Pakistan’s foreign policy has long navigated a complex terrain, particularly in its relationship with the United States and China. Historically, the intricate interplay between strategic requirements, geopolitical hurdles, and economic constraints, profoundly influenced Pakistan’s foreign policy trajectory. Wherein Pakistan progressively opted to align with China while striving to hedge its relations with the US.
Pakistan faces a strategic dilemma in navigating the intensifying US-China rivalry, necessitating a nuanced and balanced approach.
While Pakistan has historically leaned towards the US for security and economic assistance, recent years have witnessed some strain. The US withdrawal from Afghanistan and a shift in US foreign policy focus have impacted the bilateral relationship. On the other end lies Pakistan’s multifaceted strategic partnership with China. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) remains a cornerstone of this relationship.
Pakistan finds itself at the horns of a strategic dilemma as the US-China rivalry intensifies in international politics. At the heart of the dilemma is the burden of choosing between the US and China which has the intended effect of raising costs for Pakistan’s foreign policy.
The contemporary debates revolve around two options for Pakistan i.e.: whether Pakistan is better off bandwagoning with one power (China for instance) in order to balance against the other (US) or vice versa, or to reap maximum returns while minimizing risk contingencies should Pakistan gamble and rather opt for a more complex yet less biased approach by hedging between the two superpowers
The Balancing behavior comes into play when a state perceives threats from the rising power of another state and engages in a military and defense build-up to strengthen itself. While bandwagoning refers to flocking to the dominant state, balancing involves joining the weaker coalition. The two strategies envision that the states balance against other states from which they perceive a threat, therefore the balance or bandwagoning is a consequence of not power, but the threat perception. When it comes to Pakistan the threat perceptions emanate primarily from its immediate neighbor India, thus one can predict that regional anxieties have been the primary driver of Pakistan’s’ balancing and bandwagoning behavior towards great powers.
Hedging allows Pakistan to avoid binding alignments, optimizing benefits while minimizing risks in uncertain geopolitical landscapes.
Historically, it was easier for Pakistan to navigate between China and the US during the Cold War, especially when American and Chinese threat perceptions against each other, were less rigid. However, challenges and risks for Pakistan‘s foreign policy have increased in the wake of rising threat perceptions between the US and China, especially where the US identifies itself as a progressive, moral, liberal, and democratic status quo power, challenged by disruption from an immoral, authoritarian actor in the shape of China termed as a revisionist power.
Whereas, to truly understand the impact of China’s global initiatives, and to strike a balance between the US-China equation we need to stop thinking in a status quo-revisionist binary which seems to be an inherently flawed means of assessing state intentions, defined by the US. Secondly, we need to understand that international orders are not static but rather fluid and multilayered.
A contemporary overview of Pakistan’s foreign policy options advocates the need for Pakistan to strike a balance between China and the US. However, at the same time less debated trilateral equation of China-US, Pakistan-China, and India-US relations imply a more nuanced reality, which provides room in the post-cold War era, for exploring the strategy of “hedging” where a state doesn’t fully commit to one side.
Hedging is a strategy used by countries to navigate uncertain political situations, especially when dealing with powerful rivals. It refers to a low-commitment-level alliance between two states of unequal power, where a state avoids a binding alignment with any single major power, giving out ambiguous signals with regard to its security interests and keeping a space for shifting alignment with major powers in the future.
CPEC remains a cornerstone of Pakistan-China relations, but its potential failures could lead to friction and strategic recalibration.
States hedge to pursue multiple policy options to reduce the source of risk while optimizing its benefits. This behavior of states also explains why foreign policy involves elements of both cooperation and conflict. States may cooperate at multiple preferential points yet be at loggerheads over others. The prime example one can study is the US-China-Rival-Cooperation equation where US is vocal over China‘s rise and sees it as a threat yet China continues to be the US‘s top trade partner.
Furthermore, despite intensifying India-China rivalry as witnessed in border conflict along the Line of Actual Control, bilateral trade between India and China continues to grow. Considering these state of affairs in bilateral relations states strategize their policies to maximize their returns while minimizing their risks.
As evident from US-India and Pakistan-China relations, the sub-regional bloc might be hindered by the complexities and inconsistencies within the US-India relationship, on the other hand, we also witness growing India-China economic and trade relations. Similarly, divergences are also evidenced in the China-Pakistan relationship especially if CPEC fails to materialize Pakistan’s economic benefits which can lead to potential friction between the two countries. With China and the US maintaining their ties with India combined with Pakistan‘s relative divergences with both the US and China, Pakistan‘s strategic choice tilts more towards a hedging approach between China and the US.
Contemporary strategic realities are more nuanced which requires a non-conventional and non-traditional approach. It compels Pakistan to focus on the greys of international politics and refuse the blacks and whites. It’s high time that Pakistan opts for a prudent foreign policy approach and avoids seeing one pole of power as essentially good as opposed to the other.
An autonomous, interest-based foreign policy focusing on economic growth and non-traditional security imperatives is crucial for Pakistan.
The optimal strategy for Pakistan is an autonomous interest-based foreign policy that is able to intercede systemic pressures by engaging in a hedging strategy which can take its economic leap forward by leveraging its relationship with both the US and China. A strategy that is primarily more focused on non-traditional security imperatives because if it tilts toward the US it puts its traditional friendship and partnership with China at risk and If Pakistan sides with China by alienating The US, it comes with an economic cost of losing the support of international financial institutions which is indispensable for its growth.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.
