Zia relations with west and its social economic or religious implications

Abstract:-
An extremely apparent turning point in relations between the United States and Pakistan
occurred on December 27, 1979, the day of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. The historically
solid ties between the United States and Pakistan had already hit their lowest point earlier in
1979. The Carter administration, which had never felt at ease dealing with the dictatorship of
General Muhammad Zia ul-Haq, had stopped providing Pakistan with economic aid because it
thought (together with many in Congress) that Pakistan was making active attempts to develop
nuclear weapons. When students attacked and set fire to the American embassy in Islamabad in
November, killing two Americans and two Pakistani embassy staff members, the already
deteriorating relationship took a further turn for the worse.The attack itself was terrible, but it
was made worse by the Pakistani government's puzzlingly slow response to the embassy's siege
and its puzzlingly hesitant refusal to deny the report that the United States was somehow
involved in an attack on the Grand Mosque in Mecca, which was the alleged cause of the attack.
Introduction:
In order to protect its national interests through maintaining contacts with other countries, a state
formulates a set of aims and objectives known as foreign policy. Foreign policy is a plan of
action that the government of one state adopts to deal with or communicate with other
governments. The Islamic Republic of Pakistan's foreign policy is created by the government to
advance the nation's objectives within the framework of international relations while also
defending its national interests. The founder of this country, M.A. Jinnah, stated the planned
direction of the state's foreign policy in the following words: "Our Foreign Policy is one of
friendliness and good-will towards all the nations of the world.We do not harbour hostile
intentions towards any nation or country. We are prepared to contribute as much as we can to the
promotion of peace and prosperity among the nations of the world because we believe in the
policy of honesty and fair play in national and international relations. Pakistan would never fall
short in providing material and moral support to the UN's underprivileged and repressed people.
Pakistan’s Relationship with U.S
1950-1953: Liaquat Ali Khan, the first prime minister of Pakistan, travelled to the US to meet
President Harry S. Truman. It is claimed that during PM Khan's first trip to the US, President
Truman asked Khan to refuse his request for the CIA to establish a post in Pakistan only for the
purpose of monitoring Soviet Union activities.
Many Pakistani officials have travelled to the US over the years in order to obtain financial aid
from the US, including commander-in-chief Ayub Khan, foreign minister Zafarullah Khan,
foreign secretary Ikra mullah, finance minister Ghulam Muhammad, defence secretary Sikander
Mirza, and special envoy Mir Liaqat Ali.
1954:In May, Pakistan and the United States signed a mutual defence assistance agreement.
According to the agreement, a lot of Pakistani soldiers travelled to the US for training, and the
US also set up a Military Assistance Advisory Group (Maag) in Rawalpindi.
1956: President Dwight Eisenhower asked Prime Minister Suhrawardy to let the American Army
rent Peshawar Air Station so they could monitor the Soviet Union and their ballistic missile
programmes. The prime minister gave in to the demand.
1960s: Pro-American sentiment reached an all-time high in the decade in Pakistan's western
region. However, the military and financial aid was mostly aimed at West Pakistan, which
sparked a commotion and a sense of mistrust in East Pakistan. Ayub Khan visited the United
States of America with his daughter and permitted the United States to fly a spy mission to the
Soviet Union from Pakistani soil. After losing half a billion dollars in the 1965 Indo-Pakistan
war, which was fought to foment unrest in Indian-occupied Kashmir, the United States increased
the amount of funding that Pakistan was supposed to receive from the consortium of Pakistan. A
military and economic embargo was imposed on Pakistan by the US as a result of the war, which
caused its economy to collapse.
1971-1974: The United States supported Pakistan despite the arms embargo because Pakistan
was a crucial partner during the Cold War. On his first trip to the People's Republic of China,
President Richard Nixon received assistance from Pakistan. In the war of 1971, it is believed that
the US gave Pakistan military assistance and arms to deter India from further forays into
Pakistani cities. Losing Pakistan would have meant losing a crucial ally in the soviet war.
Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was also elected as Pakistan's president and then took office as prime
minister in 1974, according to the election results.
1976-1979: After winning the US presidential election, anti-socialist President Jimmy Carter
declared his intention to work for a ban on nuclear weapons. Carter disapproved of Bhutto's
policies and reinforced Pakistan's already-placed embargoes, therefore he lost the favors he had
while Nixon was the US president. Bhutto was able to acquire materials to advance his atomic
bomb research, nevertheless. Bhutto allegedly received threats from President Carter and his
government to halt the proliferation of atomic weapons and research with which he disagreed,
causing him to disagree with the Americans.
1979-1988: Pakistan and the United States had a cordial relationship under Zia ul Haq that was
mostly founded on military cooperation and accomplishments. The US, the CIA, and ISI
launched billion-dollar operations over the decade to halt the advance of Soviet forces into the
area. During this time, Pakistan received billions of dollars in military and economic aid from the
United States. Pakistan and the United States were negotiating a $3.2 billion aid package by
1981, and Pakistan overtook Israel as the second-largest receiver of aid in 1987.
But by the time General Zia's administration was through, Congress had approved the Pressler
amendment. The amendment forbade considerable economic and military assistance to Pakistan
unless the nation could justify and present convincing proof that the money was not being used
for nuclear proliferation. With the United States, Pakistan was negotiating a $3.2 billion aid
package in 1981, and behind Israel, Pakistan was the second-largest receiver of aid in 1987. But
by the time General Zia's administration was through, Congress had approved the Pressler
amendment.
The amendment forbade considerable economic and military assistance to Pakistan unless the
nation could justify and present convincing proof that the money was not being used for nuclear
proliferation. But despite Pakistan allegedly disclosing its ability to enrich uranium and put
together a nuclear weapon in 1984 and 1987, respectively, the sanctions allegedly weren't put in
place until 1990.
Military Coup of 1977:
The coup led by Pakistan's Chief of Army Staff General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq on July 5, 1977,
toppling Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto's administration was code-named Operation Fair
Play. The bloodless coup itself was preceded by political and social instability between the right-
wing Islamist Pakistan National Alliance and the Bhutto administration's ruling Pakistan People
Party, which was accused of manipulating the 1977 general elections. Zia pledged "free and fair
elections" within 90 days following the coup, but these were continually delayed under the guise
of accountability, and ("party-less") general elections were not held until 1985. Prior to his
passing in an aircraft crash, Zia himself remained in power for 11 years.The coup marked a
turning point in both the nation's history and the Cold War. After the 1971 war with India, which
resulted in Pakistan's surrender and Bangladesh's freedom, the coup took place over six years
later. Following the coup, Pakistan "Islamized" and joined the Afghan mujahideen—who were
supported by the US and Saudi Arabia—in the fight against the Soviets in Afghanistan.
Party less Elections:
On February 25, 1985, Pakistan held general elections to choose the members of the National
Assembly. After the 1973 constitution was restored, the elections were conducted by Muhammad
Zia-ul-Haq's military regime. The elections, which were nonpartisan, had about 1,300 candidates.
Each candidate was required to have 50 registered voters from the constituency they sought to
represent sign their nomination form. Zia-ul-Haq amended the Political Parties Act of 1962 in an
effort to exclude numerous opposition candidates and establish a conservative administration.As
a result, the elections were boycotted by the Movement for the Restoration of Democracy
(MRD), a group that demanded an end to the military administration. The voter turnout was
52.93%, which was far lower than it was in the two previous elections. The majority of the
MNAs that were elected supported the Zia government. Under the direction of Muhammad Khan
Junejo, a less well-known national politician, a new government was established. The pro-Zia
conservative Pakistan Muslim League was later founded by Prime Minister Junejo and his
supporters.
Referendum of Zia-ul-Haq:
On December 19, 1984, Pakistan held a vote on President Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq's agenda of
Islamization. Voters were asked if they approved of Zia-ul-Haq's plans to change a number of
laws to conform to the Quran and Sunnah, if they wanted this process to continue, and if they
agreed with Pakistan's Islamic worldview. Zia-ul-Haq's presidential tenure was also extended by
the referendum by five years. With a turnout of 62.2%, official results showed that 98.5% of
voters approved of it.Independent monitors highlighted "widespread irregularities" and
questioned if voter turnout had reached 30%.
Social & Islamic Policies of Zia-ul-Haq:
To decide legal cases based on Islamic law, Zia set up distinct Shariat judicial courts and court
benches. Adultery, fornication, and various forms of blasphemy were introduced as criminal
offences, and lashing, amputation, and stoning to death as punishments.
"Profit and loss" payments took the place of interest payments for bank accounts. Donations
made in zakat are now subject to a 2.5% yearly tax. Libraries and school textbooks were updated
to eliminate non-Islamic content. Offices, schools, and workplaces have to have a place for
worshipping. Zia increased the power of the Islamic parties and the ulama (clergy), while
conservative academics gained regular television appearances. To assure the continuance of his
programme after his death, tens of thousands of Jamaat-e-Islami party activists were appointed to
positions in the administration.On the Council of Islamic Ideology, conservative ulama were
added
Economic liberalization of Pakistan:
After Pakistan's exclusive foundation, the government of Exclusive Liberalism made significant
efforts to understand the country's economic strategy and promote rapid expansion of the
national economy. The country's GDP growth increased by 9.38% in 1964, 8.71% in the 1980s,
and 8.97% from 2004 to 2007. Liaquat Ali Khan was the British premier in 1947. Since 1947,
government economic experts have advocated rapid heavy industrialization and a robust and
powerful private sector as a need and an immediate economic answer in an effort to pull the
population out of poverty. When India and Pakistan were divided in 1947, Ali Khan's
government lacked the natural resources, financial institutions, and skilled technical workers it
would need to play a significant role in the economy's growth. In order to encourage national
growth, policies were simultaneously pushed in the direction of liberalism and governmental
intervention. Pakistan's Five-Year Plans resembled planned, centralised planning that was only
allowed for use in the military, the power and energy industries, as well as the production and
operation of railway equipment, telephone, telegraph, and wireless equipment. The management
and ownership of the remaining sectors was entrusted to the private sector. However, due to
social and political instability that resulted in the first economic crisis, efforts to liberalise the
economy faltered. Punjab experienced higher GDP growth than any other province in Pakistan
between 1980 and 1999, when the majority of economic reform took place. The nation was
under martial law. The 1962 Constitution, which imposed an extreme level of economic
liberalisation, was effectively supervised by President Ayub Khan, who took various steps to
liberalise the economy. The United States supported and widely praised the measures to
liberalise the economy, but civil society generally rejected them and there were conflicts
surrounding them.The widespread discussion concerning the unequal distribution of income,
wealth, and economic power at the national level started to take place in public forums. The forty
major industrial oligarch groups were found to have possessed more than 50% of private
domestic assets and around 42% of the country's industrial assets, according to studies conducted
by economists from official institutes in the 1960s. These same industrial conglomerates also
held control over eight of the nine major commercial banks. Dr. Mahbub-ul-Haq, the Planning
Commission's head economist, expressed his concern over income inequality in a powerful
speech in 1968.According to Dr. Haq and planning commission officials, Pakistan's national
economic growth has not significantly raised the average person's standard of living, and the
"trickle-down approach to development" has simply served to concentrate wealth in the hands of
"twenty-two industrial families." In order to counteract the inherent tendency of free markets to
concentrate wealth in the hands of those who already hold significant assets, the Planning
Commission suggested that the government must interfere in the economy. Following the war in
1971, Bhutto introduced the nationalisation programme, a more severe set of policy measures.
Under this policy, the majority of industries were vertically integrated and all significant
liberalised Era of Economic Progression industries were heavily managed by the
government.Under his government's five-year term restriction, the public and governmental
sectors grew significantly, and governmental investment increased yearly to support the
operation of the enterprises. Bhutto enacted extreme left-wing but nationalist economic reforms
to boost the government sector's economic output while reducing that of the liberal private
sector.
Zia’s Reforms and Islamization:
Under the codename Fair Play, the Pakistan People's Party (PPP) administration was overthrown
in a coup d'état in 1977. [6] As soon as possible, a new set of reforms were put in place to protect
the private sector's position in the nation's economic framework. President Zia-ul-Haq's
economic strategy was based on two pillars: economic liberalisation and economic Islamization.
To achieve the goals of economic reforms and Islamization, the government used and approved
several recommendations made in policy studies by experts, engineers, and economists. In order
to fulfil its economic objectives, the new policy relied on fostering the private sector and
businesses.
Although the new policy put a strong emphasis on economic liberalisation, it was subsumed
under the Islamization plan and forcibly overturned the nationalisation programme. Although
many businesses were privatised, banks remained under government control and management.
With the implementation of a new policy, private sector investment increased from 33% in 1980
to 44% in 1989. In 1979, a new system was also established, signaling the economic Islamization
of the country. The newly enacted Islamization regulations incorporated the liberalisation of the
economy under a new economic framework.
Theories of foreign Relation:
The two major theories of international relations are realism and liberalism.
Realism:
According to Realism, States only strive to strengthen their own power in relation to other states'
power. The following is also asserted by realism:
• The outside world is a hostile and perilous place. Power is the one thing in life that is certain. A
strong state will always be able to surpass and outlast a lesser one. • A state's principal interest is
in its own preservation, making military force the most significant and trustworthy type of
power. As a result, the state must constantly endeavour to consolidate its control.
• There is no supreme authority that can impose universal laws or penalise improper
conduct.Moral conduct is particularly dangerous since it can make a state less able to defend
itself.
•The very nature of the international system encourages states to wage war and utilize military
force. Despite their morality, leaders must not let moral considerations dictate their foreign
policy. International institutions and the law are only valid as long as governments abide by
them.
Since there have been states, politicians have used reality. The majority of academics and
politicians throughout the Cold War had realist perspectives on international relations. In order to
secure themselves and spread their political and military power overseas, the United States and
the Soviet Union each sought friends because neither side trusted the other. George W. Bush's
administration has made significant use of realism as well.
Liberalism:
Liberals stress how difficult it is to define the national interest and how military might is less
relevant as a result of the close ties between states. In the 1970s, as some academics started to
claim that realism was out of date, liberalism emerged. States could no longer rely on simple
power politics to decide issues due to growing globalisation, the rapid advancement of
communications technology, and the expansion in international trade. Theories of complex
interdependence are another name for liberal approaches to international affairs.
The following is a claim made by liberalism:
• The world is a harsh and dangerous place, yet frequently the drawbacks of utilizing military
force exceed the advantages. Therefore, every state has a stake in international collaboration.
• There are other forms of authority than military power. Power in the social and economic
spheres is also crucial.
• distinct governments frequently have distinct principal interests.
• International laws and organisations can aid in fostering collaboration, trust, and prosperity.
• Exerting economic power has been shown to be more effective than exerting military might.
Realism and Neorealism:
The biggest distinction is between classical realism, which emphasises domestic and human
causes, and neorealism, which emphasises how the design of the international system shapes
state behavior
Statement of the problem:
Opposition to zia regime and response of masses interms of radicalization of society
1.Liberal Forces get backward:
During zia ul haq military rule the liberal forces were get backward they loss their progress as
they were expected before such as different NGO's during the military rule of General Zia ul haq
an alliance of Karachi baded NGO 's known as Alliance Against Discrimination Laws(ADL) was
formed to oppose the blasphemy law that was introduced during his time period.
2.Economic Impact(Aid Addicted)
It was The time when Pakistan stops exportation and was all dependent on importing this makes
us aid addicted and the implementation was that we suffer economical problems and we came to
take loan interests from other countries.
3.Dependent on Conflict (Hired Gun):
During this era U S used Pakistan as hired gunnto attack Russia through Afghanistan during this
war Pakistan was served with a lot of weapon's and aid but it was The time when America was
using Pakistan just for his own sake And the thing Pakistan had to suffer was 9/11 incident.
There are two types of economies one is security economy and the other one is welfare economy.
Security economy: economic security of financial security is the condition of having stable
income or the other resources to support a standard of living now and in the foreseeable
future.For e.g what USA invest in other countries is economical security that he invests for his
own benefit.
Welfare economy:welfare economy is the economy that markets comprised therein to achieve
an efficient allocation of goods and resources in the society.The aim of welfare economy is the
overall well being of society.
Analysis:
My analysation on this topic will be further on and it will be my part of research to work on this
topic..
However, Zial-ul-Haq started the process of Islamization by passing laws that discriminated
against women. He encouraged purdah and forbade women from watching or participating in
sports. He revoked every basic right protected by the 1973 Constitution, including the
prohibition on discrimination based on The martial law regime of General Zia-ul-Haq (1977-
1986) took some of the steps for women’s development
Women empowerment and the problems women faced in his regime was poverty as they were
prohibited from freedom they were stuck in their homes facing poverty, unemployment 16%
females of our society were working women and has to give up their jobs due to this law this was
increase sexual harassment and crimes.This was also the rise of denominationalism in our
country that had made a violence vibrant in our society at that time.
The main issue is that how economy had a negative impact, and how much social disintegration
is increased.Hence,this study through empirical evidence investigates the costs and benefits of
pakistan in the wake of Zia alliance with U.S.
It was the time when Pakistan stop exportation and was all dependent on imports. Imports makes
us aid addicted and the implementation was that we suffer economical problems and we came to
take loan from other countries or IMF. Dependent on conflict (hired gun) during this era U. S
used Pakistan as hired gun to defeat Russia through Afghanistan during the Afghan Soviet war.
Pakistan was served with a lot of weapons and aid but it was the time when America was using
Pakistan just for his own sake. And the thing Pakistan has to suffer terrorism from the Taliban
side like as TTP, Al Qaeda and lashkare jhangvi .
There are two types of economies one is security economy and the other one is welfare economy.
Security economy: economic security of financial security is the condition of having stable
income or the other resources to support a standard of living now and in the foreseeable
future .For e. g what USA invest in other countries is economical security that he invests for his
own benefit.
Welfare economy: welfare economy is the economy that markets comprised therein to achieve
an efficient allocation of goods and resources in the society. The aim of welfare economy is the
overall well being of society.
My analysation on this topic will be further on and it will be my part of research to work on this
topic.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS:
 If Zia’s push for Islamisation had any political motivations, what they could have been?
 To what extent the forces backfired in Zia Regime?
 To what extents Against Zia USA and Alliance damaged Pakistan’s welfare economy?
 What was the social impacts on Pakistan during Zia regime?
 What was the economic growth in Zia’s era?
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES:
• To evaluate the effect of the Soviet-Afghanistan War and Agreement on Pakistan’s political
and socioeconomic stability during the General Zia-ul-Haq era (1977–1988).
• To investigate the type and scope of democratic disagreement and agreement during Pakistan’s
general Zia-ul-Haq’s rule (1977–1988).
• To examine the factors that influenced democratic dispute and consensus during this time.
• To determine the lessons for future democratic government in Pakistan that can be drawn from
the democratic debate and agreement during the General Zia-ul-Haq era (1977–1988).
Research methodology:
Due to the fact that my topic falls under interpretive theory, my research methodology will take a
qualitative approach. I would also employ discourse analysis, as I described before with the
interpretive paradigm. The desk studies category is where this project belongs. Additionally, for
my topic, I will use both primary and secondary data sources.
Organization of study:
The thesis is consisting on five chapters.
First Chapter is an introductory and deals with the introduction of Pakistan foreign, economic
and social policies of Zia. And also mentioned about the problem and its significance of the
problem. The research methodology is also included in this chapter. After first an introductory
chapter, the thesis is divided into four chapters including chapter of conclusion. The chapters are
also divided into topics and sub-topics.
The second chapter is Zia’s relations with West (USA) and its social implications. Further tells
about the foreign policy of General Zia-ul-Haq from 1977 to 1988.
Third chapter is general Zia phase -1 martial law. In this chapter, the economic impacts of
martial law on Pakistan or economic development of Zia era. This chapter also covered the
Pakistan Economic relations with west (USA) or Russia Afghan war and its economic
implications on Pakistan.
Forth Chapter is about religious history of Pakistan especially Zia regime, this chapter gives
details of the Zia’s Islamaization and Pakistan’s alliance with USA or support Afghan Taliban
against Russia and the religious impacts of Afghan war.
Fifth chapter is about conclusion. This chapter concludes and traces out the real and scientific
reasons of the Pakistan foreign policy against West, especially USA. A comprehensive
understanding about the social, economic or religious implications in Zia era. In the end of this
chapter measures and integrity have been told.
Literature Review:
Plenty of literature on Pakistan-US relations exists in the form of mostly secondary Source
material throwing light on various aspects of these relations. This literature needs to be probed so
that a true picture of these relations regarding costs incurred and Benefits accrued by Pakistan
may be known. It is available in various forms i.e. popular Literature, biographies,
autobiographies, and research work in the form of books as well As academic journals. Abundant
popular literature expresses general public opinion Regarding Pakistan-US relations. Anti-US
popular writers have presented negative Picture of these relations while the pro-US ones have
shown cooperative, constructive And beneficiary nature of them with reference to costs and
benefits to Pakistan.
However, their arguments provide no primary corroborative evidence for the post-9/11 Phase. It
depends upon their own conditioned attitudes that are based upon their own Thinking process
and knowledge. This literature includes newspaper columns, editorials, biographies,
autobiographies, talk shows, and statements by politicians.Biographies and autobiographies of
important personalities directly concerned With foreign policy matters are other sources of data
available regarding Pakistan-US Relations. These works present some useful insights regarding
these relations. But they Lack authentic evidentiary sources and consist of personal
accounts.Therefore, they are not trustworthy. However, they serve us with some voluminous
knowledge about the relevant research field otherwise unavailable. Substantial research work
supported by authentic evidence is available in the form of books, research articles, and
unpublished dissertations. Such research works need to be reviewed to find out the true nature of
subject under study and discern the authenticity of corroborative evidence provided by the
researchers. Some of these works deal with particular dimensions of Pakistan-US relations not
covering their all aspects. Others are on foreign policy of Pakistan giving some space to
Pakistan-US relations in one or more chapters. The research journals do not exclusively deal
with Pakistan-US relations. They have some research articles in this regard. Other research
works deal with theoretical perspectives of international relations and foreign policy giving an
insight into real underlying forces driving the states to make and break Alliances. A review of
this research work enables us to successfully make further advancement in the relevant research
field. Pakistan’s Defense Policy, 1947-58 by Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema (1998) discusses the early
domestic, regional and international compulsions that forced the Westernoriented Pakistani
policymakers to join the US-sponsored Western anti-communism Alliances. In 1954, Pakistan
joined South East Asian Treaty Organization (SEATO) and became member of Central Treaty
Organization (CENTO) in 1955. The writer is of the view that states make alliances with specific
objectives expected to be achieved. Their primary objectives are to get maximum benefits with
minimum liabilities out of these Alliances. Pakistan joined the US-sponsored anti-communist
alliance system to get multiple strategic, political, economic and psychological benefits,
especially against India.Cheema’s book reveals that the US military assistance strengthened
Pakistan’s defence forces against possible internal and external threats, but mostly India-centric
ones. The US provided a million tons of wheat aid to address food crisis in Pakistan, economic
assistance of around $620 million from 1954 to 1958, and defence support allowing Pakistan to
use it for economic development and commodity imports. The alliance membership enhanced
political and diplomatic support for Pakistan, provided sustenance to the ruling moderate group,
strengthened the government hands in dealing with communist activities, increased the military
strengt to deal effectively with Internal security situation and inculcated the sense of security
among Pakistanis. The book claims that Pakistan incurred substantial political, strategic and
Economic costs out of its membership. It infuriated India which accused Pakistan of introducing
the Cold War into the region and made it an excuse to wriggle out of its plebiscite commitments
in Kashmir. The Soviets were annoyed. The Soviet leaders, then visiting India and Afghanistan,
declared Kashmir an integral part of India and later supported Indian stance on Kashmir in the
united Nations Security Council and started Supporting Kabul-backed Pushtoonistan issue. It
improved Afghanistan’s relations with the Soviet Union and India thus creating aggressive geo-
political environment for Pakistan. To please the Americans, though initially supporting the
Chinese, Pakistan started voting for American-sponsored resolutions in the UNO. Egypt, reacting
to Pakistan’s membership of the Baghdad Pact, called it an outside imposition with British re-
entry into the Arab World and began to woo India declaring Kashmir as dear to India as Suez to
Egypt. It deteriorated relations with Afghanistan, hardened the Afghan attitude, increased
Afghanistan’s dependence on the Soviets, sustained its Pushtoonistan stance against Pakistan and
kept on blocking Pakistan-Afghan normalization. The book counts strategic challenges created in
the wake of its alliance membership. It put more liabilities on Pakistan and made Pakistan
dependent heavily on US weaponry, invoked the displeasure of many regional countries and
extremely complicated regional security environment for Pakistan. The Soviets built a strategic
road in Afghanistan and increased its influence on Afghan military thus paving the road For
espionage of Pakistani territory. The increased security links among the Soviets, Indians and
Afghanistan created security dilemma for Pakistan. It increased the Maintenance cost of the
modernization of its armed forces manifold affecting Pakistan’s budgetary allocations.Farooq
Naseem Bajwa (1996), in his book Pakistan and the West: The First decade 1947-57 discusses
and analyses the regional pacts Pakistan entered with the US-led capitalist Western world during
1950s. The book examines the compulsions which led Pakistan to join these pacts and its
achievements out of them. The book statesthat Pakistan was born in very desperate
circumstances. Burdened with severe domestic Problems, it felt threatened by an external
aggression from India especially on Kashmir Dispute. The writer argues that Indian target was
the whole Pakistan rather than only Kashmir. Pakistan tried to resolve its problems and disputes
with India by using the Outside world which showed no interest in this regard. Pakistan
perceived its very Survival at stake.The book tells that when Pakistan came into existence, the
then world political Power dispensation was bi-polar with two influential superpowers – the
USA and the USSR – constantly involved in expanding their respective circle of influence across
the World. The countries on their borders had little option but to be caught in their geostrategic
game. The countries which were able to keep themselves away from this game Did so by playing
one power against the other. In such circumstances, Pakistan, a poor And weak country, could
not afford the risky option of neutrality and its initial non-aligned foreign policy was not
sustainable. Its circumstances forced it to find some Powerful external allies which could address
its security and economic problems Substantially. To address these problems, the British, the
Soviet Union and the US were the Options before its small dominant Western-educated and -
inclined civilian and military Ruling clique. A fierce debate resulted in the conclusion that the
Soviet Union was not An option as it lacked interests in the region, was an unknown quantity and
highly Dangerous as a communist country. The Britain was also not an option as it was no
Longer a helping superpower which had been replaced by the US in the wake of Second World
War (1939-45) and did not like to get entangled in inter-Commonwealth Conflicts. The US was
considered as the only option left which could deliver. At the other Side, the US quickly realized
that Pakistan was an important country In its strategic calculus due to its geographical location,
anti-communism orientation, Hardy manpower and being the largest Muslim country. But it was
disinterested in Pakistan as an ally because of embittered Indo-Pakistan rivalry and overall
Western World inclination to India. However, when US President Eisenhower perceived the
Urgency for the containment of the communist USSR and started search for allies in the Middle
East and South Asia, the importance of Pakistan was enhanced in the US eyes. The book argues
that there was a little chance for the regional pacts to provide A satisfactory defence structure for
the Middle East and no chance for Pakistan to be Ever defended against India. The real US
intentions were to bring more and more Countries under US-led Western influence to outbid the
same Soviet efforts in these Countries but not to provide them an unqualified security guarantee.
Therefore, these Regional pacts were irrelevant as well as dangerous for Pakistan. Irrelevant
because they Provided no security guarantee against India and dangerous because they resulted
in Increased Indian hostility and the Soviet annoyance especially in the Middle East. They Only
lessened Pakistan’s feelings of international isolation and made military and Economic aid
available to Pakistan during the first decade of its alignment. Further, by These pacts, the US did
Not mean to make Pakistan militarily and economically self-reliant. The book concludes that
although the US aid during this period did not enable Pakistan to divert its funds from defence to
development, yet it would have been Impossible for Pakistan to solve its security dilemma
without this military assistance. Pakistan and the Regional Pacts: A Study of Pakistan’s Foreign
Policy 1947-1954 by Dr. Mohammed Ahsen Chaudhry (1988) states that the internal and
external Dangers to the integrity of a state force it to find means for self-defence. The threat to
The integrity of several states with some common interests and objectives urges them to Form
regional pacts. Being a smaller state, engulfed with manifold internal problems And living in
aggressive external environment, it was unrealistic and impracticable for Pakistan to stand
neutral in world politics. To address its internal and external security problems Pakistan entered
into a Military pact with the US which provided military and economic assistance to the former
to enhance its defense and economic capabilities to meet aggression and grow Its economy.
Pakistan got allies which would support it in time of crisis and in its Disputes over Kashmir and
the Durand Line. In March 1956, the SEATO Council of Foreign Affairs declared that Pakistan’s
sovereignty extended up to the Durand Line. Its allies supported Pakistan’s legitimate stance on
Kashmir when discussion on it was Held in UN Security Council in February 1957. On
November 30, 1956, the US Government declared that any danger to Baghdad Pact nations
would be viewed with Utmost gravity. Due to this membership many Muslim countries stressed
upon India to Hold plebiscite in Kashmir. The Muslim countries, member of the Baghdad Pact,
Counted two thirds of the entire population of the Middle East and were willing to stand By
Pakistan in her hour of crisis.The book argues that the free flow of economic and military aid
made the Recipient country neither subservient to her benefactor nor reversed the process of
Asian Liberation. It saved the nations against possible communist domination which flourished
In conditions of poverty and hunger which the foreign assistance reduced. That many Countries
having military pacts with the US pursued their independent foreign policies And their pact
membership did not affect their relations with China and the Soviet Union. It concludes that
Pakistan considered any kind of aggression an evil thing which Must be resisted individually or
collectively. Pakistan joined the SEATO and the Baghdad Pact for the provision of the best
guarantee for the safety and promotion of Her national interests. The book counts some benefits
accrued by Pakistan out of its Alliances of 1950s but does not touch upon the cost incurred by
her.
A.Z. Hilali’s (2005) book US-Pakistan Relationship: Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan states that
the decade of 1980s changed the form of global and regional politics as it put the international
and regional security at risk. The USSR military incursion in Afghanistan and its presence there
was a part of the Cold War politics between the US and the USSR. This act of the USSR was
taken by the US-led Western capitalist world as its long-desired southward strategic expansion to
ultimately reach the warm water ports of the Indian Ocean. It was considered a mammoth
challenge to their strategic interests in the Indian Ocean, the Middle East and the Persian Gulf. It
was thought as a threat to capitalism and democracy and a proof of communist ideological
expansion. The sussess of the Soviet Union in Afghanistan would have posed extreme danger to
the geo-strategic interests of the US and its allies. This situation particularly affected the security
posture of Pakistan and the US. Therefore, these two countries emerged as the major actors in
this anti-Soviet Afghan war. The whole US-led capitalist world became part of this Afghan war
to contain the Soviet southward expansion. Adopting multilateral approach, the US bolstered its
regional defence capabilities in the region. The Reagan administration abandoned the Carter’s
delaying tactics and resorted to tharsh measures. Unwilling to annoy the Soviet Union and
keeping the past experience of its alliance with the US in view, Pakistani leadership did not take
the threat seriously not willing to make gestures of solidarity with the US. But later, Pakistani
leadership perceived the Afghan crisis a multi-pronged danger to its security considering the past
Soviet-Afghan-Indian postures against Pakistan. The Indian intentions and its superior military
power created serious security challenges for a smaller and weak Pakistan which it wanted to
address effectively with external help. The US had already made up its mind to contain the
Soviet Union to safeguard its geo-strategic interests which had been put in jeopardy due to
Afghan crisis. It was imperative for the US to involve Pakistan in any countermeasure for the
containment of the USSR. Thus, Pakistan and the United States were compelled strategically to
join hands against the Soviet Union. They became partners to deal with the Afghan crisis
substantially and effectively. The US strengthened defences of Pakistan by providing it ultra-
sophisticated military equipment and accelerated its economic development by 18 providing
substantial economic assistance. Pakistan provided facilities enough for successful
implementation of their anti-Soviet agenda. The weapons and other material assistance to the
resistant Afghan Mujahideen were channelized through Pakistani territory. Pakistan provided its
military bases to operate from there and allowed the deployment of US medium-range nuclear-
equipped bombers and ground troops when the situation intensified. Pakistan-US cooperation not
only contained the Soviet Union but also forced it out of Afghanistan in 1988 successfully. This
partnership provided Pakistan an opportunity to strengthen its relations with the West, Islamic
world and China. It was able to deal with both India and the Soviet Union effectively. It
accelerated its economic development with external economic assistance got in response to its
services. It consolidated its defences with external military assistance. The US provided Pakistan
with modern sophisticated military weapons including F-16 aircraft which bolstered its defences
and security. A weaker and unstable Afghanistan left behind could better serve Pakistan’s
interests in the coming days. The Soviet defeat removed a potential territorial and ideological
threat to Pakistan, killed its ethno-nationalist movement and infused among Pakistanis
confidence and psychological security. The book argues that these gains accompanied heavy
liabilities and long-term problems for Pakistan. This partnership infuriated the Soviet Union,
invited its wrath and created security risks for it as it might have brought disastrous
consequences in case of Soviet military retaliation against Pakistan as its troops were deployed
just along the Durand Line. The Soviets encouraged the separatist elements in NWFP and
Baluchistan, abandoned its neutral position on Durand Line and strongly supported Indian stance
on Kashmir. The book argues that the influx of millions of Afghan refugees brought multiple
troubles for Pakistan domestically. The country faced deteriorated law and order situation. It
strengthened Zia’s military regime. The transfer of funds and weapons worth billions of dollars
channelled through Pakistani ISI not directly by the US made Pakistan army officials, its society
and the Afghan Mujahideen commanders corrupt. The Soviet defeat benefitted the US and its
Western allies tremendously. The US took revenge of its defeat in Vietnam and made huge geo-
strategic gains. It completely changed the strategic environment of the world and South Asia.
With it 19 changed the US strategic perceptions and interests. It started reorienting its global
policies and increasing readjusting its geo-strategic and geo-political priorities. In new US
strategic calculus, the importance of Pakistan started dwindling. The US started considering
Pakistan more a liability rather than a strategic asset. With Pakistan considered no longer needed,
the nuclear issue resurfaced, and the US stopped Pakistan’s economic and military assistance by
invoking nuclear-related Pakistan specific Pressler Amendment in October 1990. Pakistan under
the military eleven years of Zia ul- Haq.Shahid Javed Burki and Craig Baxter with contributions
by Robert LaPorte, Jr. and Kamal Azfar. The Great Game: On Secret Service in High Asia US
title The Great Game: The Struggle for Empire in Central Asia is a book By Peter Hopkirk on
“the Great Game”, a series of conflicts in the 1800s between the UK and Russian powers to
control Central Asia.
Originally published: May 10, 1990
Author: Peter Hopkirk
Original title: The Great Game: On Secret Service in High Asia