Pakistan & US Joint Venture: The Political Trajectories of al-

Qaeda, the Afghan Taliban, and Regional Peace

By

ABDUL SABOOR
Student I.D: 15616-D
PhD, Political Science
Department of Political Science and International Relations

Supervisor: Dr. Azmat Ali Shah

Assistant Professor
Department of Political Science
Qurtuba University DI.Khan

Qurtuba University of Science and Information Technology,

Dera Ismail Khan
 Research Proposal Certificate by Supervisor

PAKISTAN US VENTURE: POST 9/11 IN THE PERSPECTIVE OF TTP AND ALQAIDA

(Title of Research Proposal)

Submitted by

ABDUL SABOOR 15616-D

(Scholar Name) (Scholar ID)

I have thoroughly checked this proposal as per guidelines issued by Graduates Studies Committee
(GSC)

(Mark where applicable)

CHECKED N/A
General Format
Literature Review
Research Methodology
References
Appendix

I certify and endorse the final submission of this proposal.

Supervisor: _______________
(Signature)

Co-Supervisor: _______________
(Signature)

Note: The Research Proposal would not be accepted by Graduate Studies Committee (GSC) for Submission if it is not duly
signed by supervisor or incomplete.
 Self-Assessment Report by the Scholar
Checklist:
Yes No
Format of Thesis in APA
Cover and Title Page

Certificate from Supervisor

Table of Contents
Language & Grammar
Problem Statement
Purpose/ Objective of the Study
Theoretical Framework
Research questions/Hypotheses
Significance of the Study
Delimitations / Limitations
Definition of Terms
Literature Review
Research Design
Sampling
Variables
Methods of Data Collection
References in APA Format
Appendices

I Mr.AhsanUllahKhan hereby, declare that I have prepared the attached Research Proposal under
the guidelines of prescribed format of Qurtuba University of Science & IT.

Scholar’s Signature:________________________________ Scholar ID:_15616-D_

For Graduate Studies Committee Use:

I recommend that the Research Proposal be revised.

I recommend that the Research Proposal be accepted & forwarded to BOASAR.
I recommend that Research Proposal be accepted & forwarded to BOASAR with minor amendments
I recommend that proposal is accepted as the observations & corrections mentioned in BOASAR has been addressed

Chairman / Member (GSC)___________________

Table of Content
Introduction..........................................................................................................................1
1.1 Background....................................................................................................................1
1.2 Statement of the Problem...............................................................................................2
1.3 Research Questions........................................................................................................2
1.4 Objectives of the study...................................................................................................3
1.5 Significance of the study................................................................................................3
Literature Review.................................................................................................................5
2.1 purpose of Pakistan USA relations................................................................................ 5
2.2 Usa Use Pakistan By Various Aspects:......................................................................... 7
2.3. Positin of both states on TTP and Alqaida post 9/11...................................................8
Research Methodology.......................................................................................................11
3.1 Research Philosophy.................................................................................................... 11
3.2 Research Design: Methods and Procedures................................................................. 11
3.3 setting boundries of the research..................................................................................12
3.4 sources of data.............................................................................................................12
3.4.1 secondary data.......................................................................................................... 12
3.5 Data Collection ............................................................................................................13
3.6.data analysis technique................................................................................................13
3.7 limitation of study.........................................................................................................14
3.8 delimitation.................................................................................................................. 14
3.9 organization of thesis................................................................................................... 14
Refrences......................................................................................................................15-16

1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the study;
 US- PAK relations historically go back since the independence of Pakistan. Pakistan
has a great importance due to its geographical and strategic location not only for Islamic
countries but for all over the world. After the 9/11 event of world trade centre occurred in
USA, president Bush declared “war on terror” and both countries come closer to each other
against terrorism. Pakistan fully supported to USA in the war against Al-Qaida in
Afghanistan and against the terrorist groups in tribal areas of Pakistan whose support the
Taliban in Afghanistan. Islamabad’s relations with the Washington have had a chequered
history. Socio-economic, political differences and national interests exacerbated by
diplomatic ineptitude, as well as the obstacles inherent in relations between a developing
country and a superpower, have all united to make it so, while strategic compulsions and geo-
political relations on both sides have forced to bring the two countries closer. This should be
emphasized that the chequered history of Pak-US relations, the shifting emphasis and the
changing proclivities of the US administration and public, the nature and the constraints of
the US commitment to Pakistan’s security, all make it absolutely imperative for Pakistan to
take every step with the utmost care. Pakistan should realize that Washington policy on
security issues could probably rebound to Islamabad’s benefit currently, but definitely not on
all times in the future, as there are difficult options ahead for both Islamabad and Washington
on basic strategic interests. However 9/11 incident and war on terror took back the warmth
relationship of 1950s decades. Again Pakistan is playing the role of front line state to
eradicate the menace of terrorism from the world and restore peace and stability in the region
with the collaboration of USA and its allied Imran. M, Mustafa. G and Nagra. M(2019)
A democratic and stable Pakistan is vital to US interests. After 9/11 two states came
closer to each other because of both countries joined efforts against war on terrorism.
Pakistan has been praised for its cooperation to counter terrorism although Pakistan is
burning in fire of domestic terrorism. Since history there are many ups and downs in
Pakistan-USA relations, but Pakistan joined hands with US in terrorism war despite of severe
public protest in Pakistan against this decision. Strategically no country can deny importance
of geographical location of Pakistan. At 9/11 event Pakistan was far from US allies but US
desperately needed Pakistan support because without Pakistan’s support terrorism war in
Afghanistan was not possible. US concern in Pakistan is to stabilize Afghanistan, to counter
terrorism whether it is domestic or international, to prevent the nuclear weapons proliferation,
democratization and Human rights protection, to create the stability in South Asia by
normalizing the relations between Pakistan and India. Since September 2001, Pakistan is
fighting with USA on terrorism war with economic and military support of US. But this time
aid caused a loss to Pakistan instead of gain unlike Pakistan involvement to contain Soviet in
1979.Relations between the two countries were going smoothly till 2011 although constant
demand of Washington to do more. But rifts in relations occurred in 2011 because of
Raymend Devis event, Osama killing in Abbot bad, NATO attack on Salala check post and at
last the vacation of Shamsi airbase by USA. Although many cracks in relations, both the
countries cannot isolate because of war on terrorism cannot be possible without their mutual
cooperation and this war will join two countries together Akhtar(2012).

1.2 Statement of the Problem

Pakistan and USA established their relations from the very beginning, just
after the independence of Pakistan. The relations of the both states are like a swing of
pendulum. At the time of independence of Pakistan there was bipolar system of the world,
two states USSR and USA were the two super power of the world and Pakistan established
its relations with US instead of Russia for supporting her economy and security against her
neighbor India and others which are not ready to accept Pakistan as a state. The geostrategic
position of Pakistan compels USA to establish its ties with Pakistan to got access to Asia and
containment of communism. USA used Pakistan for its own interests on various occasions
like in cold war, proxy war, black water and war on terror after the event of 9/11 against
Taliban and al-Qaida in Afghanistan. After the disintegration of USSR in 1991 the USA
become a single super power of the world and success in the fulfillment of her need USA
enforced economic embargo on Pakistan saying that Pakistan trying to nuclear weapons.
After the event of 9/11 USA need again Pakistan assistance to use its land and air bases
against Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Pakistan accepted this and allow USA to use various three
air bases against Al Qaeda in Afghanistan it shows that America use Pakistan. Pakistan paid
a cost in the shape of personnel lives, trade and economy to join the American war of terror
and now trying to bring both on table of negotiation and now play the role of mediator
between the both actors on the slaying of USA. This shows that USA used Pakistan for her
needs and purpose and Pakistan become ready to assist USA every time only for the purpose
to gaining economic assistance and Survival. Thus Pakistan and USA relations established
only on need bases which are purely based on the game theory of international relations, this
is the gap of my research topic and my this dissertation will fill this gap.

1.3 Research Questions

 Researcher is keen to shed light on the following research questions.

 Why Pakistan established relations with united sates?

 How US used Pakistan for their own benefits?
 What is the stance of Pakistan in the perspective of War on Terror, TTP and Al-
Qaida?
 What is the stance of Pakistan in the perspective of War on Terror, TTP and Al-
Qaida?
 What is the impacts of the with drawl of USA army troops on the regional security
and Pakistan role of mediation between USA and Taliban?

1.4 Objectives of the study

My Research, will be achieve the following objectives:

 To discuss the purpose of Pak- US relations.
 To explore that US used Pakistan for its own benefits in several aspects.
 To explain stance of Pakistan in the perspective of War on Terror, TTP and Al
Qaida.
 To evaluate the stance of USA in the perspective of War on Terror, TTP and
Al Qaida.
 To examine the with drawl of USA military troops from Afghanistan and its
implications on Pakistan and Regional peace.
1.5 Significance of the Study
Pakistan established its relations with USA after came into existence in 1947. To secure
its position from various states especially from its neighbor India, fulfillment of national
interests, getting a support to its weak economy and for security purpose. There are many up
and downs come in the relations of both countries. The relations of both countries based on
need of time. My research will be covered all the factors of Pakistan and USA relations i.e.
historical review, strategy of both states on war on terror, against TTP and Al Qaida and
with drawl of army troops of USA from Afghanistan and its implications on regional
security. My dissertation will be helpful for the students of foreign policy of Pakistan,
current affairs, Pakistan and USA relations regarding TTP and Al-Qaida and war on terror
post 9/11. In addition to that, the reader will be able to know about the initiatives taken by
the Pakistani and the US leadership that have caused deterioration to the cordial relationship
of cold war, in the late 1980s and mutual concerns to get rid of terrorism and militancy in
the 21st century. Furthermore My this single document of thesis will cover all the aspects of
the relations of both countries especially after the 9/11 event, TTP and Al-Qaida and its
mediation. This single documents will provide great support to the investigators,
government officials, policy makers and researchers in future in the shape of saving their
time to providing study about the various fields of the relations of both countries.
2- Literature Review
A profound analysis and interpretation of the published literature pertinent to the study
problem explain to the researcher about the issues and methods for studying them. It also
provides a direct link to previous research and conceptual foundations. It is surprisingly
enough, given the numerous impacts of the different media on government accountability.
There is not enough previous scholarly study on the mentioned topic and the problems arising
out in the relations of both countries Pakistan and USA in the perspective of war on Terror.

2.1 Purpose of Pakistan USA Relations

Akhtar. S(2012), In her article “ Dynamics of USA-Pakistan Relations in the Post 9/11
Period: Hurdles and Future Prospects” explore that Pakistan-USA relations hold greater
importance. Since independence of Pakistan, USA and Pakistan have been cooperating with
each other not only in the economic field but also politically, socially and diplomatically.
USA has always assisted Pakistan in all these fields and has been one of the key allies in
providing funds and support. There have been times of mistrust and suspicions as well but
while analyzing the overall scenario one can clearly asses that Pakistan’ relationship with
USA has been one of the significant features of Pakistan’s foreign policy. This study assesses
the importance of this relationship and the hurdles which obstruct cooperation and progress in
the Pakistan-USA relationship. Furthermore the dynamics of their relationship after 9/11 with
prospects of good will and cooperation in future also form part of this study.

Bashir. F and Mustafa I (2014), in their paper “ Pak-US Security Relation: Challenges &
Prospects for Pakistan” stated that Survival and independence are the essential ingredients of
the existence of a community, society, nation and state. Both are being processed through
security mechanism and policies by the nation’s status in international politics. Therefore,
security is multifaceted phenomenon based on requirements, competence and qualms of
intermingling entities. Security can also be understood as freedom from all kinds of fears.
Security is a concept that is not only dependent on external factors but it is also dependent on
psychological orientations of the people. In this regard perception plays an important role
which is the outcome of past experiences, time duration and surroundings. Similarly, Pak-US
military alliance in mid 1950s is the outcome of threat perception. Since Pakistan perception
of state security remained India centric and US major aim was containment of communism.
They also discussed that how during the times of need the US extended its support to
Pakistan and abandoned it after its objectives are realized. Nevertheless, occurrence of 9/11
opened a new chapter in security relationship of Pakistan and United States, since terrorism
emerged as a new threat to state security. It was this new security set up that led to the
commencement of Pak-US strategic dialogue in 2006, to give new meaning to the decade’s
old partnership. And to attend one of such meeting, US Secretary John Kerry visited Pakistan
in January 2015, where representative of both the countries announced to continue their
mutual efforts in eradicating terrorism and fostering peace in Afghanistan. They also discuss
the matter of reimbursement to Pakistan after the expiry of Coalition Support Fund at the end
of 2015. Moreover, US announced to extend its support to Pakistan in other fields as well,
and both the countries affirmed to further strengthen their bilateral relations.

Hathaway RM(2008) also stated that Notwithstanding the close partnership between
Washington and Islamabad that has developed over the past half-dozen years, Pakistan today
is viewed by Americans as a country inimical to the interests and values of the United States.
This article seeks to gauge the impact of Pakistan's close ties with Washington since 9/11. In
important respects, the partnership has brought the government of Pervez Musharraf
substantial benefits, including international legitimacy, the lifting of US sanctions, debt relief,
access to sophisticated technology, a helpful American role in reducing tensions with India,
and massive amounts of economic and military assistance. Yet the vast majority of the
Pakistani people have an unfavorable view of the United States—in part because of its
military engagements in Afghanistan and Iraq, but in good measure because the policies of
the George W. Bush administration have served to sustain Musharraf hold on political power.
Desirous of avoiding contentious issues for fear of exacerbating Pakistani apprehensions of
abandonment, the Bush administration has never spelled out at what point Pakistani miss
behavior would cause it to rethink the virtues of the blank cheque. As a consequence, it has
failed to lay.

2.2 USA Relations with Pakistan for Its Own Benefits

Abbas Z & Hussain S (2018), In their article “Analytical View of Pakistan-United States
Relations: Past and Present” stated that Relations between Pakistan and United States are like
the swing of pendulum. Pakistan, from the very first day, is playing catalyst role for the
interests of the United States in the region. But the relations between two countries remained
difficult and widen the trust deficit with the span of time. Despite aids from the US, Pakistan
also suffered irreparable loss for her pleasure and to get financial support from unequal ally.
History reveals that United States always used Pakistan for self-purposes.

2.3 Pakistan response against war on terror Post 9/11 especially against Al-Qaida, TTP
and Afghan Taliban

After 9/11 event American president made a speech in white house saying that there are two
ways for the world states weather they choose any one in these two i.e. First is stand for
peace and join the war against terror till the end of the last terror and Second is stand with
terror against peace and America will fight against those who support the terror, thus Pakistan
join the war on terror and proof that Pakistan stand for peace in the Global War on Terror.

2.3.1: War on Terror

Schetter. C (2013), in his article “ The Durand Line The Afghan-Pakistani Border
Region Between Pushtunistan, Tribalistan and Talibanistan” argued that while the borderland
between Afghanistan and Pakistan has gained global significance since the terrorist attacks of
9/11, it is too narrow an approach to view this region solely through the lens of the “war on
terror”. To understand this border region, one has to take the complex web of conflicts into
consideration. First, there is the ideological contest between militant Islamists and the West
(Talibanistan), which dates back only to the last decade – even though the roots of this
confrontation lie in the Afghan Wars that began in 1979. Second, there is the longstanding
conflict between tribe and state (Tribalistan), which Afghanistan and Pakistan have tried to
deal with in manifold ways in the past. Third, the situation along the border is coloured by the
unsolved ethno-nationalist conflict between Islamabad and Kabul over the Pakhtunistan issue
– the question of whether Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (former North West Frontier Province) is
part of Pakistan or Afghanistan. He argues that these three overlapping dimensions of the
conflict can help outsiders to understand the logic of the local elites and movements and of
the national and international actors and organizations.
Shaheen A (2018), in her paper “shrinking civic space in Pakistan: response and
strategies of the civil society” exploded the issue of shrinking civic space in Pakistan. The
study presents civil society activists’ responses on this issue, highlights their perception,
present and future strategies to address this issue, and their effectiveness, as such, as well.
Pakistan presents a unique case due to its involvement in the ‘war on terror’ and the
consequences being faced by both the state and society at large. Present shrinking of civil
society action is directly linked with it. In an attempt to grapple with the problems emerging
from ‘war on terror’, the overgrown state is encroaching upon citizens’ space, thus denying
the civil society to play its due role which can provide safety for the state as well. The
preferred strategies of the NGOs include lobbying with parliamentarians and mobilizing the
citizenry about the situation.
Rabbi (2012) in his paper, “War against Terrorism and its Repercussions for
Pakistan” argued that Joining the US led coalition in the war against terrorism has many short
and long term repercussions for Pakistan. The alliance helped Pakistan to overcome the
sanctions, to get economic as well as military assistance and to end its international isolation.
It also got the status of non-NATO ally, frontline state and proved itself as the most suitable
ally from that of a rogue regime, terrorist or failed state. It also succeeded to restore its
membership in the Commonwealth, which was suspended after the military coup of October
1999. On the other hand Pakistan is paying a heavy price in socio-strategic fields. It suffered
immeasurable loss in the global war on terror. It faced gravest foreign policy predicaments
and had to revise its Afghan policy and found difficulties in its diplomacy while supporting
the freedom struggle of Kashmir. The counterterrorism against terrorists and militancy inside
the country added to institutional instability and raised social problems that remained
consistent to beset the society. Thus, Pakistan is considered as one of the economic and
strategic losers in the global system that has evolved since 9/11.
2.3.2: Al Qaeda
Sageman M (2009), in his article “Confronting Al-Qaeda: Understanding The Threat
In Afghanistan” explored that Counter-terrorism policy should be based on a comprehensive
analysis of the facts. A comprehensive survey of global neo-Jihadi terrorism in the West
shows that there were 60 plots over the past 20 years, perpetrated by 46 different networks.
Of these only 14 successfully inflicted any casualty, and only two were perpetrated by al-
Qaeda proper in the past 20 years Over the past five years, global neo-jihadi and al-Qaeda
terrorism in the West is in decline and the vast majority of the plots were perpetrated by
independent homegrown groups, inspired by al- Qaeda but not linked to it or its allies. Since
9/11/01, none of the plots could be traced back to Afghanistan. Indeed, the detailed trial
transcripts of the major plots in the West since 9/11/01 show that there was no al-Qaeda
training in Afghanistan and that there is no Afghan among the perpetrators. There has been
no global neo-jihadi terrorist casualty in the West in the past four years and none in the U.S.
in the past eight years. This means that the U.S. military surge in Afghanistan will not help
protect U.S. and Western homelands from a- Qaeda and its allies. The argument that the
surge will prevent a return of al-Qaeda to Afghanistan to the same level of threat as prior to
2001 is based on many dubious assumptions. Counter-terrorism in the West has been very
successful and the value added of an increased counter-insurgency campaign in Afghanistan
is debatable.
Williams B (2011) in his paper “Dangerous Precedent: America’s Illegal War In
Afghanistan” pointed out that Osama bin Laden’s death has led many to question the efficacy
of America’s continued fighting in Afghanistan. Too often dismissed is any meaningful
discussion of the legality of the war on terror in Afghanistan, where the United States has
promised to keep fighting until at least 2014. The use of force in international law is
generally forbidden, except under three circumstances: in self-defense, pursuant to a United
Nations Security Council resolution, or with consent from the leader of an invaded state.
After a careful examination of all three, it is apparent that America’s continued fighting in
Afghanistan, more than a decade after 9/11, does not fall under any category. By continuing
to fight this illegal war, America loses a significant amount of moral high ground and
tangible international leverage. Worse still, by relying on an illegitimate leader’s consent as
justification for the war, America unwittingly establishes a precarious blueprint for future
states to follow. Whatever sound (or unsound) reasons America has for continuing the war,
its illegality foreshadows a more dangerous future
2.3.3 Tehreek-e- Talban Pakistan (TTP):
Hassan M.S (2013), in his article” The Taliban Imbroglio: Search for a Durable Peace
in Pakistan” described that Taliban are not a homogenous group of fighters or extremists
rather they are conglomerate of different groups. According to one estimate ‘there are fifty
two (52) Taliban groups inclusive of twelve (12) foreign groups’.1 Some well-known
Taliban or affiliated groups are the Afghan fighters within Afghanistan, Afghan fighters
operating in Afghanistan from bases in Pakistan, Tehrik-e-Taliban, Pakistan, Lashkar-e-
Taiba, Jaish-e-Muhammad etc. One common feature among these groups is the hostility
towards the West in general and the US in particular. This also makes them natural allies to
the declared terrorist group of Al-Qaeda. As all of them believe that in the guise of war on
terror the West has launched a crusade against the Muslims of the world, and it is now the
duty of all Muslims to confront them in whatever way possible. They have been very
successfully using the issues that Muslims are facing in different countries of the world, such
as Kashmir, Palestine, Iraq, Chechnya, and Afghanistan etc. They have also declared war
against those Muslim countries that are supporting the West in the war on terror. He gives an
overview of different militant groups and their fighting strategies with respect to the problem
of restoration of peace in Pakistan.
WEI L &Khan K M(2016) in their article, “When Friends Turned Into Enemies: The
Role of the national State vs. Tehrik-i- Taliban Pakistan (TTP) in the war against Terrorism
in Pakistan” argued that after 9/11, the Pakistani state’s decision to abandon the Taliban
(friends) under U.S. pressure and later to become a “frontline” state in the war against
terrorism had led to a massive change in the “strategic security paradigm” of the Pakistani
security establishment. This strategic policy U-turn transposed the state’s long-held strategic
partners and friends (Taliban) into brutal enemies in the war against terrorism in Pakistan.
This article critically analyzes the enigmatic situation in which these friendly forces emerged
as brutal actors in the war against terrorism and empirically examines the strategies and
tactics that Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), adopted over time to create panic and fear to
gain political leverage during military operations against them. This paper also highlights
tactical mapping of TTP and its affiliates, its ideological grounding, and critical analysis of
the perilous relationship between the state and Taliban forces as the Afghan jihad presents a
state of war on terror.
Hilali A.Z (2010), in his paper “The strategic Depth Of Pakistan” said that since the
eve of 9/11, Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) have become
strategically vital region in the world and also for the security and defense of Pakistan. The
area is landlocked and an important junction of South, Southwest and Central Asia and
chessboard of great power politics. The war on terror and the US and NATO actions against
the Taliban militants and al-Qaeda network have changed the fabric of FATA region. This
situation has created challenging circumstances for the security and stability of Pakistan.
Moreover, the US has given free hand to India in Afghanistan which is a serious matter to
Pakistan’s security concerns. However, the war seems to be “bleeding wound” for Pakistan
because it is hurting more as compared to gains. So, the best strategy for Islamabad is
disengagement from the war because it will protect FATA which is real strategic depth for
the country’s defense rather than Kabul and it will also strengthen internal stability and
guarantee territorial integrity.

Soherwordi H.S (2012) explores that Obama administration seems to have fulfilled
the US agenda in Afghanistan: killing of Osama Bin Laden, breaking the backbone of
terrorism in the region, reconstruction and democratization of Afghanistan. President Obama
asserted recently that Afghanistan no longer represents a terrorist threat to the US. According
to him, “tide of war is receding” and that “America, it is time to focus on nation-building here
at home”. If, largely, the goals in Afghanistan are achieved, this means setting in motion a
substantial withdrawal of the US forces. This would acknowledge the formal end of terrorism
and a shift of his administration’s focus towards the fast-changing political and economic
landscape in the US. His second woe can be accepted in harsh reality of domestic economic
restrains. However, the tide of war against terrorism has not receded.

Asghar Ali (2015), in his paper “Pak-U.S Relations Re-defined after 9/11” evaluate
the present standoff in the relations between Pakistan and United States, which stayed
burdened with bitterness and captive to the insistency of Washington over Islamabad with the
demand of doing more to eliminate the network of terrorist armed groups, Al-Qaida and
Taliban, who are operational from the tribal areas of Pakistan and committing terrorist
activities inside and outside the Pakistan. Argue is that the two partners in this worldwide war
against terrorism, have different regional tactical concerns. For the U.S, the war against the
terror was destined to restrain the worldwide terrorism led by Al-Qaida and penalize the
performers of the attacks of 11th of September 2001, assault on the soil of U.S. In contrast,
Pakistan joined this war unwillingly desired to provide the security to its benefits, regional
and domestic and by keeping away from the fury of U.S. Another argue is that both the
partners, Pakistan and U.S require to perform the re-defining of the on hand stage of relations
amongst them and effort jointly for achieving superior objectives, that were defined in the
war against the terror. If they failed to do so, it might endanger the armed forces operations to
counter the terrorism in edges of Pakistan and Afghanistan. In result, this region along with
the world in general would carry on to face the terrorism threat.

Conceptual / Theoretical Framework

The Pakistan-United States relationship has witnessed several ups and downs in the last six
decades. One of the most important factor affecting Pak-U.S. ties has been U.S. aid. The aid
has been used to achieve the U.S.‘ varying foreign policy objectives including, but not
limited to, containing the spread of communism, Soviet expansion, China, and
terrorism/extremism in the region. However, withdrawal of aid on more than one occasion
(e.g., alliance with China, wars with India, Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan, and nuclear
issues) forced Pakistan to explore alternate venues to serve her national interests. While the
flow of U.S. aid provided Pakistan with tools to serve both her own and the U.S. interests in
the region, abrupt withdrawal of the same and imposition of sanctions, at various times and
for various reasons, created a negative perception about the U.S. within Pakistan. It would not
be incorrect to say that the import and spread of extremism, drugs, and weapons in Pakistan
through Afghanistan, in the post-Soviet withdrawal period, is the result of the U.S.
disappearance from the scene. This is also true that this mega event has contributed
significantly towards the current state of Pakistan. The sourest point remains that the U.S.
recycled its relations with Pakistan at regular intervals to suit its own national interests
without paying much attention to its implications for Pakistan‘s geo-political, socio-
economic, and domestic situation. Pakistan has been graded, at various times, from as high as
the ‗most allied ally‘ to as low as ‗most dangerous‘ state, besides spending more time facing
military/economic sanctions than actually receiving assistance. The U.S. government has
never been focused on Pakistan‘s long-term stability and prosperity. Instead, the emphasis
has mostly remained on achieving short-term goals. The U.S. strategy towards Pakistan, even
in the post-9/11 period, remained far from focusing on long-term relations. The same pro-
military U.S. approach is reflected in most of the financial assistance that the U.S. has
provided to Pakistan since its inception. The vast majority of U.S. assistance to Pakistan since
September 11, 2001, however, has not been directed to Pakistan‘s underlying fault lines, but
to specific, short-term counterterrorism objectives that focus particularly on the western
border and on Afghanistan. Thereby, United States has undermined its broader strategic goals
in Pakistan while addressing immediate issues like al Qaeda and the Taliban, implying that
the U.S. thinking revolves around dealing with the symptoms and not the root causes of
extremism and terrorism. The cost-benefit analysis of the Pak-U.S. alliance, in the fight
against terrorism from 2001–2011, suggests a pattern of pro-military approach from the U.S.
towards Pakistan that has not only failed in achieving U.S. objectives but has also
strengthened already existing anti-U.S. sentiments in Pakistan and expanded the extremists‘
base. The diminishing U.S. influence in Pakistan is another proof of faulty U.S. policies
towards the country. The U.S. claims of providing considerable financial assistance to
Pakistan is only partially valid since most of this assistance is either severely conditioned or
provided in lieu of services offered by Pakistan. While the major portion of the assistance is
security/military related, less assistance is directed to addressing the huge population base.
Pakistan is also not methodical in fund management. An insight into the current U.S.
military/economic assistance to Pakistan reveals several drawbacks in fund appropriations
and management including, but not limited to, underutilization, mismanagement, invisibility,
unaccountability, corruption, wastage and lack of transparency. However, even if the
available funds are expanded in consonance with desired intentions under improved control,
they are not likely to bring a significant change in the outcome of war or in improving Pak-
U.S. relations, owing to the clear imbalance in their allocations. While Pakistan lacks the
infrastructure and credibility to consume allocated funds in accordance with their purpose,
the U.S. fails to recognize the inherently faulty design of fund allocation that favors the short-
term military objectives rather than the long-term strategic aspirations. The game theoretical
approach, to analyze the options for the two players in the future relationship, suggests a
cooperation strategy‘solution where success depends on a number of variables and future
U.S. policies. The game setting clearly manifests the relationship between its elements,
Pakistan and the U.S. The benefits are measured in terms of political influence and the state‘s
ability to advance its interests. While the benefits are directly proportional to the people‘s
perception, this perception creates an enabling environment to increase both political
influence and the benefits. Therefore, public perception is also directly proportional to the
political influence. As per the game theory analysis, Pak-U.S. relations have now reached the
same stage as at the onset six decades ago; however, now the stakes are much higher for both
the players, particularly for Pakistan. The U.S. may have better control over the situation but
is not in a position to dictate its terms to Pakistan. The game clearly suggests that Pakistan
can secure a better outcome if it chooses to exercise alternative strategic options in reaction to
the U.S. defection and vice versa. Finally, the game hints at the conflict in interests of both
the players, where associated cost creates a disabling environment that in turn affects strategy
implementation. In order to secure better payoffs, both the players have the option to defect,
worsening the relationship and creating conflict of interests. Pakistan‘s geo-strategic location,
historical enmity with India (over Kashmir), instability/hostilities in/from Afghanistan,
declining socio-political conditions, dismal state of economy, and rising extremism are the
realities and need to be perceived as such. Barring the geography and Kashmir issues, the
remaining problems are the by-products and implications of Pakistan‘s weak governance and
its engagement with the U.S., respectively. While the U.S. kept switching the relationship ON
and OFF to suit its interests, Pakistan failed to foresee the grave implications of U.S.
abandonment and continued its journey downward without exploring the available alternate
strategic options. One of the major flaws in the Pak-U.S. relationship is the interest
divergence of both countries. While the U.S.‘ larger objectives in the region tend to promote
Indian influence, Pakistan‘s security imperatives conflict with the U.S. intentions in
Afghanistan. While the U.S. aid is predominantly military in nature, the population‘s 106
grievances continue to shape negative perceptions about the U.S. The result is obvious: both
countries have negative perceptions about each other at all levels. While perceptual blocks
may hamper the ability to build correct perceptions, collaboration and mature understanding
of each other helps change realities on the ground, which in turn influences perception and
perception shapes relationships. All nations strive to achieve their foreign policy goals and
national interests and Pakistan is no exception. While the Pak-U.S. alliance in the fight
against terrorism and the future of their relationship hangs in a delicate balance, there is no
escaping the fact that both countries need each other for safeguarding their interests in the
region. Introducing a population-centric approach, understanding each other‘s limitations,
and promoting common goals is likely to reduce the trust deficit and contribute to achieving a
favorable cost-benefit equation besides laying the foundation for a long-term strategic
relationship. In the Pak-U.S. relationship, the ground realities differ significantly from the
perceptions of both Americans and Pakistanis. However, perceptions can be changed by
influence and the U.S. can exert this influence by shifting its focus from military to
population. In the panel‘s opinion, there cannot be a better opportunity than now for the U.S.
to engage Pakistan in a long-term strategic relationship based on trust, mutual interests and
deep understanding, an omission that has kept the U.S. from winning hearts and minds in
Pakistan. After having considered major factors affecting the Pak-U.S. relationship and
applying the game theoretical approach, recommends the following options and associated
measures as the way ahead in improving the current state of Pak-U.S. relations and laying the
foundation for a long-term strategic partnership between the two nations. The U.S. can
exercise two options: either to continue a renewed cooperation with Pakistan by using soft
power, or to coerce Pakistan to cooperate while withdrawing all its current assistance. If the
U.S. opts to defect at this stage, it has to reduce its dependency on Pakistan, a proposition
highly unsuitable to its national interests. The U.S. would also lose the very grounds that
initiated the fight against terrorism besides losing credibility in the Muslim world in general
and Pakistan in particular. Pakistan‘s sufferings would increase; however, exercising alternate
strategic options of allying with Russia, China or Iran would not only open ways for Pakistan
but also isolate the U.S. in the region. However, if the U.S. chooses to continue its
cooperation with Pakistan, it needs to concentrate on the following measures in order to reap
better returns on its investment in Pakistan. These measures are listed in order of priority and
as such are required to be adopted forthwith since time remains a crucial factor in their
application:- 1. Short-Term Measures ―Breaking the Frustration Cycle‖ a. Initiate
Confidence Building Measures to bridge the trust deficit. b. Enhance communication,
coordination, and constructive engagements at multiple levels to eliminate misconceptions
against each other. c. Launch favorable media campaign that mimics the Voice of America to
publicize the positive aspects of the relationship in both countries. d. Provide a ‗population-
specific ‘economic assistance aimed at helping people to create positive public opinion. e.
Address immediate military cooperation/coordination issues. 2. Long-Term Measures
―Reinforcing Hope‖ a. Renovate Relationship: Pakistan and the United States should
renovate their relationship based on long-term objectives, common goals, mutual interests,
regional stability/security, and better understanding. 1) Understand Limitations: While the
U.S. should comprehend Pakistan‘s limitations and strategic vulnerabilities, Pakistan should
108 concentrate more on setting the house in order to better serve the common interests. 2)
Regional Approach: Promoting a regional approach for collective security, involving key
players, is likely to advance the stabilization process in the region. 3) Address Key Issues:
Understanding and resolving Pakistan‘s concerns regarding the Kashmir issue and Indian
influence in Afghanistan would not only reduce the divergence in the interests of the two
allies but also promote stability in the region. b. Population-centric Approach: In order to lay
the foundation for a long-term strategic relationship and a better return on its investment in
Pakistan, the U.S. needs to adopt a more population-centric approach and enhance economic
support to the country that has served vital U.S. interests and is critical to achieving regional
U.S. foreign policy goals in the future. Pakistan is transitioning through one of the worst
periods in its history and needs a reliable partner to support its stabilization. A more
population centric approach aimed at improving social well-being, justice, security,
economics and governance from the U.S. is likely to prove beneficial for both countries. This
approach should be adopted to accomplish the following measures: (1) Providing education
through schools would reduce indoctrination in Madrassahs besides bringing moderation to
the society at a fractional cost of what is being spent in ―firefighting‖ against the graduates
of those Madrassahs.( 2) Creating employment opportunities and promoting entrepreneurial
culture engages the youth in constructive activities and prevent them from falling prey to
extremism. (3) Assistance in energy sector/production would serve both in stability and
addressing the grievances of population. (4) Building communication and development
infrastructure like roads, bridges, and dams helps in addressing public frustrations. 5)
Supporting the private sector, providing technical expertise in infrastructure development,
and facilitating mutual trade and export would prove beneficial for both the countries in the
long run. (6) Reshaping economic aid and enhancing long-term bilateral assistance to
promote small projects involving people and publicizing the same through media would
enhance both the perceptions and relations. (7) Creating measures to overcome corruption
through accountability and a checks-and-balance system would help achieve better return on
the U.S. investment besides favorably influencing the culture. The population-centric
approach/investment, involving the above-mentioned measures, besides laying the foundation
for a long-term partnership, would also isolate extremists from the moderate populace and
help in achieving the U.S. objectives in the region. The U.S. would be able to exert larger
influence in the region, have positive perceptions, and enhanced credibility in Pakistan and
the Muslim world. On the other side, it would enable Pakistan to address its security
concerns, control extremism, and improve its domestic situation besides enhancing its image
globally. While population centric investment may take a decade or two to prove its effects,
its benefits would certainly outweigh the costs and set the bricks in place for a long-term
strategic Pak-U.S. relationship.

Theory

Realism is a straightforward approach to international relations, stating that all nations are
working to increase their own power, and those countries that manage to horde power most
efficiently will thrive, as they can easily eclipse the achievements of less powerful nations.
The theory further states that a nation’s foremost interest should be self-preservation and that
continually gaining power should always be a social, economic, and political imperative. The
nature of realism implies that seeking a moral high ground is a goal that governments cannot
always achieve and that deceit and violence can be highly effective tools for advancing
national interests. With homeland defense elevated to the highest priority, remaining morally
righteous in the eyes of international organizations can take a backseat to enforcing foreign
policy that will improve the nation’s global stature. In modern times, realism is evident in the
foreign policies of USA; China and Russia. The relationship between USA & Pakistan is also
based on realism theory. Because USA use Pakistan for their desires and interests in all time.
America use Pakistan in cold war, Terrorism operations, Al-Qaida & Taliban peace talk, and
as well as regional peace in South Asia. In such a way the relationship between Russia and
Syria is one that has raised eyebrows in Europe and around the world; despite the bloody civil
war in Syria—and the international community’s pleas for intervention—Russia has
maintained strategic relations with the government of Bashar Al-Assad in order to protect
Russian interests in the region. Similarly, China continues its diplomatic and economic
association with North Korea in spite of the latter’s abysmal human rights record and
aggressive nuclear testing. Chinese encroachment into the South China Sea and Russia’s
incursions into Ukraine also highlight the two countries’ aggressive—and at times violent—
realist political approach to international affairs.

2. Research Methodology
Methodology is the process used to collect information and data for the purpose of
acquiring quality research. It includes many steps with the help of which a researcher has
to collect data for his project. It involves collection of data, tools for the collection of data
and analysis of it. A systematic research is conducted to gain scientific answers to the
questions. It is the search for knowledge and truth; Information about the matter is called
knowledge in its scientific meanings. It is being collected through the application of
books, experience, journals etc. It helps to collect new information which is necessary in
the field of research. Most of the development in socio, economic and political sector is
possible only because of it.
Research is being conducted not only in the field of Science but also in social science and
other disciplines also. It is the channel with the help of which scholar has to interpret,
revise, obtain new information. The process is done through experiments observations,
analysis and other tools. The objectives attached with the research is to get discoveries of
new knowledge, verified information, analysis of the specific phenomenon, cause effect
relationship is being utilized. New scientific tools are utilized; answers are found to the
questions of scientific, non-scientific and social problems and other issues. The two
dominant research traditions (or paradigms) in social science are the positivist and the
interpretivist. By contrast, interpretative researchers maintain that to have knowledge
about the social world, it is necessary to gather data about language, ideas, feelings and
meanings. Which are frequently subjected to qualitative analysis to generate
understandings about human behavior and interaction? People are regarded as participants
in the research, the researcher adopts a reflexive stance to acknowledge involvement in
and impact upon the research process itself, and values are integral to research. Many
interpretivist researchers, unsurprisingly, maintain that human behavior and interaction
can only be properly studied from an interpretivist perspective, since humans impose
meanings, interpretations and values upon their own and others’ behaviours and actions,
and that we must understand these in order to make sense of the social world. The
methodology for this study will be interpretative and analytical. In this regard, access to
the original documents (Primary), as well as, secondary sources will be made. So
knowledge and information available with the government and Non-Governmental
 organizations (NGOs), books, articles, documents, testimonies, journals, available in the
libraries and archives etc. will be collected and utilized. The study will be mostly
descriptive when covering the genesis and historical evolution of the Pak-US relationship
and its different scenarios. Literature will be reviewed in detail in this regard to get an in-
depth analysis of the circumstances going on. And I will also prepare a well-Cramped
questionnaire for regional interviews which are directly or indirectly related to the present
issue “Pak-US relationship” The interviews will conducted on desire of respondents, in
their offices, residents and so on. And we will take the respondents in confidence that this
interview is wholly for academic purposes not for any agency of State.

3.1: Research Philosophy

Research means to collect existing knowledge so that a researcher may make informed
choices. Methodology of Research is how to follow from the result of practical research to
make an abstract regarding the accuracy. It should enable us to design our research.(Deploy
and Gatling, 2011, 10). Identification of research is a vital important that occurs first or in the
initially stages of the research process. This identification are classified into two overarching
philosophical categories by Researchers through which knowledge is viewed and built, each
of which gives rise to one of the primary research traditions: experimental type, naturalistic
inquiry or the integration of the both (Deploy and Gatling, 2011, 16).

The philosophical foundation of my study will be naturalistic inquiry. Naturalistic type of

research is based on philosophical foundation—logical post positivism. Post Positivism is a
broad term that refers to the qualitative type of research.

Schratz, M., & Walker, R. (1998). Towards ethnography of learning: Reflection on

action as an experience of experience. Studies in Cultures, Organizations and
Societies, 4(2), 197-209.

Post-positivist research principles emphasize meaning and the creation of new knowledge,
and are able to support committed social movements, that is, movements that aspire to change
the world and contribute towards social justice. Post-positivist research has the following
characteristics: Research is broad rather than specialized – lots of different things qualify as
research; Theory and practice cannot be kept separate. We cannot afford to ignore theory for
the sake of ‘just the facts’; The researcher’s motivations for and commitment to research are
central and crucial to the enterprise (Schratz and Walker, 4(2), 197-209); The idea that
research is concerned only with correct techniques for collecting and categorizing
information is now inadequate Selecting a method the appropriateness of quantitative or
qualitative methods depends on the questions being asked or the issues being explored. One
should use methods appropriate to the questions. Key tools of post-positivist research In the
search for meaning, which can lead to value-led social change, we wish to emphasize four
main tools at the disposal of post-positivist researchers: a) the concept of discourse b) the
concern with power the value of narrative c) the need to be reflexive d) The concept of
discourse. The post-positivist emphasis on meaning and the relationship between language
and meaning is addressed in the concept of discourse. A discourse is a web of statements,
categories and beliefs, habits and practices. Discourse is used to filter and interpret
experience and the discourses available at a certain historical moment construct the ways that
people can think, talk about, or respond to phenomena. Discourses ‘invite’ us to be human in
certain ways, or to respond to others in certain ways.

3.2: Research Design: Methods and Procedures

Design is perhaps the most fundamental aspect of the research process. On the basis of one’s
philosophical position, research purpose, theory, and specific research question or query, the
researcher will select an action process by which to explore or answer the query. As my study
will be based on the naturalistic type of research and inductive method will be adopted.

3.3: Setting Boundaries of the Research

Boundaries are set for a number of reasons, the most important of which is to limit the scope
of the study so that it is feasible to conduct or is doable. Ways of setting boundaries include
determining the length of study, who can participate in it, the conceptual dimensions to be
examined, and the type and range of interviews that will be conducted. (Deploy and Gatling,
2011, 20).

3.4: SOURCES of Data Collection

3.4.1: Secondary Data:

It will include books, journals, research papers, magazines, research reports and media (print
& electronic).

3.5: Data Collection

A researcher can choose from an all-embracing selection of techniques for obtaining
information or data. (Deploy and Gatling, 2011, 21). As the study is based on qualitative
research design, interviews will be conducted and data will be collected.

3.6: Data Analysis Techniques

Analyzing information, the ninth indispensable of the research process, involves a series of
planned activities that differ depending on the specific research tradition in which one works.
(Deploy and Gatling, 2011, 21). The data will be collected through books, journals,
newspapers etc and also through interviews will be analyzed via content analysis.

3.7. Limitations of Study

Due to multi-dimensional factors and aspects of the subject, its extent is very
broad. There are multiple factors at local, regional, and international level and locating them
all in the right order is very difficult task. There is copious/ sufficient of information
accessible in primary and secondary sources on Pakistan USA ventures: Post 9/11 in the
perspectives of TTP and Al Qaida but very less information sources are available there.

3.8: Delimitation

Delimitations are self-imposed boundaries established by the researcher on the scope

and purpose of the study

3.9. Organization of Thesis

This study will consist of all parts which are mandatory and essential for the award of degree
of the Doctrine of Philosophy.

Chapter one will be the Introduction of the Study. This chapter will consist of historical
background of the selected research problem, statement of the research problem, objectives of
the study; Significance of the study; Research Questions.

Chapter Two will be the Literature Review of the Study. It will thoroughly review and
examine the existing literature on the topic in length and breadth (i.e. from every aspect in
detail) bringing all the factors into consideration. It will also have conceptual framework.

Chapter Three will consist of Research Methodology of the study. It will consist on approach,
data analysis tools and data collection methods to be adopted in the study.

Chapter Four will be that what are the factors responsible that Pakistan established relations
with USA.
Chapter five will consist on how USA used Pakistan for its own purpose in various fields at
various times

Chapter six will be what is the stance of both states in the perspective of TTP and Al-Qaida.

Chapter seven will be consist on the with drawl of USA army troops from Afghanistan &
Pakistan Role of mediation between US and Afghan Taliban & its implications on region.

Chapter seven will be consisting on the analysis, conclusion and a summary of the study.

Chapter nine will terminate the research study with some important judgments and
recommendations..

References
o Abbas Z & Hussain S ( 2018), Global Journal of Human Social Science
Research Analytical View of Pakistan-United States Relations: Past and
Present Vol 18, No 7-H (2018):

o Akhtar S (2012), SSH Dynamics of USA-Pakistan Relations in the Post 9/11

Period: Hurdles and Future Prospects accessed Vol. 2 No. 11; June 2012 205

o Asghar A (2015), “Pak-U.S Relations Re-defined after 9/11” Accessed

Volume 127, Issue 1, pp 179–194 |dated Received 30th October 2014

o Bashir F and Mustafa I (2014), SSH Pak-US Security Relation: Challenges &
Prospects for Pakistan: Volume 22, Number 2, 2014

o Depoy, E, and Giltin, Lauran.(2011). Introduction to Research: Understanding

& Applying Multiple Strategies. St. Louis, Missouri: SAGE

o Hassan M. S (December, 2013), Pakistan Perspective” The Taliban Imbroglio:

Search for a Durable Peace in Pakistan”

o Hathaway RM (2008), MG “Leverage and largesse: Pakistan's post-9/11

partnership with America, Contemporary South Asia accessed- P 11-24 : 06
Jun 2008 https://www.tandfonline.com
o Hilali A.Z Dr (2010), MG “The strategic Depth Of Pakistan’.
o Imran. M, etal (2019), An Analysis of Pak-US Relations after Pentagon 2011
Attacks accessed july 2019

o Iqbal Muhammad (2018), IS “The United States – Pakistan Counter Terrorism

Interaction & Distrust (A Prospect of Drone Warfare 2004-2018) accessed
Vol. 4, No. 2, July–December 2018, pp.93– 104

o Sageman M(2009), TRI “ Confronting Al-Qaeda: Understanding The Threat

In Afghanistan”
o Soherwordi .H.S (2012), PS “Withdrawal of American forces from
Afghanistan (Endgame): Issues and challenges for Pakistan accessed; Vol. 19,
Issue - 1, 2012, 129:141

o WEI LU &Khan K.M (2016) Defense Analysis, “When Friends Turned Into
Enemies: The Role of the national State vs. Tehrik-i- Taliban Pakistan (TTP)
in the war against Terrorism in Pakistan
o Williams B (2011), “Dangerous Precedent: America’s Illegal War In
Afghanistan”