Pakistan’s foreign policy is in desperate need of consistency

In a world of eternally shifting alliances and new emerging values, there is a clear need for a focused, thoughtful approach to foreign policy, especially in developing countries. The role of strong institutions here is so vital for sustainable socio-economic development, and to ensure that the rule of law prevails.

It is this fundamental ingredient of governance that Pakistan has always lacked. Many shortcomings that we observe in the country’s foreign policy are due to the utter lack of durable institutions that derive strength from the constitution of the country. Sadly, the rule of law has passed Pakistan by since its inception.

This weakness in correctly assessing and formulating an approach consistent with Pakistan’s core interests and compatible with ground realities has been reflected time and again in pursuing objectives that have cost the nation dearly. Kashmir is one such example.

Pakistan claims to be uncompromisingly supporting the cause of greater autonomy for the people of Kashmir. But what has been achieved after all these wars, these military confrontations and permanent hostility towards India? Kashmiris have lost their separate status as a state and their identity. And the dream of realizing the goal of self-determination for Kashmiris has become an unfulfilled ambition. Had Pakistan’s parliament not been made totally ineffective in crafting policies in sectors such as foreign affairs, defence and internal security, the results might have been different today. The issue of Kashmir could have been resolved long ago through robust negotiations with the full backing of a genuinely elected parliament.

Not having any consistency or clarity in policy has its costs. It can be argued that Pakistan has fallen short of its potential to forge seriously robust ties with the wider world.

Rustam Shah

According to the World Bank, the potential of bilateral trade between India and Pakistan is more than $45 billion. Imagine the impact on the economy of such a colossal amount of trade between two neighbours that share land, rivers, mountains, languages, culture, ethnicity and deep and enduring linguistic and cultural links.

The many somersaults that Pakistan took in responding to the Afghan crisis since 1979 is also a sad commentary on how it conducted its foreign policy. Supporting the Mujahideen in the 1980’s, aligning itself with the west, recognizing and backing the Taliban government in the late 90’s, abandoning the Taliban after 9/11-- these are just the manifestations of a wholly inconsistent policy that relies on short-term goals with no foresight for a long-term approach.

For this reason, neighbours and countries think before entering into long-term engagements with a country that is historically prone to changing its policies at the behest of others. For this reason, although Pakistan has hosted millions of Afghan refugees on its soil, there is little sympathy for Islamabad in Afghanistan today.

Because institutions have never taken root and real genuine civilian supremacy has never been ensured, policies have been formulated mostly by powerful individuals leaving neighbours and others guessing what Islamabad’s response will be to any development in the region or beyond. 

Not having any consistency or clarity in policy has its costs. It can be argued that Pakistan has fallen short of its potential to forge seriously robust ties with the wider world. It faces huge challenges like climate change, population growth, poverty, unemployment, declining standards of education and air, land and water pollution. Only a foreign policy that reflects the aspirations of the people, promotes national interests and has the approval of an elected government can help create an environment in which to pursue these goals and achieve real progress and prosperity.

The Pakistani military establishment, judiciary and politicians should focus on advancing the cause of the rule of law, civilian supremacy and creating durable institutions. Therein lies the salvation of the country. Only then can an independent foreign policy, based on supreme national interests, be formulated and executed.