General Assembly on Russian military action against Ukraine, was indicative of a paradigm shift in South Asian foreign policy options.

Pakistan, Sri Lanka and India abstained from voting, demonstrating an impartiality the USA found hard to digest. The shift pointed to the waxing of Sino-Russian influence. This was enough to ring alarm bells in Washington DC. South Asia holds significance because it borders on China, Russia, Iran, Central Asian States and the Gulf region.

Importantly, both Saudi Arabia which wields overriding influence in the region and Iran which has its own sphere of influence have less than an ideal relationship with the USA. Iran has more than 40 years of history of animosity with the USA. Saudi Arabia has been alienated recently because of Joe Biden’s myopic vision in dealing with America’s long-term strategic partners including Saudi Arabia.

Turkey has reviewed its foreign policy options in the recent past. Tayyip Erdogan has demonstrated independence in the formulation of its multilateral relationship. Unlike his predecessors, Erdogan has thrown his weight behind the endeavours to re-invigorate an Islamic block, This didn’t go well with the Americans.

One can see a thaw in Turkey’s relations with Russia which has added an insult to injury. On top of it, several attempts to depose Erdogan have failed. The USA is therefore in a quandary as to how to stall Sino-Russian influence that is expanding with dogged persistence.

No promising policy to deal with the issue is in evidence. Iran is yet another state with an antagonistic posture. Dispensing with Imran Khan in Pakistan or destabilising Sri Lanka will do US interests hardly any good. Instead of destabilising these states, the USA must resort to serious introspection and think of a different approach to the problem at hand.

What went wrong with the world’s only superpower in Afghanistan where it had to make an unceremonious exit after spending trillions of dollars and 20 years of physical presence? Why did it fail to see the back of Bashar-ul Assad in Syria despite its best efforts? Its failure to establish order in Iraq and Libya after deposing Saddam and Gaddafi speak volumes of its failed strategy. These failures call for a radical revision in its hackneyed foreign policy options. With this perspective, we may turn our gaze to its move to effect a regime change in Pakistan.

What went wrong with the world’s only superpower in Afghanistan where it had to make an unceremonious exit after spending trillions of dollars and 20 years of physical presence? Why did it fail to see the back of Bashar-ul Assad in Syria despite its best efforts?

The State Department at Washington and those huddled at Langley will be well advised before embarking on a regime change to take out time to read in depth the British strategy to draw out its imperial strategy.

In general, the British resorted to punitive measures as a last resort. They tended to lure their adversary through overtures typical of a trader. After 1857, the British steered clear of direct confrontation with the colonised unless they were left with no other choice. Striking deals with popular figures in the region was the tested and tried method of establishing their foothold instead of threatening them with dire consequences if their bidding was not carried out.

In the contemporary scenario, China, unlike the Americans, abstains from exerting such pressure and has benefitted from the policy. Imran Khan is bold, aggressive and independent. He cannot be dictated. If he survives the American move and comes back with a thumping majority then American interests in the region will be in serious jeopardy. If that happens the verdict of history on Joe Biden will be quite harsh.

America has had several presidents who personified mediocrity but Joe Biden surpasses them all. The way he has handled Afghanistan is a succinct testimony to his incapacity and short-sightedness. What his administration is doing with respect to Pakistan and Sri Lanka through an ‘imported’ human resource (Donald Lu is an ethnic Chinese) confirms his limited capacity to deliver USA from a mess of his own making.

It is interesting that Mr Lu has issued the same message to all dissenting South Asian states including India.

The attempted political re-engineering in Pakistan has resulted in a resurgence of Imran Khan’s popularity. Such interference in the affairs of states like Pakistan will not serve the cause of democracy. Pakistan’s political elite might forge consensus to adopt some model of governance other than democracy that allows corruption and more space to criminal mafias.

Some noises can already be heard suggesting Chinese or Singaporean models for Pakistan with the promise of development at an accelerated pace and greater socio-political stability. If America keeps on meddling into the affairs of other countries, it will be detrimental to its stature as a world power as well. The sooner it understands the changed reality, the better.

The writer is Professor in the   faculty of Liberal Arts at the    Beaconhouse National   University, Lahore.    He can be reached at tahir.kamran@bnu.edu.pk