Move towards realism

Not too infrequently are international summits overshadowed by the participants' bilateral encounters, which from Pakistan's point of view was the recently concluded Nuclear Security Summit hosted by South Korea. Prime Minister Gilani's meeting with President Obama was the highest-level contact between their governments since the clandestine get-Osama CIA attack last May, followed by an even more grave violation of Pakistan's airspace by the American air force which carried out a murderous strike on the Salala checkpost in November.
Given that the meeting took place as Pakistan's parliament was struggling to come to grips with the critical issue of defining the terms of engagement with the US in the framework of their co-operative alliance against terrorism, it was of vital interest to our people and government. And it was important also for the Obama administration given that the ice besetting the bilateral relationship was refusing to thaw making drawdown of its forces in Afghanistan rather problematic. Likewise, if President Obama was expected to keep his chin up or he was acting brave and confident in this US election year, Prime Minister Gilani too could not show a bendy or a floppy posture.
So, the encounter was quite a tense affair, the interlocutors being cautious and prudent in their expressions. President Obama did appreciate the Pakistan government's move to have its parliament endorse its Parliamentary Committee on National Security's recommendations but also left no one in doubt about his administration's position that respect for Pakistan's sovereignty has to be balanced with the United States' security concerns. Simply stated, he agreed to accept Pakistan's demand that the terms of engagement for the future must be clearly defined and strictly adhered to, but insisted on persevering in the relentless use of drones. Of course, the Gilani-Obama encounter didn't result in any breakthrough, nor was it expected. It wasn't also a fiasco either as some would like us to believe given the difficult situation that has come to obtain as the Afghan conflict enters its endgame scenario. That the two sides are talking and channels of communication remain open is no less important for both the countries.
In fact, the meeting between the top leadership of Pakistan and the United States on the sidelines of the Nuclear Security Summit in Seoul does bring out the reality of tough choices before Pakistan: to break off with the United States or to continue in that mode of a better defined and transparent co-operative relationship. The recommendations by PCNS do reflect that kind of comprehension but the hardline the parliamentary opposition has taken now - apparently more to appease the gallery than embracing the ground realities - is simply out of tune with the grim scenario that obtains in and around Pakistan. Its continuing refusal to be mindful and cognisant of the enormity of challenges facing the country tends to unnecessarily raise people's expectations. Having lost so much in terms of life and material seeking people to acquiesce in giving a free hand to terrorists is mind-boggling. The issues of foreign policy need to be steered realistically and dispassionately. Do we realise that even China, one of Pakistan's most trusted foreign friends, is as much wary of the al Qaeda and its surrogate Taliban, as the United States and the rest of the developed world?
However that said we cannot overlook the imperative of placing our relationship with the United States on an even keel. Instead of transactional relations, Pakistan and the United States must commit to a long-term bilateralism based on principles of mutual respect and interests. No doubt it is a difficult test both for Pakistan and the United States but with eyes set on a wider horizon for a wide-ranging co-operative relationship, they should be able to find the way ahead. At the same time, the parliament should contend with its job of giving a broader outline for future ties with America and leave the rest of the work for the Executive. Given Pakistan's increasing vulnerability to global pressures, particularly in terms of economic and security challenges, it has to maintain viable ties with international organisations including the World Bank, the IMF, and the European Union which in turn expect matching reciprocity in areas of their interest.
At another level - and no less critical to Pakistan's strategic and security interests - is the outcome of this second nuclear Security Summit. May be Prime Minister Gilani didn't broach the issue of civil nuclear technology with President Obama, but the summit communiqué handsomely compensates. It tends to shift the focus from bilateral and multilateral sources of nuclear technology to the United Nations and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). In fact, South Korea hosted the summit more to showcase its potential as a nuclear-technology supplier than to be the venue of security-centric discussion and debate. If at all, security of nuclear materials and facilities had to be discussed, it should have highlighted the need to strengthen N-safety and risk-free functioning of nuclear plants, a subject which deserves serious notice in the wake of the Fukushima nuclear plant incident. So, Pakistan rightly pointed out, in the preamble of its national statement at the summit that given the IAEA's extensive nuclear framework there is "no need to create new, parallel (read Nuclear Suppliers Group) institutions or mechanisms for nuclear security". The message that emerges from the Seoul summit is that nuclear power being a relatively cleaner form of energy the world simply should not ignore it as it will be something we have to live with for some time.