The Pakistan–US relationship, marked by strategic convergence and mutual suspicion, has historically oscillated between partnership and estrangement. While periods of cooperation, particularly during the Cold War, the War on Terror, and post-9/11, have yielded significant military and economic gains for Pakistan, they have also engendered long-term political instability and security vulnerabilities. This editorial explores the shifting contours of this relationship, its strategic compulsions, and the enduring political and security repercussions for Pakistan. From dependency and distrust to a fragile recalibration, the trajectory of Pakistan–US ties continues to shape Islamabad’s foreign policy, civil-military dynamics, and internal security architecture in profound and evolving ways.
Early Alignment: Cold War Foundations and Military Alliances
To begin with, understanding the complexity of Pakistan–US relations requires revisiting the historical layers underpinning the alliance. The relationship began with promise during the early Cold War years, as Pakistan joined US-led military alliances such as SEATO and CENTO in return for military and economic aid. Notably, these early alignments signified Pakistan’s willingness to prioritize geostrategic alignment over non-alignment, diverging from the path taken by neighboring India. However, as the Cold War progressed, the partnership deepened during the Afghan-Soviet War in the 1980s, where Pakistan served as a frontline state in the US-backed jihad. Yet, this cooperation proved cyclical—each high point of engagement was followed by abandonment and sanctions, such as after the Soviet withdrawal and Pakistan’s 1998 nuclear tests. Consequently, a narrative of betrayal and distrust gradually took root in Islamabad, fueling skepticism toward US motives and intentions.
Post-9/11 Reengagement: Aid, Scrutiny, and Strategic Drift
Following this historical foundation, the events of 9/11 brought renewed urgency to the alliance, transforming Pakistan into a key non-NATO ally in the US-led War on Terror. This rekindled cooperation resulted in billions of dollars in aid, enhancing Pakistan’s strategic relevance. However, it also brought unprecedented scrutiny—Washington’s use of drone strikes in tribal areas and accusations of double-dealing eroded trust. The killing of Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad in 2011, despite over $33 billion in US aid since 2002, severely strained relations and reinforced doubts in Washington. Over time, America’s strategic pivot to the Indo-Pacific and closer defense ties with India further reduced Pakistan’s geopolitical weight. In response, Islamabad has gradually shifted toward Beijing, seeking deeper economic and security cooperation. This recalibration is not merely diplomatic; it carries long-term consequences for Pakistan’s internal stability and global positioning.
Political Dependency and Sovereignty Dilemmas
At the core of the political repercussions lies the erosion of sovereign decision-making due to sustained dependency on US military and financial assistance. During key phases, such as the War on Terror, Pakistan was pressured to align its internal security priorities with Washington’s counterterrorism agenda. As a result, domestic policymaking was frequently subordinated to US strategic interests. A prime example is the Kerry-Lugar-Berman Act of 2009, which tied aid to civilian control over the military and specific counterterrorism benchmarks. While intended to strengthen democracy, it was widely seen in Pakistan as an infringement on sovereignty. This perception aggravated civil-military tensions and fueled anti-American sentiments across society. Ultimately, such conditional partnerships left Pakistan politically fragmented and increasingly wary of foreign leverage in shaping national priorities.
Distortion of Civil–Military Balance
In addition to political interference, the Pakistan–US relationship has contributed to the distortion of civil–military relations within the country. Historically, the United States has prioritized engagement with Pakistan’s military establishment, often at the expense of democratic institutions. This military-first approach—particularly evident during the Cold War and War on Terror, channeled the bulk of aid and diplomatic support directly to the armed forces. For instance, between 2002 and 2011, over 70% of US assistance to Pakistan was directed towards military and security-related programs, sidelining democratic development. Consequently, civilian governments were marginalized in key decision-making processes, especially on foreign and security policy. Over time, this skewed relationship entrenched military dominance in governance and foreign relations, reducing civilian oversight and delaying democratic consolidation. Therefore, while the military benefitted from strategic alignment with the US, the broader democratic framework remained underdeveloped and vulnerable.
Security Fallout: Rise in Terrorism and Militancy
Equally important are the security repercussions, most notably the surge in domestic militancy that followed Pakistan’s partnership in the War on Terror. As Pakistan’s tribal regions became militarized, drone strikes and operations against insurgents also inflamed public resentment. In many instances, local populations viewed the state as complicit in foreign aggression, creating fertile ground for radicalization. According to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan killed over 400 civilians between 2004 and 2014, fueling widespread anger and distrust. The rise of groups like Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) can be seen as a direct consequence of these dynamics, illustrating the internal backlash to externally dictated policies. Furthermore, repeated drone strikes caused civilian casualties, undermining the legitimacy of counterterrorism campaigns and complicating relations between the state and its citizens. These developments plunged the country into prolonged internal conflict, weakening national cohesion and overextending the security apparatus.
Strategic Insecurity and Shifting Alliances
Moreover, the changing regional strategic landscape—particularly the US pivot toward India—has intensified Pakistan’s sense of strategic insecurity. The burgeoning US-India defense and economic partnership has been perceived in Islamabad as a threat to regional strategic equilibrium. In 2016, the signing of the US–India Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement (LEMOA) symbolized a deepening military alliance, further alarming Pakistani policymakers. This perception has, in turn, accelerated Pakistan’s tilt toward China, exemplified by the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and increased military cooperation. While this realignment offers new avenues for economic development and strategic support, it also risks reproducing past patterns of over-reliance, this time on Beijing rather than Washington. The lack of diversification in foreign partnerships may further constrain Pakistan’s diplomatic maneuverability. In effect, Islamabad’s efforts to counterbalance US disengagement could inadvertently lead to new forms of dependency, raising critical questions about long-term strategic autonomy.
Impact on Diplomatic Image and Global Perception
Finally, the reputational cost of being portrayed as a “duplicitous ally” has significantly damaged Pakistan’s standing on the global stage. Incidents such as the Osama bin Laden raid and allegations of harboring militant proxies have reinforced a negative image of Pakistan in international discourse. For instance, following the 2011 Abbottabad operation, U.S. officials openly questioned Pakistan’s commitment to counterterrorism, fueling international skepticism. As a result, Pakistan has found it increasingly difficult to attract foreign investment, engage equitably in multilateral forums, or diversify its diplomatic relationships. These perceptions have also contributed to increased scrutiny from global watchdogs like the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), limiting economic inflows and compounding Pakistan’s financial challenges. Thus, beyond immediate political or security concerns, the Pakistan–US relationship has long-term implications for the country’s global legitimacy and economic viability.
Taken together, the Pakistan–US relationship serves as a textbook example of transactional diplomacy mischaracterized as strategic partnership. Though Pakistan and the US have occasionally realized short-term gains, financial aid for Islamabad, military cooperation for Washington, the cumulative impact has largely been detrimental to Pakistan’s political sovereignty, democratic evolution, and internal stability. The persistent asymmetry and underlying mistrust in the relationship have stymied meaningful policy alignment and sustainable engagement. Going forward, both sides must seek a more balanced and transparent relationship grounded in mutual interests and respect, rather than dependency and coercion.
In conclusion, the Pakistan–US relationship, once framed as vital to regional and global security, now stands at a pivotal juncture. While previous decades of cooperation provided short-term advantages, they also entrenched patterns of dependency, security instability, and diplomatic marginalization for Pakistan. The emerging global order necessitates a fundamental reassessment of this dynamic—one that emphasizes diversified diplomacy, institutional resilience, and national sovereignty. As Islamabad deepens ties with Beijing and re-engages with other global actors, it must internalize lessons from past entanglements. Ultimately, only a self-reliant and democratic Pakistan can negotiate partnerships on its own terms and ensure lasting stability both at home and abroad
