Pakistan–United States Relations: Historical

Background, Current Affairs, and Future

Prospects
Pakistan and the United States have maintained a complex and often tumultuous relationship
since Pakistan’s independence in 1947. As a newly formed Muslim state in the Cold War era,
Pakistan aligned early with the U.S. against Soviet influence, receiving substantial military and
economic aid. The bilateral partnership deepened after 9/11, when Pakistan became essential to
U.S. operations in Afghanistan. Over decades this alliance has swung between strategic
cooperation and deep mistrust, shaped by regional wars, nuclear proliferation, counterterrorism,
and competing foreign-policy goals.

Historical Overview (1947–2000)

After partition in August 1947, the U.S. was one of the first nations to recognize Pakistan’s
independence. Pakistan quickly joined U.S.-led Cold War alliances (SEATO, CENTO) as an
anti-communist partner, through which it received loans, debt relief, and advanced weaponry.
During the 1950s–60s, Pakistan relied on U.S. support to balance against India and regional
threats. However, the U.S. also sought to ease Indo-Pak tensions (for example mediating during
the 1965 war) and sometimes imposed arms embargoes on both sides. In 1971 the U.S. famously
tilted toward Pakistan (with Nixon and Kissinger secretly shuttling through Islamabad to open
China) but shifted stance as the India-Pakistan war escalated; this episode strained relations and
pushed Pakistan closer to China in later decades.

In the 1980s, Pakistan became a frontline state in the Soviet–Afghan War. The U.S. poured
massive aid into Pakistan’s military (and to Afghan mujahideen) through Pakistan’s ISI,
enhancing Islamabad’s strategic importance. Pakistan’s economic ties to the Soviet bloc (e.g.
purchase of MiG jets) predated these events, but U.S. military assistance surged after 1979.
When the USSR withdrew in 1989, the common threat had passed. In the 1990s Pakistan tested
nuclear weapons (1998), prompting the U.S. to label it a nuclear proliferator. Bilateral ties cooled
sharply: under the Pressler and Glenn Amendments, Washington imposed economic and military
sanctions on Islamabad. By the end of the 20th century Pakistan was largely cut off from U.S.
military aid, even as covert and diplomatic contacts continued.

War on Terror and Early 21st Century (2001–2014)

The September 11, 2001 attacks marked a watershed. Pakistan quickly joined the U.S.-led “War
on Terror,” recognizing al-Qaeda and Taliban as direct threats to regional stability. Islamabad
provided bases, intelligence, and ground cooperation, enabling U.S. operations into Afghanistan.
In exchange, Congress authorized vast new aid: from FY2002–FY2022 the U.S. transferred
roughly $34.85 billion to Pakistan (economic and military support). This aid funded Pakistan’s
counterinsurgency campaigns, development projects, and Coalition Support Fund (CSF)
reimbursements. Joint military exercises and training continued (e.g. annual exercises), and
Pakistan was designated a Major Non-NATO Ally.

Despite this cooperation, tensions mounted. Many in Washington grew frustrated that Pakistan’s
military intelligence appeared to tolerate or even support certain militant groups (e.g. Haqqani
network) as “strategic assets” against India. U.S. drone strikes inside Pakistan (targeting al-
Qaeda/Taliban leaders) angered Islamabad due to civilian casualties and sovereignty concerns.
Notably, the 2011 U.S. raid that killed Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad significantly damaged
trust. In parallel, Pakistan accused the U.S. of double standards. Public opinion in Pakistan
remained wary; a 2009 Pew survey found only ~9% of Pakistanis viewed the U.S. as a partner,
while 64% regarded it as an enemy. Many Pakistanis believed the U.S. unfairly sided with India
on Kashmir.

By the late 2000s both sides began recalibrating. The Obama administration (2009–2017) sought
to broaden the relationship beyond security – for example, launching programs for economic
development and civilian nuclear safety – but still conditioned aid on counterterrorism progress.
Congress passed the Kerry-Lugar bill (2009) authorizing $7.5 billion in non-military aid,
reflecting continued U.S. interest. Pakistan’s own government often publicly called for shifting
focus from military to economic ties after the Afghan front stabilized. Nevertheless, fundamental
disagreements persisted: Pakistan’s expanding nuclear arsenal and strong Pakistan-China
partnership remained red lines for Washington.

Current Affairs (2015–2025)

Relations during 2015–2025 saw new patterns amid shifting geopolitics. U.S. strategic priorities
shifted to the broader Indo-Pacific, increasingly treating India as a counterweight to China.
Under President Trump (2017–2021), tensions peaked: Trump publicly charged in 2018 that the
U.S. had been “foolish” to give Pakistan $33 billion over 15 years and immediately suspended
$255 million in military aid. Washington reduced security assistance (by 2018 direct aid had
fallen to only $23 million) and pressed Pakistan to do more against insurgents. High-level
dialogue slowed, and U.S.-Pakistan military exercises and cooperation diminished. At the same
time, trade and non-security engagement received new attention: the Trump administration
launched “Made in Pakistan” export initiatives and text discussions on free trade.

Since 2021 the Biden administration has partially restored ties but under new terms. The U.S.
again voiced support for Pakistan’s civilian government and democratic institutions, but
continued to prioritize counterterrorism and regional stability. For example, the two sides
reactivated a Counterterrorism Dialogue (2023) to discuss shared threats, after years of freeze.
Trade and investment have gained emphasis: Pakistan joined the U.S. “Trade and Investment
Framework Agreement” talks, and in 2025 sent a delegation to Washington to reduce U.S.
import tariffs and expand market access. The U.S. approved $500 million of energy
infrastructure aid (2022) and has invited Pakistani technocrats to economic conferences,
signaling interest beyond just security.

Regional crises also affect the bilateral dynamic. Pakistan’s hosting of the peace process (talks
with the Afghan Taliban) and its relations with China and Russia are closely watched in
Washington. In 2021–2025, Pakistan faced a militant insurgency on its border (TTP violence)
and organized talks with Afghan Taliban leadership, at times with tacit U.S. support since U.S.
troops left Afghanistan. Meanwhile, China’s Belt and Road investments in Pakistan (CPEC)
continued, even as U.S. officials expressed concern about debt and strategic imbalance.
Pakistan’s position in international forums has remained largely consistent: at the UN and OIC it
highlights Kashmir and Palestinian issues, and supports global norms that align with Islamic
world views. The U.S. response has generally been to call for bilateral resolution of disputes (e.g.
on Kashmir it maintains the region’s disputed status) and to encourage Pakistan to play a
constructive role in Afghanistan and counterterrorism.

Economic and Trade Ties

Economically, ties are modest. The U.S. has historically been one of Pakistan’s largest export
markets (mainly textiles). In 2022 the U.S. imported about $6.0 billion of goods from Pakistan,
up from $3.8 billion in 2020, while Pakistan’s imports from the U.S. were $3.2 billion. American
firms invest in Pakistan’s consumer goods, energy, and agribusiness sectors, and U.S. direct
investment grew ~50% in recent years. The countries concluded a ninth Trade & Investment
Framework Agreement meeting in early 2023, aiming to expand economic ties. However,
Pakistan still faces high U.S. tariffs (averaging ~29%) and has run occasional trade surpluses. In
mid-2025 Pakistan and the U.S. engaged in negotiations to “reset” economic relations: Pakistan
offered to import more U.S. products (notably crude oil) and open up mining to U.S. investment
if U.S. duties are eased.

Pakistan has also been a large recipient of U.S. aid. From FY2002–FY2022 the U.S. provided
about $34.85 billion in total assistance (military and economic) to Pakistan. Aid peaked in the
2000s for counterinsurgency support. In the 2010s, aid (via the Coalition Support Fund and
FMF) stayed in the billions until Trump cut much of it. Today most U.S. assistance comes
through civilian programs (USAID) and educational exchanges. The Pakistani-American
community (∼1 million strong) plays a big economic role: in 2022–2024 Pakistani diaspora in
the U.S. sent roughly $3 billion back to Pakistan, exceeding all U.S. aid to Pakistan in the same
period. These remittances and diaspora investments bolster Pakistan’s economy independently of
the U.S. government.

Security and Defense Cooperation

Security ties have alternated between close partnership and suspicion. Pakistan’s military long
viewed the U.S. as its primary arms supplier and trainer. At its peak, Pakistan received dozens of
F-16 fighter jets, helicopters, and heavy equipment through U.S. Foreign Military Sales, and its
officers often trained at U.S. war colleges. Washington prized Pakistan’s airfields and supply
routes for Afghanistan, and reimbursed Pakistan (through CSF) for logistical support.

However, congressional and executive restrictions have tightened. The U.S. strings security aid
to end-use guarantees; for example, in 2019 U.S. officials explicitly questioned Pakistan about
reports that its F-16s had been used against India in Kashmir (which would violate the sales
agreement). In July 2018 Congress capped annual aid at $150 million, citing Pakistan’s lack of
anti-terrorism action. The Trump administration withheld a planned $255 million tranche until
Pakistan took concrete counterterrorism steps. The U.S. also withheld other technology transfers
(e.g. advanced avionics for F-16s in 2016) when it believed Pakistan was not fully cooperating.
Pakistan’s leadership, in turn, has grown frustrated by these conditions. The country has
diversified its military procurement (buying Chinese and Turkish jets and missiles) to hedge U.S.
restrictions. Officially, Pakistan remains a “Major Non-NATO Ally,” but much of the bilateral
defense dialogue now centers on counterterrorism rather than joint war-fighting.

Social and Cultural Relations

On the social front, American influence in Pakistan is mixed. Large segments of Pakistani
society are skeptical of U.S. intentions. As noted, most Pakistanis believe the U.S. favours India
in the Kashmir dispute, and few see the U.S. as a reliable partner. Nonetheless, many Pakistanis
support cooperation against terrorism: one survey found 72% favor U.S. aid to Pakistani troops
fighting extremists.

People-to-people ties exist mainly through education and diaspora links. An estimated one
million Pakistanis live in the U.S.; many send remittances and invest in Pakistan. Pakistani
students and professionals have studied and worked in America, and there is some cultural
exchange (media, NGOs). However, soft-power penetration is limited compared to ideological
differences. U.S. policies in the Muslim world (e.g. on the Middle East, on Islamophobia) are
often criticized in Pakistan, while U.S. leaders continue to publicly endorse Pakistan’s
democratic process. On the other hand, Pakistan’s political leadership frequently raises Muslim
causes (Kashmir, Palestinian rights) in international forums, expecting U.S. support – which
rarely materializes beyond verbal encouragement.

Pakistan’s Diplomatic Stance

Diplomatically, Pakistan has often tread a balancing act. In multilateral fora (UN, OIC, NAM), it
champions issues like Kashmir (viewing it as an unresolved conflict) and Islamic solidarity,
while usually refraining from openly antagonizing the U.S. on all matters. Pakistan accepts U.S.
aid and engages Washington on trade and security, even as it deepens ties with China and –
increasingly – with Russia, Iran and Gulf states. Islamabad’s official line is that it seeks a “multi-
aligned” policy (avoiding formal blocs), but critics on both sides sometimes accuse the other of
hidden agendas (e.g., Pakistan suspecting the U.S. of desiring regime change, or the U.S.
suspecting Pakistan of playing a “double game” on terror). In practice, Pakistani diplomats try to
keep avenues open: they participate in joint forums (like the Strategic Dialogue in the 2010s),
pursue economic agreements with the U.S., and simultaneously counterbalance by engaging U.S.
rivals.

Impact and Regional Dynamics

Pakistan–U.S. relations have far-reaching impacts. Regionally, their alliance historically
countered Soviet expansion (1970s) and now interacts strongly with the India–U.S. partnership.
U.S. support has sometimes checked Indo-Pak conflicts; for example, Washington pressed both
sides to de-escalate during 2016 and 2019 border crises. Conversely, U.S. tilt toward India
(evident in military sales and diplomatic gestures) is viewed in Pakistan as a threat, causing
Islamabad to rely more on China as a security guarantor. The Pakistani relationship with the U.S.
also affects Afghanistan: during 2001–2021 Pakistan was a key U.S. partner in that war, and
after 2021 it remains a critical interlocutor with the Taliban regime (in Washington’s interest of
preventing a regional terror resurgence).

Globally, the U.S.–Pakistan partnership has influenced nonproliferation and counterterrorism

policies. Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal (smallest of the declared nuclear states) still worries
Washington due to proliferation risks; at the same time, U.S. defers any public pressure on
Pakistan’s nuclear program because Pakistan helped contain extremism. On terrorism, Pakistan
helped obliterate al-Qaeda’s Afghan safe haven but also later guarded members of the Afghan
Taliban for negotiating leverage. These contradictions have shaped NATO strategy in
Afghanistan and the global fight against militancy. On Pakistan’s side, close U.S. ties have
meant dependence on American diplomacy (e.g., needing U.S. support for IMF loans), but have
also brought Pakistan into international spotlight where it must justify its policies.

PESTEL Analysis
 Political: Pakistan has alternated between military rule and democracy; the U.S. publicly
“supports Pakistan’s democratic institutions” and rule of law, tying many programs to
civilian governance. Washington’s foreign policy trends (e.g. emphasizing India as a
partner) have sometimes undermined Pakistan’s confidence in the U.S.. Pakistan in turn
has not abandoned the Kashmir issue – it remains Pakistan’s focal point abroad – whereas
the U.S. maintains that Kashmir must be settled bilaterally.
 Economic: U.S.–Pakistan trade and investment are modest but significant. Pakistan ran a
~$3.0 billion trade surplus in 2024 despite high U.S. tariffs. Textile exports to the U.S.
(e.g. apparel) dominate Pakistan’s exports, while Pakistan imports machinery, oil and
technology from the U.S. In recent years, the U.S. has been the leading foreign investor
in Pakistan; U.S. direct investment grew ~50% in a recent year. U.S. aid and
development programs (roads, power, agriculture) have bolstered Pakistan’s economy,
but aid volatility (freeze in 2018, etc.) has added uncertainty. Pakistan’s large diaspora in
the U.S. also injects capital (remittances), offsetting some trade deficits.
 Social: Pakistani society has a mix of anti-American sentiment and pragmatic views.
Many Pakistanis distrust U.S. motives (as noted, only 9% say the U.S. is a partner), and
most blame America for favoring India. At the same time, there is considerable public
support for U.S. help in fighting terrorism; for example, large majorities endorse U.S.
intelligence-sharing and aid to Pakistan’s military against extremists. The Pakistani-
American community (and students in the U.S.) strengthen interpersonal ties and
economic links.
 Technological: The U.S. has been Pakistan’s source of advanced military technology (F-
16s, avionics, drones for surveillance) and civilian tech (satellites, telecom equipment).
However, high-tech cooperation is tightly controlled: U.S. arms transfers to Pakistan are
subject to end-use monitoring and conditionality. Pakistan’s own technological
advancement, especially in nuclear weapons and missile delivery, has been a source of
contention. U.S. law requires certification that Pakistan’s nuclear program poses no
 threat; Pakistani nuclear tests and development have triggered legal sanctions. In civilian
tech, collaboration is growing (e.g. U.S. involvement in Pakistan’s power grid projects),
but lags compared to Chinese investment in Pakistani infrastructure.
 Environmental: Climate and environment are emerging as areas of bilateral concern.
Pakistan is highly vulnerable to climate change (e.g. 2022 floods affected 33 million
people). U.S. agencies and NGOs have provided disaster relief and discussed climate-
resilient development. The two governments have begun technical cooperation (for
example, clean-energy projects with U.S. funding and Pakistani staff training).
Environmental issues (water scarcity, air quality) have not dominated the agenda, but
climate diplomacy could become a future pillar given Pakistan’s needs and U.S. global
leadership on climate goals.
 Legal: A web of laws and agreements governs U.S.–Pakistan ties. U.S. sanctions laws
(Pressler Amendment, Kerry-Lugar Act provisions) have on-and-off dictated aid flows.
Pakistan is also implicated in U.S. counterterrorism law enforcement (e.g. extradition
requests) and financial compliance (FATF evaluations, anti-money-laundering standards
encouraged by the U.S.). Defense pacts (like COMCASA and BECA signed in 2018–19)
allow U.S. intelligence sharing, but require Pakistani parliamentary review. Over 75
years, no formal alliance treaty was concluded; instead relations are defined by executive
agreements and annual defense commitments. Both sides have periodically used legal
measures (tariff policies, visa controls) to press each other (for example, the U.S.
threatened visa bans on Pakistani military officers over human rights).

SWOT Analysis
 Strengths: Pakistan’s strategic location (bordering Afghanistan, Iran, China, and India)
has made it valuable to U.S. policy. Shared concerns – notably countering Islamist
terrorism – have driven cooperation. U.S. security assistance (over $34 billion since
2001) has built Pakistan’s counterterror capacity. People-to-people links (diaspora
remittances of ~$3 billion/year) and historical goodwill among some elites also favor the
relationship.
 Weaknesses: Mutual mistrust is a chronic weakness. The U.S. sees Pakistan as providing
“safe havens” to terrorists (raising outrage in Congress and public), while Pakistan often
accuses the U.S. of ignoring its security concerns (e.g. Kashmir). Divergent interests
(Pakistan’s alignment with China/early warming to Russia) give the U.S. pause.
Domestic volatility in Pakistan (political coups, instability) undermines consistent policy-
making. Pakistan’s image in the U.S. is tainted by perceptions of human rights abuses
and nuclear proliferation, limiting political support in Congress and executive circles.
 Opportunities: There is room to expand non-security cooperation. The 2025 trade talks
suggest both sides are exploring an economic “reset”. U.S. investment in Pakistan’s
technology, energy, and infrastructure (in partnership with institutions like USAID) could
boost Pakistan’s economy. Counterterror cooperation can shift toward intelligence, law
enforcement, and development (e.g. reintegrating ex-militants), areas that benefit both
countries. Increased university collaborations and cultural exchange programs could build
trust among younger generations.
 Threats: Pakistan’s deepening ties with China (and to some extent Russia and Iran) may
pull Islamabad away from the U.S. orbit. India’s growing U.S. partnership (e.g. defense
 sales, strategic dialogues) challenges Pakistan’s sense of security. Any future flare-up of
South Asian tensions (Kashmir escalation, cross-border insurgencies) risks dragging the
U.S. into mediation roles, potentially straining Islamabad. Finally, systemic threats like
regional spillover of terrorism or economic crises in Pakistan could force the U.S. to
disengage or impose sanctions, compounding mistrust.

Future Trends and the Way Forward

Looking ahead, analysts expect a pragmatic, interest-based relationship. The U.S. under current
leadership prioritizes stable, democratic governance in Pakistan and expanded trade and climate
cooperation, while remaining wary of new commitments to Pakistan without verifiable progress
on security issues. Washington’s Indo-Pacific strategy will continue to engage India more
intensively, but policymakers in Washington acknowledge that problems in Afghanistan and
terrorism require at least a working relationship with Pakistan. Pakistan will likely seek to
balance its alliances: maintaining its “all-weather” partnership with China while repairing ties
with the U.S. to address its economic needs.

Key variables to watch include Pakistan’s internal political stability and reforms, progress (or
lack thereof) on rooting out extremist networks, and developments in Afghanistan. Further U.S.
engagement may hinge on Pakistan’s willingness to facilitate Afghan peace and
counterterrorism. Economically, successful conclusion of trade and investment agreements could
pull the relationship toward cooperation. On the other hand, if global power rivalries intensify
(for example, U.S.-China competition in South Asia), Pakistan–U.S. ties may face additional
pressure from external factors.

In sum, Pakistan and the United States have a deep but strained partnership. Their future will
depend on building trust through transparency, aligning on shared interests (especially security
and economic development), and managing the larger regional context. Both sides have
incentives to cooperate – such as shared counterterror goals and mutual economic opportunities –
but must also reckon with strategic competition and historical grievances. Success or failure of
this bilateral relationship will have important consequences for Pakistan’s own future and for
stability in South Asia.

Sources: Authoritative analyses and reports from government, think tanks, and reputable media
have been used throughout. Key references include government and Congressional Research
Service assessments, academic journals, and reputable news outlets (see embedded citations).

🔄 1. Bilateral Trade Negotiations (June 2025)

 Ongoing negotiations led by Pakistan’s Finance Minister Aurangzeb and U.S.
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick aim to conclude talks on reciprocal tariffs by
early July 2025. Key elements include:
 o Pakistan’s offer to import more U.S. goods (e.g., crude oil) to offset its
~$3 billion trade surplus with the U.S. in 2024.
o Plans to open sectors like mining (notably the $7 billion Reko Diq project) to
U.S. investment under regulatory reforms.
o Potential $500 million–$1 billion financing from the U.S. Export–Import Bank
for Reko Diq infrastructure (reuters.com).

This marks a strategic attempt to reset economic ties amid shifting geopolitics and a legacy 29%
U.S. tariff.

🛡️2. Counterterrorism Dialogues & Security Cooperation

 In May 2024, the 2nd Pakistan–U.S. Counterterrorism Dialogue in Washington DC
reaffirmed cooperation to combat TTP and ISIS-K (Khorasan), focusing on:
o Technical exchange, law enforcement training, and border security infrastructure.
o Over 300 Pakistani police and frontline responders were trained since
March 2023 (reuters.com, mofa.gov.pk).
 A new round planned for June 2025 in Islamabad aims to maintain momentum .
 In early 2025, Pakistani Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi and U.S. officials held talks on
enhancing law enforcement, immigration cooperation, and counter-terror investigations
—including collaboration on the arrest of IS-K planner Mohammad Sharifullah
(pakistantoday.com.pk).
 Pakistani and U.S. military held joint exercises in July 2024 during Operation
Azm-e-Istehkam in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (en.wikipedia.org).

📰 3. Strategic Military and Diplomatic Engagements

 June 2025: U.S. Central Command chief General Kurilla publicly described Pakistan as a
“phenomenal counter-terrorism partner,” citing Pakistan’s role targeting ISIS-K in
coordination with U.S. intelligence (theguardian.com).
 Former President Trump personally welcomed Army Chief Asim Munir to the White
House in June 2025, marking a diplomatic thaw that caught India’s attention
(theguardian.com).
 April 2025: Discussions between U.S. Secretary Rubio and Foreign Minister Dar
included bilateral trade, critical minerals cooperation, immigration, and regional security
strategies related to Afghanistan and migration dynamics (reuters.com).

🌎 4. Multilateral and Regional Diplomacy

  June 2025: U.S. Secretary of State Rubio and PM Shehbaz Sharif discussed Pakistan’s
potential role in facilitating peace between Israel and Iran, highlighting shared strategic
interests (reuters.com).
 Pakistan has nominated Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize in recognition of his mediation
during the India–Pakistan ceasefire (May 2025) (reuters.com).

✅ Summary of Current Cooperation

Area Highlights
Trade & Investment Tariff talks; U.S. funding for Reko Diq
Counterterrorism Dialogues, joint training, internal operations
Military & Security Joint drills; U.S. intelligence sharing
Diplomacy High-level visits, U.S. facilitation in regional conflicts
Multilateral projects Environmental, immigration, law enforcement cooperation

🔍 Analytical Commentary
1. Economic Reset: Mutual interest in reducing tariff barriers could transform the bilateral
link into a more balanced economic partnership, shifting focus from security to
development.
2. Deepening Security Links: Sustained counterterror dialogues and joint operations reflect
growing trust and alignment on regional threats, particularly with renewed TTP and
ISIS-K activity.
3. Strategic Recalibration: Visible moves like hosting Gen. Munir in Washington and U.S.
praise for Pakistan’s anti-terror efforts mark a possible strategic realignment, shaped by
U.S. regional stability goals.
4. Diplomatic Utility: Pakistan’s role across regional crises (Kashmir, Israel–Iran,
Afghanistan) is being acknowledged by Washington, highlighting Islamabad’s potential
as a diplomatic hub.

 reuters.com
 reuters.com
 theguardian.com
 economictimes.indiatimes.com
🔑 1. Strategic Realignments
 China Factor: U.S. concern over Pakistan’s increasing reliance on China (e.g. CPEC,
military hardware, loans).
 India–U.S. Nexus: How U.S. partnership with India (QUAD, defense sales, Indo-Pacific
strategy) reshapes Pakistan’s threat perception.
 Multipolarity: Pakistan’s move towards a "balanced" foreign policy—strengthening ties
with China, Russia, Gulf states—while keeping U.S. engaged.

✅ CSS Angle: Pakistan must avoid strategic isolation by maintaining diverse foreign alliances
without alienating Washington.

🔍 2. U.S. Domestic Politics and Foreign Policy Shift

 U.S. Elections 2024–2025: Trump’s reelection changed the tone toward Pakistan. Expect
a more transactional, personality-driven engagement.
 Congressional Attitudes: Bipartisan suspicion persists in U.S. Congress about Pakistan's
double game on terrorism. Aid is highly conditional.
 Shift from 'War on Terror' to 'Great Power Competition': Pakistan is no longer
central to U.S. foreign policy, which now prioritizes China and Indo-Pacific.

✅ CSS Angle: Pakistan needs to adjust its diplomacy to remain relevant to changing U.S.
strategic interests.

💣 3. Terrorism & Security Landscape

 TTP resurgence: Recent attacks in KPK and Balochistan (2024–25) raise U.S. concerns.
Counterterror cooperation has resumed.
 Afghanistan spillover: Taliban rule has indirectly emboldened militants in Pakistan.
U.S. relies on Pakistan for intelligence.
 Sanctions Risk: Any perception of harboring militants or lack of action against groups
like LeT or JeM could trigger U.S. sanctions (e.g. under FATF, CAATSA).

✅ CSS Angle: Pakistan must reform internal security policies and show verifiable
counterterrorism outcomes.

⚛ 4. Nuclear Diplomacy
  Non-Proliferation Worries: U.S. remains concerned about nuclear command, potential
for rogue elements, and tactical nukes.
 Nuclear Technology: Unlike India, Pakistan has no civilian nuclear cooperation deal
with the U.S. (e.g. 123 Agreement).
 Strategic Assets: U.S. still considers Pakistan a nuclear weapons state with “minimum
credible deterrence,” but pressurizes on transparency.

✅ CSS Angle: Analyze how Pakistan’s nuclear policy affects relations with U.S., especially in
crisis situations.

💰 5. Debt Diplomacy & Economic Reform

 IMF Bailouts: Pakistan’s reliance on IMF (often backed by U.S. influence) creates
leverage for Washington on fiscal reforms.
 Trade > Aid Shift: U.S. pushing for market-based partnerships, not aid-based
dependency.
 Investment Climate: U.S. investors hesitant due to security and tax issues; Reko Diq
talks show a possible new direction.

✅ CSS Angle: Frame arguments on why Pakistan must transition from aid-recipient to trade-
partner status.

🕊️6. Human Rights & Democracy

 Press Freedom & Judiciary: U.S. criticizes crackdowns on media, civil liberties, and
judicial independence.
 Minority Rights: Religious freedom and treatment of minorities are often cited in U.S.
congressional reports.
 Democracy Promotion: U.S. supports democratic processes, but avoids interference in
elections post-Afghanistan.

✅ CSS Angle: Expect CSS questions around balancing sovereignty and international
expectations on democracy.

🌍 7. Regional Influence & Peacebuilding

 Israel–Iran Mediation: U.S. encouraging Pakistan to play a role in defusing tensions
(2025).
  OIC Leadership: Pakistan’s stance on Palestine, Islamophobia, and Kashmir aligns it
with wider Muslim world.
 Belt and Road vs. Build Back Better: U.S. views Pakistan as a testing ground for its
alternative to China’s BRI.

✅ CSS Angle: Position Pakistan as a peace broker, not just a frontline state.

🧠 8. Soft Power and Public Diplomacy

 Education & Exchange: Fulbright and IVLP programs are active. Over 10,000
Pakistanis study/work in U.S. each year.
 Diaspora Diplomacy: 1 million+ Pakistani-Americans are an important lobbying and
remittance force (~$3B/year).
 Perception War: U.S. must rebuild trust in Pakistan’s public opinion, still skewed
toward anti-Americanism.

✅ CSS Angle: Emphasize people-to-people diplomacy and diaspora as untapped assets in foreign
relations.

📊 9. Recent Collaborations (2024–2025 Highlights)

 Trade Reset: Ongoing talks on tariff reductions, investment in mining (Reko Diq).
 Counterterrorism Dialogue: Technical and intelligence-sharing resuming.
 Climate & Energy: $500M aid for energy sector, green financing programs underway.
 UN Engagement: Coordination on UN votes, regional crises (Gaza, Ukraine).

📚 Recommended Reading for CSS Prep

 Pakistan: A Hard Country – Anatol Lieven
 Pakistan Beyond the Crisis State – Maleeha Lodhi
 CRS Report on Pakistan–U.S. Relations (latest edition)
 Dawn, Foreign Policy, Al Jazeera (opinion and analysis sections)
 U.S. State Department Country Reports

✅ Conclusion: What to Focus On for CSS

1. Shifting from security to economic relations
2. How Pakistan navigates China–U.S. rivalry
3. Role of domestic stability and governance in shaping foreign policy
4. Strategic consequences of Afghan Taliban rule and TTP revival
5. Building an independent foreign policy without isolating major allies