The Reluctant Ally: How Trump’s potential travel ban will affect US-Pakistan relationship

My article for TRT Global, March 11, 2025

 https://trt.global/world/article/571cb83dadd5

The reluctant ally: How Trump’s potential travel ban will affect US-Pakistan relationship

The Trump team includes many known pro-India and Indian-origin faces, who are openly hawkish on Pakistan and its all-weather ally, China.

By Amir Zia

Many Pakistanis wait with bated breath for the Trump administration to announce its new travel ban list that may or may not include their country among those whose citizens would be barred from coming to the United States.

There is nothing official yet, but a Reuters story, dated March 5, quoted three anonymous sources saying that along with Afghanistan, Pakistan “would” also be recommended for inclusion on the travel ban list. Several other Muslim-majority countries could also be on the list, but their names were not disclosed.

The story came as a rude shock to Pakistan, especially its government, ruling elite, and well-to-do citizens. After all, Pakistan has a history of working closely with the United States, and its English-speaking elite has always been overwhelmingly pro-West.

Going to America for education, work, setting up businesses, buying assets and eventually settling there has remained a dream of many educated, professional and well-heeled Pakistanis as the United States never shut its doors on Pakistan completely. Despite many ups and downs in relations, the security establishments of the two countries usually maintained close contact.

The travel ban story was all the more surprising for Pakistanis as only a day before, President Donald Trump in his first address to the joint Congress session on March 4, thanked Pakistan for the arrest of a Daesh-K terrorist kingpin.

On the CIA’s tip, Pakistani authorities tracked and arrested Mohammed Sharifullah alias Jafar from the southwestern Balochistan province near its Afghan frontier and handed him over to the Americans.

Among many others, Jafar also stands accused of masterminding the deadly terrorist strike at Kabul Airport on August 26, 2021 that killed 13 US soldiers and 170 Afghans.

Trumpian thanks

The Shehbaz Sharif government was still basking in the glow of “Trumpian thanks” and news channels still playing up the news when the possibility of the inclusion of Pakistan to the travel ban list dawned on them.

But according to two former Pakistani diplomats, there was no need for over-excitement on Trump’s note of thanks. The Reuters story should also be seen with caution, they say.

“I don’t have any credible information about this (travel ban), barring the Reuters story,” Sherry Rehman, a former Pakistani ambassador to the United States, told this scribe. “I don’t think it is possible. It would be a surprise if this happens… In my view there won’t be any blanket ban on Pakistan.”

Masood Khan, another former senior diplomat who served in the United States as Pakistan’s ambassador, said that after reading the Reuters story, he prayed that this should not happen. “It would be a very negative decision and would have a negative fallout.”  

Pakistan holds its relationship with Washington crucial. The United States is not just the country’s biggest export-destination but its support is vital for Islamabad in dealing with multilateral financial institutions like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. Pakistan’s ongoing IMF programme would not have been possible without Washington’s support.

Yet, Pakistan’s relations with the United States have a history of going from one extreme to the other. From once being part of the anti-communist alliances of CENTO and SEATO, and dubbed as the most allied ally to the most sanctioned and bombed one, Pakistan has seen it all.

Pakistan partnered with the United States during the Cold War and resisted the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and then again sided with Washington in the so-called war against terrorism in that land-locked country following the 9/11 terrorist strikes on US soil.

Following the withdrawal of the US-led NATO forces from Afghanistan in August 2021, Pakistan apparently lost importance for Washington.

A test for Pakistan

All through President Joe Biden’s term, relations between the two countries remained mostly cold despite occasional instances of cooperation that included Pakistan’s help during the withdrawal of the US-led NATO forces from Afghanistan. 

However, towards the fag-end of its term, the Biden administration slapped sanctions on three Pakistani companies, including a state-run entity, for assisting in the country’s missile programme.

To Pakistan’s surprise, the Americans declared its long-range missile programme a threat to the United States, although all of Islamabad’s defence preparations are directed towards one adversary: India.

That was the reason that a “thank you” from President Trump meant a lot for the Shehbaz government.

The second reason for the Shehbaz government to enthusiastically welcome Trump’s gesture has more to do with its symbolism for domestic politics.

The Shehbaz government faces bitter opposition from many influential Pakistani Americans who are upset over the jailing of former premier Imran Khan, who remains a popular figure in Pakistani politics.

Pro-Imran Khan Pakistanis, both in the country and abroad, expect Trump to use his good offices for his release and have been actively lobbying for this.

However, Pakistan’s challenge of maintaining smooth relations with the United States is far bigger and graver than to be interpreted by a mere thank you or even if Pakistan’s name does not appear on the US travel ban list.

There are many more serious points of divergence of interests between the two countries than convergence. Pakistani diplomats admit that their country’s bandwidth of relations with Washington has squeezed tremendously following the US withdrawal from Afghanistan.

Apart from old challenges in relations between the two countries, including US concerns regarding Pakistan’s missile and nuclear programmes, its close strategic ties with China, and Islamabad’s festering relations with arch-rival India, which is now a strategic partner of the United States, the Trumpian era could throw surprises at Islamabad.   

Under the Trump presidency, the pressure can suddenly mount on Pakistan because of his unconventional and aggressive style of diplomacy on any of the old issues or a new one that the United States deems to address. Currently, Pakistan may be a low priority of the United States, but this can change dramatically if the US president decides to focus on Pakistan in particular or South Asia in general, at any given time.  

Therefore, the Trumpian era is likely to test Pakistan’s diplomacy to the hilt.  

Pro-India, anti-Pakistan

A new factor that intensifies Pakistan’s US challenge is the fact that the Trump team includes many known pro-India and Indian-origin faces who hold top positions. Some of these team members are openly hawkish on Pakistan and its all-weather ally, China.

For example, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, National Security Adviser Mike Waltz and CIA Director John Ratcliffe – are all anti-China hawks. Pakistan is likely to face more pressure from Washington on the scope of its partnership with China on the diplomatic chessboard.

In the past, while Rubio proposed an anti-Pakistan and pro-India bill in the Senate, Waltz - a military veteran - had pushed for intensifying pressure on Pakistan to curb the alleged cross-border terrorism – a line in sync with the Indian position.   

Among the opening shots of Ratcliffe as the new CIA director was to exert pressure on Pakistan which led to the arrest of Sharifullah.  

Tulsi Gabbard, director of the National Intelligence that manages the 18 US intelligence organisations, is the first Hindu to serve in Congress and seen as a pro-India hawk. She has no ancestral connection with India, but enjoys close ties with its Hindu nationalists. Gabbard’s Indiana-born mother converted to Hinduism and gave her children Hindu names. 

Gabbard had been critical of Pakistan during its military standoff with India in 2019.    

Then, there are several other Indian-Americans holding important positions in the Trump team – from Kash Petal as FBI director to Ricky Gill serving as senior director for South and Central Asia at the National Security Council. They also include Kush Desai, deputy press secretary in the White House, and Saurab Sharma in the Presidential Personnel Office, indicating that the 4.5 million-strong Indian diaspora is a strongly represented minority in the new Trump administration.  

This strong presence of Indian-Americans in the US power corridors is the newest challenge for Pakistan in its relations with the United States.

How Pakistan, with its diminishing influence and mounting hurdles, will make its voice heard in Washington remains to be seen.  

For this, probably the Shehbaz government needs to connect with the Pakistani diaspora in the West and bring political stability at home to fight the country’s case effectively on the world stage.

Ends

 

Education & Media: Tools of National Cohesion

By Amir Zia
Monthly Hilal
December 2022

Without a common education system, and a common and shared story of our history, the nation building task would remain incomplete and the goal of national cohesion and unity elusive. 

It was sometime in 2010 when I had veteran broadcaster, play-write and one of the pioneer team members of the Pakistan Television, Agha Nasir sahib as a guest on one of my current affairs shows, in which he briefly spoke about the initial days of radio and television in Pakistan and the kind of role they played to promote the Pakistani identity and national cohesion.

Yes, we all know that soon after the partition of British India in August 1947, Pakistan was struggling to set-up new institutions and expand the ones which already existed. Resources were scarce and the challenge of making the new country work and stand on its feet was humongous. In the initial years of independence, Radio Pakistan was the only nerve-center of electronic media in the country, attracting a galaxy of creative minds, including writers, poets, drama artists, singers and musicians. The who’s who of Pakistan’s intellectual world were associated with Radio Pakistan, carved out of the All India Radio. The Pakistan Television made its entry sometime in 1964. Agha Nasir had served both the institutions in their formative phase.
One of the key challenges for the nascent state and its pioneers was countering the Congress propaganda which banked on oneness, the commonality and shared culture and values of the people living under British rule in South Asia. For the Indian National Congress and its followers, the creation of Pakistan was just an aberration in history that would soon be corrected.
But for the founding fathers of the new Muslim homeland, it was the sharp difference and contrast in the religious and cultural values of Muslims and Hindus that led to the creation of Pakistan. And that point had to be asserted and reasserted on every front. The state-run Radio Pakistan and then later, the Pakistan Television were the vanguards of this battle of narratives that raged full blown in the initial decades of independence.
According to Agha Nasir sahib, there was a drive to carve out a separate Pakistani identity in every field. “We even coined new Urdu words for the broadcast medium,” he said. For actor, it was adakar, voice artist, sadakar,musician, musiqar vvvvv, song-writer, naghma-nigar, director, hidayatkar etc., the veteran broadcaster recalled.
This small anecdote shows the passion and the kind of effort the first-generation of Pakistanis put into developing this country on each and every front, focusing even on the small details, like thinking up new words and phrases so that the baggage of British India can be thrown away altogether. We had mega problems, but there was hope and drive. The objective of nation-building was clear. And in the task of nation-building, concepts, perceptions, ideology and narrative take precedence over brick-and-mortar. Yes, only big visions and dreams can make brick-and-mortar work for the nations.
In the initial formative decades of Pakistan, despite the presence of the fringe centrifugal political forces, the dominant narrative stressed on developing the Pakistani identity and the uniqueness of the world’s biggest Muslim state, which the country was at that time until the tragic fall of Dhaka in 1971.
Pakistani cinema, music, radio and television, art, literature, including fiction, poetry and even the genre of detective novels roared in the mainstream of the country in 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, and to an extent in 1980s. The Pakistani public followed Pakistani actors and actresses, many of whom became larger than life personalities in their own right. The soft power of Pakistan was potent, vibrant and growing.

---

The state-run Radio Pakistan and then later, the Pakistan Television were the vanguards of this battle of narratives that raged full blown in the initial decades of independence.

---

Compared to the Pakistani media of yesteryears, today there has been massive expansion of electronic media, but its traditional role to inform, educate and entertain stands undermined. When it comes to the news channels, unfortunately they are overwhelmingly contributing to intensifying polarization and creating divide in the society through sensational content, half-truths and ill-informed and biased discussions and opinions. There are hardly any investigative reports, documentaries and even informative news packages aired by any of the dozens of 24/7 news channels. Even entertainment channels appear nowhere when it comes to advancing the national cause. No wonder then it is left to the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) to come up with new national songs and even support the production of television plays and movies.
In the Pakistan of yesteryears, Radio Pakistan (the Pakistan Broadcasting Corporation of today) and Pakistan Television used to churn more content for national cohesion and unity than all the private channels and radio stations of today put together.
Coming back to the country’s formative phase, serious work was being done on history to ensure that it helped promote Pakistani identity and contribute to the task of nation-building, overriding ethnic, sectarian and provincial differences and biases.
The first generation Pakistanis were the thought leaders of this unannounced nation-building project and needed no schooling in it. The literacy rate was low, but the educational institutions, including the government-run schools–which were the backbone of the education system–worked and produced future leaders of the nation in every field, from sports to leading scions of civil and military bureaucracy.
The belief was that Pakistan–a bouquet of different languages, and sub-cultures–would develop and help transform them into a grander and bigger Pakistani identity and culture by assimilating them under one umbrella. While the uniqueness of regional languages and sub-cultures would be very much there, this one colourful bunch be the representative of all under the flag.
In the nation-building process, the most important front is education, which also feeds and strengthens the country’s soft power. Education not only leads to national progress and development, but also serves as the main vehicle to bring about national cohesion and unity and develop a common narrative that serves as a bedrock for any state.
Unfortunately, here as a nation, we lack the most. I remember reading in a work of an Islamic scholar that nations get defeated in the battlefield later; they first lose at their educational institutions. And yes, here we are losing the most.
Although an estimated 22.8 million children aged 5-16 years old, representing a massive 44 percent of the total population in this age group are not attending school, according to the United Nations International Children Emergency Fund (UNICEF), still many could argue that the picture is not that bleak on the educational front, given a massive expansion in the number of schools, colleges and universities in the country. They can rightly point out that compared to 1947, Pakistan’s literacy numbers have increased. Yes, the standards of the government-run schools have gone abysmal, but the private sector has come forward to bear the burden. In a nutshell, to many die-hard optimists, the graph is showing signs of improvement.
This may be the case, if one counts the number of buildings, including some very plush and elite educational institutions, but the basic question remains: are they contributing to the goal of nation-building as they should have? 
If on the one hand, the 22.8 million out of school children is a tragedy, on the other, the multiple systems of education and their quality should also be a cause of concern.
In Pakistan, we have not one or two, but many systems of education running parallel to one another. We have seminaries mainly for the poorest of the poor, we have government-run schools–a vast number of which are deprived even of boundary walls, toilets, and clean drinking water along with trained and motivated teachers. Then we have various categories of private-run institutions which cater to the demand from the lower middle class to the elite. The Cambridge system is also there, in which even the Pakistan Studies textbook has been penned by a foreign author.
Instead of uniting the nation, education has become a divider. There is a divide between the Urdu and the English-medium institutions, the divide between seminary and the rest, between institutions of poor and middle class and elite and the rest, between those institutions which follow the Cambridge curriculum and those which do not. The world view and aspirations of students being churned out from each set of these institutions is different from the other. Each for their own bubble and look at the other suspiciously. The system and type of education give a head start to some in their lives and not to the others. Each set wants to create and mold Pakistan according to their own liking. 
In the past few years, there has been an effort to introduce a single national curriculum, which is being resisted tooth and nail by the vested interests as they try to dilute it as best as they can. Even many in the so-called intellectual elite are opposing the single national curriculum. Perhaps they want to see education continue to remain as the main social and class divider in the country. 
While one can rightly debate and argue about the quality and content of the single curriculum, at least on principle, one should agree that there is a need for one. Of course, the intent of the single curriculum should not be seen as dragging down the standard of education, but instead of raising it. For this, a constant review and debate would remain necessary in every generation, so that the national curriculum ensures that students develop a critical thinking and a creative and questioning mind. However, whatever basic education is being given to one set of students should also be given to the other, regardless of the class or which part of the country he/she belongs to.
A special emphasis needs to be given to two languages–Urdu and English and subjects of mathematics, science and Pakistan Studies up to the higher secondary or intermediate level, so that all students have got a common grounding before they embark on higher and more specialized education.
Without a common education system, and a common and shared story of our history, the nation building task would remain incomplete and the goal of national cohesion and unity elusive. Therefore, the project of a single national curriculum should be taken as a state project, which should continue despite the change of governments. Education is the first step and the most important front of the task of nation-building, aimed at promoting Pakistan, its uniqueness and a shared national ethos and ideology.

Editorial: An uncertain new year

Bol News
January 1, 2023

Although no political player or institution seems to take ownership of the rumours concerning the caretaker set-up, with a slightly long term mandate — which ironically has no constitutional provision –, those pushing the case make some strong arguments against the existing set-up.

Pakistan enters a new year amidst speculations about a caretaker government, consisting of technocrats, to be installed. While all the mainstream political parties, including the opposition Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), have rejected the idea altogether, there are many leading experts and civil society members who think that under the present circumstances, when Pakistan remains stuck in continuing and aggravating political and economic crises, this remains the only way forward for the country. Although no political player or institution seems to take ownership of the rumours concerning the caretaker set-up, with a slightly long term mandate — which ironically has no constitutional provision –, those pushing the case make some strong arguments against the existing set-up.

Firstly, a government eying the next general elections – whether held early or on time, by October or November, 2023 – will not go for the painful economic and institutional reforms required by Pakistan right now, at this critical juncture. Already, the half-measures taken by the Shehbaz Sharif-led government to get the IMF’s stalled programme back on track under the stewardship of former finance minister Miftah Ismail resulted in a lot of criticism, not just from the general public and the opposition, but also from within the ruling coalition. After Miftah’s departure from the finance ministry, the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) brought its so-called ace-economic wizard, Ishaq Dar, to run the economy. But Dar’s antics not just stalled the IMF programme again, but his financial juggling landed Pakistan into a greater economic mess, from where there seems to be no easy way out.

Therefore, to expect the Pakistan Democratic Movement’s (PDM) government to go for any meaningful reforms in the remaining few months in power – at the most eight – would be false expectations. The only way this government could be forced to carry out the reforms will be if it gets a longer mandate, which is not possible without delaying the general elections for a year or two – a desire of some of the PDM’s bigwigs. But even for this, the government will have to do away with Dar type economic management and push for reforms under a new set of financial managers. This is easier said than done on four accounts. One, that under a PML-N government, no one but Dar is seen competent to run the economy because he is not just a close aide of three-time premier Nawaz Sharif, but his son is also married to the self-exiled former premier’s daughter. When family interests are so entrenched, there is hardly any room left for rational and objective decision-making.

The second objection of those calling for an immediate caretaker set-up is that the Shehbaz Sharif government lacks credibility and trust of the people because of the allegations of corruption and misrule against its top leaders. A government lacking credibility and popularity is hardly in a position to push for reforms, and is likely to face stiff resistance from the general public even if it does so.

Thirdly, with an incomplete National Assembly (NA), where one-sided and self-serving legislations are being done, expecting political stability and pushing any agenda for reforms is not just undoable, but even unthinkable. And fourthly, Imran Khan, despite his anti-government campaign having apparently lost steam, remains a potent challenge for the government. The fact that he and his party are staying out of the NA and are in a continuous protest mode will keep the government under pressure and unsettled. Under these circumstances the installation of a caretaker government led by technocrats could act as a buffer between the warring political interest groups and help defuse the situation.

For the PDM, it would mean getting some time to revive its political fortunes, given the public’s short memory. As for the PTI, Imran Khan’s arch nemeses – the Sharifs, Zardaris and Fazl – won’t be in the driving seat. The caretakers can take all the tough economic decisions needed to revive the economy, and create a conducive environment for the next general elections to be held in a transparent and fair manner. However, the first hitch here is who would bell the cat – meaning who will decide the caretakers acceptable to both the rival sets of politicians. The second hitch is how to give legal and constitutional cover to a caretaker set-up beyond its three-month mandate. Here, perhaps the judiciary can step in.

All of this is wishful thinking and speculation for now, without any solid basis and ownership from the powers that matter. However, under these abnormal circumstances, when all else fails, this may prove to be the last option. The plan needs to be seriously explored and implemented before it is too late.

Yes, 2023 welcomes Pakistan with all its uncertainties and risks. May it, hopefully, still be a happy new year!