During his maiden visit to Pakistan as secretary general of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Nato) Anders Fogh Rasmussen was quite upbeat, to some bewilderment of the people who still remember him as the Danish prime minister who had stoutly defended the publication of the Holy Prophet's blasphemous caricatures.
Then, the Pakistanis, as Muslims in many other countries, had violently protested the Danish government's nonchalance over an issue which so deeply hurt feelings in the Muslim World. We don't know if Rasmussen offered an apology to the people of Pakistan, even privately in his meetings with the host leadership, but he did exhibit quite a bit of strange exuberance as he projected a rosy future for the Pak-Nato relationship. He even proposed "a framework agreement between Pakistan and Nato through a joint political declaration which could boost their bilateral political and military co-operation".
Of course Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi was not a reluctant respondent; he too saw a productive future of the Pak-Nato relationship "beyond Afghanistan" - completely forgetting that only a few weeks back Prime Minister Gilani had returned empty-handed from Brussels without winning a normal trade concession from the European Community of which Nato is the military wing.
Is it a kind of CENTO or SEATO partnership that is being offered to Pakistan? Or, is it a 'do-more' pat on Pakistan's back as the endgame plays out in Afghanistan? Whatever the case Pakistan has the experience of both. The Cold War vintage defence pacts failed it when hard times came - recall how the Seventh Fleet didn't turn up in the Bay of Bengal when the very existence of Pakistan was at stake. Once-bitten-twice-shy Pakistan cannot and should not think of becoming member of an outfit which in some time to come may place it in an embarrassing position vis-à-vis its trusted friends and allies like China.
Probably, it was a kind of lollypop Secretary General Rasmussen dangled before the Pakistani leadership, the game was seen through as the visitor was asked to enlighten on the Nato's record in Afghanistan. How come the poppy cultivation which was completely eradicated by the Taliban government is now a flourishing business under the watchful eyes of the Nato commanders? And why the Nato troops have failed to interdict the cross-border movement of militants? Here too an attempt is being made to hand over the baby to Pakistan, or so it appears, even when pledges to stay on "beyond Afghanistan" are aplenty.
Terrorism is an international phenomenon and may persist with fluctuating intensity for quite some time to come. But, as we learn from our own experience, it tends to flourish where it is challenged. If Pakistan today is epicentre of terrorism one principal cause is the extra attention it has received. In case Pakistan accepted role of a vanguard of Nato's fight against international terrorism we are bound to have more of the same. So, for Pakistan a peaceful Afghanistan is more important than a Taliban-free Afghanistan.
Not that Pakistan would like to vouchsafe Taliban primacy in Afghanistan; but its perspective remains that war should come to an early end. Now that military solution is seen to be grounding a peaceful Afghanistan is possible by securing a grand reconciliation. Nato leadership would be doing great good to the war-weary Afghans by helping move forward the process of reconciliation instead of preparing for another spell of war.