ISLAMABAD – The row of the telephonic conversation between Pakistan’s primeminister Imran Khan and US Secretary of State Michael Pompeo was anythingbut expected in Washington DC. Any other chief executive of a developingcountry would have joyously played upon the positive nature of the readout.

Imran Khan did not. Taking exception to “the factually incorrect statement”issued by US Department of State, Pakistan’s spokesperson pointedly stated,“There was no mention at all in the conversation about terrorists operatingin Pakistan.” The US expectedly stood by its side of the story. The episodeleaves much to be unpacked. Firstly, it reflects on the US habit oftwisting or lying about the telephonic conversation or closed-door meetingswith other leaders.

In January 2011, President Barack Obama insisted on the “simple principle”of diplomatic immunity for Raymond Allen Davis who was a contractor for theUS government. In a bid to pressurize Pakistan publically, Obama went greatlengths to claim special status for the US citizen who had killed twoinnocent people in Lahore. “If it starts being fair game on our ambassadorsaround the world, including in dangerous places where we may havedifferences with those governments … that’s untenable.

It means they can’t do their job. And that’s why we respect theseconventions and every country should as well,” the Associated Press hadquoted the 44th US president as demanding. Who can recall the saga betterthan Shah Mahmood Qureshi, who was the foreign minister at the time? Theastute politician and statesman would have thrown a hint during thefarewell call on by the US Ambassador, David Hale, who would now be postedas Undersecretary for Political Affairs at the Department of State.

When Raymond Davis shot two Pakistanis dead, Shah Mahmood Qureshi wasreporting to PPP co-chairman Asif Ali Zardari who is known for anything butfair play and straight talk. The deal resulting in the release of the UScontractor remains shrouded in mystery and so are the legal questionsarisen thereof.

As much as Imran Khan’s vivid response sends a strong message toWashington, the episode also has a lesson for the country’s chiefexecutive. When the protocol required that the secretary of state mustinteract with his country, then why did the prime minister not respect it?Had the dispute arisen then, there would have been a senior level channelto sort the matter out.

Admitted that the State Department downplayed the objection and highlightedthe positive nature of the telephonic conversation, Imran Khan’s eagernessto adopt a hands-on approach to foreign policy especially relations withthe United States undermines the role of the foreign minister.

Unlike Pervez Musharraf, Asif Ali Zardari and Nawaz Sharif, the primeminister can follow the standard protocol of complementarity or equality.Even if the PTI chairman wants to engage with certain important countriesdirectly, he must interact with his counterpart, e.g. President DonaldTrump or Vice President Mike Pence in the case of America.

By no means, should it be necessary for the prime minister to chair ameeting with US Secretary of State Michael Pompeo’s during his visit onSeptember 5. At best, a courtesy call on along with Ambassador Hale shouldbe enough. Instead of micromanaging the affairs, the foreign ministry canbe strengthened by empowering the foreign minister and the career diplomats.

On the bright side, the US side has received the message that it can’ttwist the contents of a meeting and still get away with it. Secondly,Washington can’t engage in diplomacy as well as public bullying at the sametime.

Thus, the September 5 visit of former CIA director and top US diplomat willbe anything but a routine visit to bash the hosts. The US dignitary mightnot be visiting Islamabad, had Imran Khan decided to attend the UN GeneralAssembly session. The prime minister has prioritized Pakistan’s domesticchallenges over sojourn to the US and rubbing shoulders with the globalpolitical elite.

The controversy also signifies the US frustration with Afghanistan.Undeniably, the previous leaders have been promising Washington for morethan they wanted to deliver or had the capacity to materialize. Thus, overthe past 17 years, Washington found it convenient to blame it on Islamabadinstead of making a rational assessment and viable stratagem.

Michael Pompeo is a distinguished official groomed in US bureaucraticsystem. Being the former CIA director, he has a deeper understanding ofissues, as well as capacity, visualize the trends than his predecessors RexW Tillerson or even John Kerry. He has proven significantly successful inbuilding a bridge between the US and North Korea.

His decision to be the first foreign dignitary to visit Islamabad afterformation of the new government reflects upon the significance Washingtonattaches to engaging with Islamabad’s new leadership. If the Imrangovernment pragmatically demonstrates the will to be a US partner in peace,there is a reason for hope. From resumption of strategic cooperation todelisting from FATF watch-list and seeking the IMF bailout funds, Pakistanis in dire need of America’s helping hand. It’s neither the time to be rashnor apologetic.

By: Naveed Ahmed