Introduction
The cold war ended in 1989 and a mutual peaceful mood engulfed the universe as all parties ushered in a new era. The Berlin Wall was dismantled and a disintegration of the Soviet Union as well as new independence for the Eastern Europe countries was witnessed.
This was a brand new start after a volatile era that would have seen the use of weapons of mass destruction that made people live in fear. It was described as the ‘End of History’ based on the fact that the gross conflicts between nations had come to a halt. 1 This paper looks at how the United States relations have impacted and effected Pakistani – Indian relations in post cold war.
The cold war brought about distrust and suspicion between the United States, India, and Pakistan but the events of post cold war have changed this relationship. The United States and India have developed closer ties courtesy of factors that are directly influenced by individual leadership, domestic leadership and structural leadership.
These countries now cooperate at different levels that include diplomacy, economic development, as well as strategic development. The end of the cold war led these countries to rethink their stand against each other and they came to discover that they needed to cooperate in order to move forward. However, this has not been the case with Pakistan and India who still harbor grudges against each other to date.
The United States was in support for India during the cold war and this was the main reason why it provided it with military equipment for the war. However, the US failed to get the kind of support it expected from India, which was more bent towards forging ahead, and taking part in the war independently without relying on the super power.
India’s non-alignment was disputable since it was a weak country as compared to the American and Soviet Union countries. The 1970s saw India ditch the United States despite her efforts to support it and joined the Soviet Union side that seemed more successful.
The Soviet Union in turn supported India and protected it from its enemies. Pakistan at this time happened to be India’s archrival due to its support for the U.S. in its endeavors. Pakistan in return got favors from the United States that included military and economic assistance.
The U.S. embarked on a non-proliferation process that was aimed at denying South Asia the use of nuclear weapons. India was deeply agitated by this move that was not only hypocritical but also discriminatory since the West had a right to the nuclear weapons. 2
The end of the cold war saw the collapse of the Soviet Union and the unresolved conflicts between India and Pakistan over Kashmir persisted. Around this time, India still harbored strong hatred for the United States that seemed to stand between them and their prosperity.
To bridge the gap left by the Soviet Union, India decided to get into a closer relationship with the United States that was mutually beneficial as it hoped to get an upper hand over china, which was becoming powerful.
To date, the U.S. has refused to accept India’s terms on the use of nuclear weapons and this is seen as a factor that would dent a progressive relationship between these two in future. India would want to test its nuclear weapons and use nuclear fuel, demands that the U.S is reluctant to meet.
On the other hand, the United States has taken to supporting Pakistan reclaim her lost glory to appear among the most prosperous and stable countries of the world. This is among the impacts and effects that the U.S relations have on the Pakistani – Indian relations in post cold war. The price that Pakistan has to pay is to support U.S. policies in the region and take part in the mitigation of nuclear proliferation.
The U.S also hopes to end the enmity that has existed between India and Pakistan since time immemorial. The U.S – Pakistan relationship is however strained in that Pakistan has lost its trust for the U.S. it blames the U.S. for the violence that has escalated in the country in the recent past. 3
Pakistan got its independence in 1947 and continued to enjoy good relationships with the West. It was aligned with the Unites States and Britain and this led to its joining the British Commonwealth of Nations. It did not loose the Britons who headed some of its vital government branches like the military and high administration.
Britain thus continued to supply Pakistan with military weapons and offered training for its troops as well. Pakistan at a point felt that it was getting a raw deal from Britain in issues that involved their archrival, India. This saw its cessation of membership from the Commonwealth in 1972 though it later rejoined in 1989.
The United States regained its firm grip on Pakistan and made it a base for its military operations in South Asia. India and Pakistan went to war in 1965 and the U.S continued supporting it with military weapons.
This angered India and caused their relationship to strain further and in 1971, India managed to defeat Pakistan in the civil war. The then Pakistan president, Zulfiqar Bhutto started loosing faith in the U.S. citing that it was in a position to prevent the attack by India. He thus embarked on severing ties with the United States since he felt betrayed.
In 1981, President Ronald Reagan gave Pakistan US$3.2 billion that was to cover military and economic support after 9 years of their fall out. This donation was increased to US$4.0 in 1986 and the United States continued its military and economic support for Pakistani citing that its nuclear weapons were used for peaceful purposes only.
The year 1990 saw to the termination of this assistance by president George Bush as the nonproliferation agenda gained ground. Once again, Pakistan, just like India felt betrayed and discriminated upon by the U.S. and vowed to keep its nuclear weapons. 4
As the cold war came to a close, the United States lost interest in Pakistan and embarked on working out a relationship with India. This was followed by sanctions in 1990 against Pakistan to loose its nuclear weapons that ironically had been supplied by the same U.S. government. In addition, India, in the eyes of the U.S government had a greater potential for commercial, political, and strategic terms as compared to Pakistan.
The then U.S. president, Bill Clinton initiated negotiations with India and this further widened the gap between Pakistan and India as Pakistan felt sidelined. 5
Regardless of all this, India and Pakistan went ahead to test their nuclear weapons and the U.S did not have a choice but to lift the sanctions in 1998. In a twist of events, the U.S. renewed its interest in Pakistan as it yearned its help in combating the antiterrorist war against Afghanistan.
Bearing in mind the love-hate relationship that existed between the U.S and Pakistan, the move to renew the relationship was not taken kindly. The U.S. efforts to offer it military and economic assistance was rejected and termed as “peanuts” and in order to win it back, the aid had to be increased.
The U.S. did not have a choice and soon succumbed to Pakistan’s demands and increased the aid to $3.2 billions. By doing so, it could now count on Pakistan’s support in conquering Afghanistan in the nuclear weapon’s war. 6
In 1988, Moscow withdrew its troops from Afghanistan and Pakistan was thrown out in the cold by the U.S. since she was no longer important to their strategies. This situation did not last long since in 2001, the U.S embarked on a war against the Taliban and Al Qaeda and as usual charmed Pakistan into a relationship for convenience purposes. The U.S. needed the support of both India and Pakistan to meet its objectives.
It needed India to fight the “China Threat” and Pakistan for the fight against terrorism in Afghanistan. It therefore had to work out a harmonious relationship between these two rival countries if it was to succeed.
A conference to discuss nuclear weapons was suggested by Pakistan in 1991 but India declined to attend. Its main reasons were that Pakistan would renew its relationship with the U.S and India felt threatened. In addition, India felt that the nuclear weapons fight was not a South Asia thing but a global thing the U.S sought to distance itself from.
India felt that to beat china, which was coming up fast, it needed its nuclear weapons. More so, it felt that Pakistan would agree to give up its nuclear weapons in exchange for favors that included diplomatic victory and this would single India out as the only country that had illegal access to nuclear weapons. This would have put it at the center of military action in the war against possession of nuclear weapons. 7
The nuclear weapons war has brought about grievous disputes between India, Pakistan, and Kashmir even in post-cold war. There has also been a boundary dispute for about 50 years with Kashmir though a peaceful resolution is being sought. The presidents of Pakistan and India even met to resolve the issue though the progress has been minimal judging from the past bitter relationship the two countries have been through.
Kashmir, which is located in northwest India, has brought about a major conflict between India and Pakistan since the World War II ended. India and Pakistan were meant to be one country if Mahatma Gandhi’s wishes were followed though this was not to be.
Religious differences led to the split where India was predominantly Hindu and Pakistan Muslim. The Kashmir area issues that was predominantly Muslim were left unresolved though two months later; India was given control over it. Pakistan was not happy with the decision and this erupted into a war between the two countries.
Ceasefire was called in 1949 by the United Nations and the Kashmir territory was divided between India and Pakistan. This saw Pakistan take a third of it while the rest went to the Indian government. 8
Despite this division, India went ahead and took control over the whole of Kashmir in 1956 and this only resulted into another war with Pakistan. Most terrorist activities headed by Al Qaeda have been reported in Kashmir that is next to Afghanistan. Pakistan is in full support of these activities since it claims the Kashmir territory.
This has promoted the terrorist network that the U.S. has been fighting hard and this war is now termed as “Jihad” and this has pushed matters to their worst. The region is seen to promote terrorism since it hosts the Al Qaeda groups and acts as an escape for many of its leaders such as Osama Bin Laden. 9
The United States has been fighting a hard battle with Pakistan and India as it tries to come up with good relations that will brush all the differences these two countries have aside. President Obama’s recent visit to India is a clear indication that the United States has got over its ugly past with India and seeks to turn over a new page where the two countries will be able to cooperate.
This is a delicate issue though bearing in mind that Pakistan has been the U.S puppet during and after the cold war and thus India distrusts it. The border fight between the two countries over Kashmir notwithstanding.
The U.S relations with these two countries is focused on reconciliating them with the aim of fighting transnational terrorism that has taken root in Kashmir. This makes these relations even more sensitive and if the U.S is to continue enjoying the good relations it has embarked on, there is a great need to tackle the problems that come with their rivalry first.
Otherwise, if this does not happen, this will be a losing battle since peace will be elusive and instability will settle in. The U.S therefore has to be hands-on on the case of Kashmir and attempt to resolve the underlying differences between Pakistan and India. 10
Conclusion
The U.S is at the center of the conflict between India and Pakistan as evidenced by this paper that focuses on how U.S relations have impacted and effected Pakistani – Indian relations in post cold war.
It has repeatedly supported Pakistan against other countries in the Soviet Union for its personal interests. It has been picking and dropping it at will and it is a pity that this comes up as a major cause of the post cold war unrest witnessed in these two South Asian countries.
It is evident that U.S relations have impacted negatively on Pakistan and India. For the U.S to drop Pakistan in favor of India is seen as adoption of double standards where despite Pakistan remaining loyal, the U.S uses it for its convenience in anti-terrorism wars.
No wonder the two countries have remained at logger heads even in the Kashmir’s case and appear adamant to subscribe to the cessation call of nuclear weapons. The war against terrorism will therefore remain a dream if the U.S retains the same kind of relationship with Pakistan.
At the same time, the U.S may have succeeded in forming better ties with India but their varied stance on nuclear weapons could derail the progress since the goodwill generated could evaporate.
Bibliography
Chou, David. “U.S Policy toward India and Pakistan in the post-cold war era.” Tamkang Journal of International Affairs 27 (2003):1-30.
Fair, Christine. “Time for sober realism: Renegotiating U.S. Relations with Pakistan.” The Washington Quarterly, 2009, A32.
Ganguly, Sumit. “The Kashmir Conundrum.” Foreign Affairs 80 (2005): 40-45.
Kapur, Paul and Ganguly, Sumit. “The transformation of U.S. – India Relations. An explanation for the rapprochement and prospects for the future.” Asian Survey 47(2007): 642-656.
Keen, Emily. “India, Pakistan and Kashmir. What have been the recent developments in the dispute between India and Pakistan regarding Kashmir?” Batch News, 2004, A10.
Kronstadt, Alan. “Pakistan – U.S. Relations.” CRS Report for Congress, 33 (2008): 4-9. Web.
Laquer, Walter. “After the cold war. The euphoria did not last.” America Government, 5(2006): 2-3.
Pant, Harsh. “Pakistan and Iran’s dysfunctional relationship.” Middle East Quarterly, 2009, A16.
Rizvi, Hasan-Askari. “Analysis: Critical issues in India – U.S. Relations,” Daily Times, A new voice for a new Pakistan, 2010, E2.
U.S Library of Congress. “The United States – Pakistan.” Country Studies 1(2006): 1-3.
Footnotes
- Walter Laquer, “After the cold war. The euphoria did not last.” America Government 5 (2006): 2-3.
- Paul Kapur and Sumit Ganguly, “The transformation of U.S. – India Relations. An explanation for the rapprochement and prospects for the future.” Asian Survey 47(2007):642-656.
- Christine Fair, “Time for sober realism: Renegotiating U.S. Relations with Pakistan,” The Washington Quarterly, 2009, A32.
- U.S Library of Congress, “The United States – Pakistan.” Country Studies 1(2006): 1-3.
- Harsh Pant, “Pakistan and Iran’s dysfunctional relationship.” Middle East Quarterly, 2009, A16.
- Alan Kronstadt, “Pakistan – U.S. Relations,” CRS Report for Congress 33 (2008), 4-9.
- David Chou, “U.S Policy toward India and Pakistan in the post-cold war era.” Tamkang Journal of International Affairs 27 (2003):1-30.
- Sumit Ganguly, “The Kashmir Conundrum.” Foreign Affairs 80 (2005): 40-45.
- Emily Keen, “India, Pakistan and Kashmir. What have been the recent developments in the dispute between India and Pakistan regarding Kashmir?” Batch News, 2004, A10.
- “Hasan-Askari Rizvi. Analysis: Critical issues in India – U.S. Relations,” Daily Times, A new voice for a new Pakistan, 2010, E2.