ISLAMABAD – America’s Pakistan policy shows Trump administration lacksgeostrategic thinking at highest levels according to *Russia Today*link.

America’s Pakistan policy shows top echelons of Trump administration lackthe geostrategic nous

America’s Pakistan policy shows White House ignorant of major geostrategicshift

The Trump administration recently froze some $255 million in aid toPakistan for continuing to harbour *“terrorists”* – in this case, AfghanTaliban, which was created years ago by Pakistan’s military intelligence,Inter-Service Intelligence, (ISI). In this year’s Pakistani election, ISIapparently supported the former cricket player and playboy, Khan – who isknown for his anti-American rhetoric.

In the past, Khan has been very vocal in his opposition to US efforts tostrike terrorist operations by drones inside Pakistan. His criticism hasextended to any US efforts to link foreign aid to Pakistani cooperation incounterterrorism efforts. The cut-off of aid suggested that the Trumpadministration was holding Khan to the same criteria for continuedassistance as previous US administrations have required of previousPakistani governments.

This became apparent in a State Department comment following the electionof Khan. The Trump administration* said that it expects Khan to do moreagainst* “externally-oriented terrorist groups,” namely the Afghan Taliban.

*“We have expressed our concern over the fact that terrorist proxy groupscontinue to be able to enjoy safe haven in Pakistan,”* the StateDepartment’s Alice Wells said. *“We are urging the government to do more tobring pressure to bear against these organizations and externally-orientedterrorist groups.”* Wells is the head of the South and Central Asian bureauat the State Department.

Wells made clear that *“externally-oriented terrorist groups”* not onlyincluded the Afghan Taliban but also the Haqqani Network, an affiliate ofthe Afghan Taliban, as well as the Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad,both of which also operate inside India.

The primary issue between the US and Pakistan revolves around the status ofthe Taliban in Afghanistan which continues to attack, almost with impunity,the heart of the US-created Afghan government as well as remote regions ofthe country. Since the Taliban’s near-elimination in October 2001, the USdiverted its attention to Iraq, causing the Taliban to reemerge to thepoint that the insurgent group today occupies more than 50 per cent ofAfghanistan.

While the neocons, particularly the US Ambassador to the United NationsNikki Haley, welcomed the sanctioning of Pakistan, this latest actionagainst Pakistan reflects a lack of fundamental geostrategic thinking atthe highest levels of the Trump administration.

Even before Khan’s election, Russia immediately filled the political andmilitary void which has been created as a result of increased tensionbetween Washington and Islamabad. Such concerns have now resulted in the USfreezing military assistance, which included anti-terrorism training.Moscow’s increased assistance has included training in counterterrorism,and Russia has been conducting joint military exercises with Pakistandespite years of discord between the two countries.

Despite Haley’s announcement of suspending assistance to Pakistan, Khansignalled a willingness to work with the US. Some commentators suggest theoverture may be a reflection of a potential relationship with Trump thatwould be more personality-driven, such as the one Trump experienced uponmeeting North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, to whom weeks earlier Trump hadreferred as *“rocket man.”*

Both Khan and Trump are unconventional leaders, neither of whom are careerpoliticians and have led an extravagant lifestyle and each, in his own way,exhibit a certain charisma.

*“As a new prime minister, Khan will politically benefit from suchgrandstanding against the unpopular United States,”* said ShamilaChaudhary, who served as director of Afghanistan and Pakistan at the WhiteHouse National Security Council. She was referring to Khan’s previousanti-American rhetoric and the *“bluntness”* in his political speeches,similar to that which Trump has exhibited in his political statements.According to Chaudhary, both Khan and Trump make politically bluntstatements for public consumption, showing a *“fearlessness of theimplications”* of what is said.

*“But the bones of the relationship will suffer,”* she said. *“Should thetwo countries go down this path, bureaucrats in their respectivegovernments will have to work extra hard to keep the relationship intactbehind the scenes but with little hope of policy progress.”*

Since being elected, Khan has also reached out to India and offered tostart a dialogue over long-simmering disputes, such as Kashmir. Remember,both are nuclear powers and for years have been at odds, resulting innumerous border confrontations between the respective militaries. It’s aprime reason Pakistan created the Taliban and other jihadist groups in thefirst place.

In response to Khan’s offer, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi similarlyexpressed a desire for talks. Khan has expressed interest in the twocountries coming to grips with the dire poverty that pervades in South Asiaand to undertake new trade agreements.

In pursuing a hardline stance against Pakistan, the Trump administration,unlike its counterparts in the Kremlin, has failed to notice the subtlegeopolitical shifts over time – shifts away from a US-led world order. Thisemergence is taking place in the East where the rise of an alternativeworld order now favours countries such as Turkey – which is at loggerheadswith the US – along with Russia, China, Iran and Pakistan.

Much of this evolving shift was accelerated by Trump dropping out of theJoint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or Iranian nuclear agreement, causingcountries which trade with Iran to decide whether they will side with theUnited States and the dominance it wields has over the Western world order,or team up as a group.

Much of the framework for such an alternative world order is emerging withthe combination of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, China’s OneBelt/One Road Initiative, along with the potential expansion of theEurasian Economic Union and the BRICS, comprised of Brazil, Russia, India,China and South Africa. Now, Turkey wants to join as well, which willcreate its own set of geopolitical issues for the US and NATO.

And this is where the Trump administration has missed the boat in lookingat the world as it is, rather than the way the neocons wish it to be asthey pursue an agenda for a universality of American domination.

As one retired general recently told this writer, we should not look at theworld through the prism of ideology but through the prism of reality.Clearly, the neocons haven’t got the memo.

What is emerging is a multi-polar world order which seeks an alternative torelying on the dominance of the US dollar in international businesstransactions and recognizes the importance of different cultures andpolitical systems under a new economic vision.

This observation was underscored by former MI6 officer Alastair Crooke inConflicts Forum Weekly Comment, titled ‘As Trump ‘goes nuclear’ againstIran and China, what’s next?’

Crooke pointed out that multipolarity is in direct opposition to Westernuniversalism.