Last week the State Department released its Afghanistan and Pakistan Regional Stabilization Strategy.  There is much to like in this comprehensive document that seeks to elevate development and diplomacy efforts alongside that of defense.  Although the troop increase announced in December by President Obama will be integral to success, for too long the military has overshadowed development and diplomacy in this part of the world.  They are all part of the solution.  We’re now moving in the right direction, but there’s more to be done to get the Pakistani public on board.

The strategy in Afghanistan focuses on reconstruction and development, improved governance, rule of law, and an expanded civilian presence.  The Pakistan component deals with the recently passed Kerry-Lugar-Berman legislation that devotes $7.5 billion over 5 years to Pakistan.  It also emphasizes security assistance, communications, and strengthening people-to-people ties.   The strategy isn’t just a list of impressive goals, but rather it lays out measurable milestones that we should all use to hold the U.S. government accountable.

This all sounds great.  So what’s missing?  Here’s my concern, particularly related to Pakistan.  Poll after poll reports that the Pakistani public continues to harbor strong anti-American sentiment.  For example, in an August poll by the Pew Global Attitudes Project, 64% of Pakistanis viewed the U.S. as an enemy.  Only 22% of Pakistanis felt that the U.S. takes their interests into account when making foreign policy decisions.  There were many references in the strategy about the commitment to a long-term partnership with Pakistan.  Although the Pakistani government might have agreed, I’m quite concerned that the Pakistani people are not yet convinced.

This was particularly evident last fall with the huge debate in Pakistan over the Kerry-Lugar-Berman bill that provided an unprecedented amount of aid to Pakistan.  Rather than being a huge public relations boon to the U.S., the ensuing debate in Pakistan ended up having the exact opposite effect.  There was tremendous concern about conditions being placed on the aid.  When a country’s economy is in tatters and its people consider rejecting a huge assistance windfall, you know that there are real problems brewing.  Although the uproar was largely based on misperceptions, if our strategy is based on a long-term partnership, this is not a good way to start.

Fortunately, the strategy highlighted an enhanced communication effort and stronger people-to-people ties.  These should help.  In the long run, the disbursal of aid will hopefully make a real difference.  However, there are a few things that the U.S. could do right now that could have a tremendous impact:

1.  Show Blackwater the door. The Pakistani press has been obsessed with Blackwater’s presence in the country.  No one knows how many Blackwater operatives are on the ground, but Secretary Gates, on his recent visit to Islamabad confirmed the firm’s presence.  The costs of having Blackwater employees pack up their bags is probably relatively low.  The cost in terms of continued negatives public perception of the U.S. is quite high if their operatives continue to be in the headlines. It’s about perception here, and that really matters.

2.  Think seriously about the costs of drone attacks. The U.S. military considers drones its most effective weapon against Taliban and Al Qaeda leaders in Pakistan and they have been successful in eliminating some high value targets.  At the same time, there is huge backlash from the Pakistani public.  They are concerned both with the collateral civilian deaths and the infringement on Pakistani sovereignty.  In the Pew poll, 95% of Pakistanis had a negative view of the drone attacks.  If you ask ordinary Pakistanis, this will be the one issue that comes up again and again.  Perhaps the drone attacks are a tactical victory and a strategic mistake.  The problem is that there aren’t good alternatives.   Other than completely eliminating the attacks, we may want to place an even greater emphasis on reducing civilian casualties or hand more control over to the Pakistani government.  Each of those options has costs, but we’re already paying a tremendous price with our current course of action.  What’s clear is that as long as these attacks are in the headlines, the harder the overall development and diplomacy strategy will be to implement.

3.  For long term development, invest in social entrepreneurs and learn from them. There will be millions of dollars in development aid pouring into Pakistan.  If used effectively, this could be a tremendous benefit to Pakistan and strengthen its people’s confidence in the U.S. long-term commitment.  However, it could also be a setback if improperly distributed.  Figuring out how to utilize this money effectively is going to be key.  Many Americans are now familiar with Greg Mortenson, the author of Three Cups of Tea, who has built or supported over 130 schools in the Pakistan/Afghanistan region over the past 16 years.  What can we learn from him?  Understanding and appreciating the local culture and needs is critical to success.  Aid workers need to get out in the communities they are serving. There are plenty of social entrepreneurs in Pakistan who are finding local solutions to pressing social problems.  Ashoka is finding and supporting many of them.   Social entrepreneurs like Greg Mortenson can be a key part of that effort and we should be learning from their successes.

No related posts.