Khurram Aslam Khan
Analysts had cautioned that the recent drift in Pakistan’s foreign policy towards the USA could unfavourably impact its long-term strategic relations with China. Pakistan’s leaders mocked India for its failure to maintain balanced relations with opposing and rival nations. Pakistan had prided itself on successfully navigating the competing global influences of China and the USA.
Decision-makers in Pakistan have remained confident that the special relationship with China will withstand all challenges, including warming ties with the USA. It is no secret that the USA views China as a threat to its global hegemony. All recent US political, economic, and military strategies are directed towards containing Chinese ascendancy.
In a recent article by a Chinese academic from a state university, published in Dawn (31 October), the newspaper highlighted Chinese concerns couched as damning with faint praise. The article apparently discounts Western noise questioning Pakistan’s closeness with China. The writer takes a swipe at Western propaganda, highlighting “the perennial ‘debt trap’ narrative, alarmist talk of ‘strategic drift’, and politically motivated suggestions of security breaches”.
The writer calls for detailed analysis rather than a perfunctory view of geopolitical apprehensions. He terms motivated Western concerns as a “smokescreen” rather than genuine concern for Pakistan’s welfare. This spin is pushed by foreign powers who fear the success of South-South cooperation, as evidenced by Pakistan-China collaboration.
The article then describes the strategic relationship between Pakistan and China as a “transformative, structural, and historical commitment”, in contrast to the transactional nature of Western alliances, which are limited in scope. The Chinese model outplays the Western bargaining system because it “is defined by unconditional respect for sovereignty and non-interference in internal affairs”. The rationale of “All-Weather Strategic Cooperative Partnership” between Pakistan and China is not comprehended by its detractors.
China has remained a dependable defence partner for Pakistan—a factor emphasised by the writer. In the recent Indo-Pak skirmishes, the Chinese role became more noticeable. The article recounts: “China remains the most significant, reliable, and consistent supplier of technology, training, and strategic defence platforms to Pakistan”.
Having outlined the strength of the Pakistan-China strategic relationship, the writer rubbishes the Western notion that Pakistan is undermining its all-weather partnership. He poses the question: why would Pakistan risk the foundation of its defence system by adopting such a move? It further questions why Pakistan would commit “national self-sabotage” by compromising its relations with China.
The writer attributes such opinions to desperate regional and global rivals who see the success of the Pakistan-China strategic partnership as a threat. He opines that propaganda unleashed by vested interests is a “calculated attempt to induce paranoia and force a strategic fissure”. He advises to dismiss this psychological warfare as an affront to the judgement and security integrity of Pakistanis.
Dwelling on the necessity of the special relationship between Pakistan and China, the writer terms it a stabilising factor in the turbulent, tempestuous international environment. Citing domestic terror threats and unpredictability induced by climate change, he underlines the importance of strategic links with China for Pakistan.
The article concludes with a reminder that inimical regional and global powers are out to sow mistrust about the efficacy of this mutually beneficial bond. It warns that both nations should not “allow externally generated fears to cloud the clear, long-term vision of a shared destiny and prosperity”.
The writer ends with the hope that the people of both countries will not be misled by motivated propaganda, as the bond between the two peoples “is built on history, cemented by respect, and driven by development”. The writer must be naïve to overlook the fact that public input in strategy formulation in Pakistan is minimal, if not non-existent. The real audience is clearly Pakistan’s decision-makers.
The article conveys apprehension that Pakistan may once again be lured by the glittering lights of the West—particularly the US—and compromise, if not sacrifice, its enduring relationship with China. It is likely that the article has the tacit backing of the Chinese government to impress upon Pakistan the futility of treading the off-beat path once again.
China would be hard-pressed if the West succeeded in neutralising Pakistan. That would leave China with little room for manoeuvre in a belligerent region. The Far East and India are already part of US plans to contain China, and the Middle East is in alliance with the West. Losing the unflinching support of Pakistan could create new challenges for China.
The US and its allies will not relent in their antagonistic campaign against China. Proposing Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize, adopting cryptocurrency, providing rare-earth metals, etc., will not satiate the US appetite. It will demand its pound of flesh for extricating Pakistan from its economic quagmire. Pakistan will soon face Hobson’s choice. Pak-Sino relations are founded on strong foundations. It is not to suggest that there is a lurking threat that China may not enamour Pakistan anymore. But Pakistan’s getting closer to USA will have an impact on these bonds. Pakistani decision-makers will have to be extra cautious and weigh all possible outcomes.
The author is former Joint Director General, Intelligence Bureau.
