Pakistan’s Relationship with USA on Recent Events”When diplomacy ends, war begins” – (Hitler)The quote above precisely describes the intensity of therelationship between Pakistan and the USA. The relationship between the twocountries can be called bilateral. A stone was set in history, when UnitedStates extended its hand towards Pakistan right after six days of independencein 1947, making Pakistan one of the first nations to create relations with thenew state. Pakistan has played a major role in allying with the United Statesduring the cold war against Russia and has been a fundamental participant inthe SEATO and CENTO organizations. The relations trailed downhill during the 1970’s and United States,under the Foreign Assistance Act, deferred most of its economic assistance to Pakistan.
After the terrorist attack on the World Trade Centre in September, 2001, Pakistanhad become one of the major ally’s in the war in terror with the United States.The era from 2000 to 2015 was a continuous trench of ups and downs for therelationship between Pakistan and United States. In August, 2017, Donald Trump (current president of UnitedStates) devised a new strategy against the Afghan Wars and also criticized Pakistanfor playing a part in protecting the terrorists. “The Pakistani peoplehave suffered greatly from terrorism and extremism. We recognize thosecontributions and those sacrifices, but Pakistan has also sheltered the sameorganizations that try every single day to kill our people”, Trump said. (Wikipedia) This speech given bytrump was seen as a threat by Pakistani people and protestation was held acrosscountry.
The relationship hit a rock bottom when president Trumpannounced that Jerusalem would now be the capital of Israel. This awakenedanti-American feelings between Pakistanis leading to mass protests in differentcities of Pakistan. The Future of Pak-US Relations:The future of Pak-U.S is unclear as Islamabad is beingpressurized. For the past few months, U.S representatives have been pressurizingand criticizing Islamabd for protecting the terrorists and for not taking anappropriate action against the Haqqani Network. (Tikhonova)The White House is said to consider alternatives tostrong-arm Pakistan into battling terrorists on their own land.
A few examinersrecommend that Islamabad could be pronounced as a sponsor of terrorism by theU.S. Then, the Trump organization has openly indicated that it is thinkingabout removing Pakistan of its non-NATO partner status. (Tikhonova) This was the opinion voiced by U.S.
Best services for writing your paper according to Trustpilot
Secretary of State RexTillerson on Tuesday, under 24 hours after Trump disclosed his Afghanmethodology;”We have some leverage that’s been discussed in terms of theamount of aid and military assistance we give them, their status as a Non-NATO alliancepartner. All of that can be put on the table.” (Iqbal)Tillerson cautioned that Pakistan’s status as a favoredmilitary partner of the U.S. will be expelled on the occasion that it keeps onharboring terrorists on its dirt, a claim Islamabad has since quite a while agorejected. Furthermore, Tillerson focused on that Washington would “workwith Pakistan affirmitavely” if it changes its way to deal with themilitants. (Tikhonova)Conclusion:Pak-US relations have come to their least since Trumpuncovered his Afghan methodology, and now the Trump organization’s harsher talktowards Pakistan and endeavors to strong-arm the country will probably pushIslamabad to reach towards both China and Russia. (Tikhonova)On account of further crumbling in Pakistan-US relations,Islamabad could close down these supply routes as a countermeasure against theTrump organization’s change in Afghan policy, recommended Arif Rafiq, fromt theMiddle East Institute in Washington, to The New York Times.
In the event thatIslamabad cut access to these supply routes, it would provoke the U.S. to lookfor less compelling routes that would likely involve extra money related costsand a conceivable death toll among U.S. troops. With the supply routes inPakistan, the U.
S. could make its war procedure in Afghanistan less convolutedthan it already is. (Tikhonova)
