The Uneasy Embrace: US-Pakistan Relations and the Geostrategic Puzzle of South Asia

By Inzamam Ul Haq

In the intricate geopolitical theater of Asia, alliances are not forged solely on ideological lines or historic friendships. They are shaped by necessity, strategy, and ever-shifting regional dynamics. Among the most enigmatic and often misunderstood of these relationships is the long, layered, and sometimes strained alliance between the United States and Pakistan.

For decades, the US has projected its core values—democracy, human rights, and individual freedoms—as guiding principles in its foreign policy. Yet, in South Asia, these ideals have often collided with the hard realities of regional instability, nuclear rivalries, and counterterrorism imperatives. In this context, US-Pakistan relations stand as a prime example of geopolitical pragmatism shadowed by a complex historical baggage.

1947–1959: Birth of a Partnership Amid Cold War Winds

When Pakistan emerged on the map in 1947, born from the trauma of partition and facing immediate challenges from its neighbor India, it sought powerful allies. The United States, recognizing Pakistan’s strategic location bordering the Soviet Union, China, Iran, and India, saw a valuable partner.

The 1950s marked the honeymoon phase. Pakistan became a key member of US-backed security pacts—SEATO (Southeast Asia Treaty Organization) and CENTO (Central Treaty Organization). The US, in turn, provided generous military and economic aid, seeing Pakistan as a bulwark against communist expansion. The alliance, however, was transactional. While the US sought containment of the USSR, Pakistan aimed to secure support against India.

1960s: Fractures and Frustrations

The 1965 Indo-Pak war over Kashmir exposed the fragility of the alliance. The US suspended military aid to both Pakistan and India, angering Pakistani leadership who felt betrayed. Washington's attempt at neutrality—guided by its broader strategic balance in the region—was perceived in Islamabad as a breach of loyalty.

This decade ended with a sense of disillusionment in Pakistan, which began to reconsider its overreliance on the US. Yet, the American strategic interest in the region never waned.

1970s: Shifting Sands and Secret Diplomacy

The 1971 Indo-Pak war—resulting in the creation of Bangladesh—was another low point. The US, under President Nixon and guided by Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, tilted toward Pakistan diplomatically. But it could not prevent India's military victory.

Despite this, the 1970s saw Pakistan play a crucial role in opening diplomatic channels between the US and China, through covert arrangements with Beijing. This not only restored strategic relevance to Pakistan but also showed its utility in US global maneuvers.

Domestically, however, Pakistan under Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto began leaning toward a more independent foreign policy, asserting sovereignty, and initiating Pakistan's nuclear program—something that would haunt US-Pak ties in years to come.

1980s: The Afghan Jihad and Strategic Convergence

The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 was a game-changer. The US once again turned to Pakistan—not just as an ally but as the primary conduit for arms, funds, and fighters to support the Afghan mujahideen.

This era saw unprecedented cooperation. Billions flowed into Pakistan—much of it covertly through the CIA and Pakistan's ISI (Inter-Services Intelligence). Pakistan became a frontline state in the Cold War, and the ideological divergences were conveniently set aside.

However, this strategic intimacy came with long-term costs. The influx of weapons, fighters, and radical ideologies created a volatile internal environment in Pakistan. The seeds of extremism were sown, which would bear bitter fruit in the decades ahead.

1990s: Sanctions and Suspicion

With the Soviet withdrawal and the Cold War’s end, US interest waned. The 1990 Pressler Amendment imposed sanctions on Pakistan due to its nuclear ambitions. This was a sharp reversal from the generous aid of the 1980s.

During this period, Pakistan faced international isolation, especially after its nuclear tests in 1998 in response to India’s tests. Washington’s dual sanctions on both India and Pakistan were again seen in Islamabad as signs of US hypocrisy and strategic ambivalence.

2000s: 9/11 and a Renewed Alliance Under Duress

The September 11, 2001 attacks forced a strategic reset. The US invaded Afghanistan, and once again, Pakistan’s geography and influence in the region made it indispensable.

Under General Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan became a “major non-NATO ally.” Billions in military and economic aid were disbursed, and Pakistan provided crucial logistical support. But beneath the surface, mistrust simmered.

The US accused Pakistan of playing a double game—supporting the US publicly while allegedly providing safe havens to the Taliban and the Haqqani network. Pakistan, in turn, accused the US of ignoring its sacrifices and fostering instability along the Afghan-Pakistan border.

2010s: Osama Bin Laden and Strategic Divorce

The 2011 US raid in Abbottabad that killed Osama Bin Laden without prior notice to Pakistani authorities was a nadir in the relationship. It confirmed US doubts about Pakistan’s sincerity and embarrassed Islamabad internationally.

The Obama administration gradually pivoted toward India, strengthening economic and defense ties. Pakistan, meanwhile, grew closer to China, deepening cooperation under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC)—a major component of Beijing's Belt and Road Initiative.

US aid declined. Relations became transactional again, centered on counterterrorism operations and Afghanistan.

2020s: Withdrawal, Recalibration, and a New Era?

The US withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021 left Pakistan grappling with a Taliban-led Kabul and a potential security vacuum. While the US exited the battlefield, Pakistan remained entrenched in the region’s instability.

A new strategic recalibration seems to be underway

In December 2023, a year after his appointment, COAS Asim Munir visited the US and met with senior US military and government officials. Sources indicated the meetings were focused on resetting ties, exploring regional counterterrorism cooperation, and potential economic engagement.

In June 2025, behind closed doors, former President Donald Trump met with Pakistan’s Chief of Army Staff, General Asim Munir—a meeting that raised eyebrows in diplomatic circles. This covert engagement was followed in early 2025 by an emerging economic framework between the two nations. Still in nascent stages, the deal hints at US interest in Pakistan’s economic revival, particularly in green energy, tech transfer, and agriculture—a move possibly aimed at counterbalancing China’s influence in South Asia.

US Core Values vs. Strategic Realities

At the heart of this complex relationship lies a fundamental contradiction. The US champions democracy, human rights, and freedoms. Pakistan’s democratic record, with alternating civilian and military rule, human rights issues, and curbs on press freedoms, often sits uncomfortably with American ideals.

Yet history shows that when strategic interests dominate, values take a back seat. The Cold War, the War on Terror, and regional containment strategies have repeatedly pushed the US to engage Pakistan regardless of internal governance dynamics.

This contradiction continues today. The US remains concerned about human rights in Pakistan, particularly in Balochistan, the treatment of journalists, and electoral transparency. However, the need to maintain influence in a nuclear-armed nation bordering China, Iran, India, and Afghanistan keeps the door open.

Looking Forward: A Realist Alliance?

As China’s assertiveness grows, and India treads an independent foreign policy path, the US may seek to hedge its bets. A balanced engagement with Pakistan—focused not just on security but also on economic development—could serve mutual interests.

For Pakistan, a stable relationship with the US could provide an economic lifeline amid a chronic financial crisis. But the days of blank checks and unquestioned support are over. Washington is likely to demand transparency, accountability, and genuine counterterrorism cooperation in return.

Whether this recalibrated alliance can overcome decades of mistrust and conflicting expectations remains uncertain. But in a multipolar world, both nations might find pragmatism more useful than perfection.