Trump-Imran summit: the meeting of the unpredictables
They come from different backgrounds but US President Donald Trump and Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan have some strong similarities: both are populists and full of paradox. While Trump’s style of governance may be more arbitrary and whimsical, Khan is no less capricious. The two will be meeting in Washington next week and the outcome will be unpredictable.
It will be Khan’s first visit to a Western capital after coming to power. What is most unusual is that he will be accompanied by army chief General Qamar Bajwa during his July 22 meeting with President Trump.
It will be an unprecedented event even though the army remains the determinant of Pakistan’s foreign and security policy. One wonders if this is on Washington’s suggestion. The optics of the army chief sitting with the Prime Minister in DC will not go down well at home or abroad.
The visit comes at a time when the embattled US president is midway through his controversial first term in office. Under Trump, Pakistan’s relations with the US have hit a new low. The alliance between the US and Pakistan has long been tenuous, but tensions have heightened under his presidency.
Washington has suspended most of its military aid to Pakistan for its failure to act against terrorist groups. The Trump administration has also excluded Pakistani officers from the International Military Education and Training Program and was successful in getting Pakistan back on the global Financial Action Task Force’s grey list, which includes countries that have failed to curb terrorist financing.
In a tweet last year, Trump said: "The United States has foolishly given Pakistan more than $33 billion in aid over the last 15 years, and they have given us nothing but lies and deceit, thinking of our leaders as fools.”
A similar statement by the US president in November last year triggered a toxic twitter exchange between Trump and Khan.
Ironically, while the Afghan war may be the basic cause of the tension between Pakistan and America, it has also been the reason for the two estranged allies to stay together.
Zahid Hussain
In a series of tweets, Khan said that US aid to Pakistan was a ‘miniscule’ $20 billion, while the country lost 75,000 people and more than $123 billion fighting the “US War on Terror.” He also pointed to the supply routes Pakistan provides to American forces.
“Can Mr Trump name another ally that gave such sacrifices?” he said.
Interestingly just weeks after the face-off, Trump wrote a letter to Khan seeking Islamabad’s help in Afghan peace negotiations. Trump’s message came at a time when Zalmay Khalilzad, special US envoy, had made some significant progress in his talks with the Taliban in Doha. Trump’s tenor seems to have mellowed since. This is no surprise. This blow-hot-blow-cold game has become the hallmark of current Pakistan-US relations.
Ironically, while the Afghan war may be the basic cause of the tension between Pakistan and America, it has also been the reason for the two estranged allies to stay together. More than ever, the US appears serious in finding a political solution to the Afghan crisis and the interests of the two countries converge in finding a negotiated political settlement to the Afghan war. Pakistan has played a significant role in facilitating US talks with the Taliban which have now entered a critical stage.
Khalilzad is optimistic about reaching a peace deal before the end of this year. The optimism stems from some significant headway in negotiations made with the Afghan Taliban. But there is still a long way to go before one can hope to see the end to the longest war the US has ever engaged in.
One major challenge that Khalilzad faces is to get the Taliban to interact with the Kabul government. Pakistan’s role in persuading the Taliban to sit at the table with the Afghan government is critical. That is one of the reasons for Trump inviting the Pakistani Prime Minister to Washington despite the estrangement. Pakistan also remains strategically important for the United States because of fast changing regional geopolitics.
Surely, Pakistan’s role in Afghan reconciliation is extremely important, but it is difficult for Islamabad to meet Washington’s expectations of making the talks work. It will certainly be in Pakistan’s own interests to help facilitate a negotiated political settlement in Afghanistan.
The Washington meeting between the two populist leaders is likely to be candid and could help reduce tensions. But to expect that the estranged allies will go back to their old relationship is to expect too much.
