A ‘Straight to the Facts’ interview with Ambassador Masood Khalid
‘Straight to the Facts’ is a Criterion Quarterly podcast produced in collaboration with Talking Sense. For our first broadcast on YouTube, we interviewed Mr. Masood Khalid—a former Ambassador of Pakistan who served in this capacity in China for over 6 years. Below are excerpts of part 1 of this 3-part interview titled: “The Pakistan-China Equation.”
The full interview and other content on the environment, digital Pakistan, etc., can be accessed through: https://youtube.com/@criterionq
SttF: I would like to begin by discussing the great power rivalry that has emerged with the US on one side and China on the other. Since it (this rivalry) is in its nascent stage, people have tried to fill in the blanks regarding what is going to transpire and they have sometimes tried to compare it with the cold war which, I believe, has multiple differences. One primarily being that between 1945 and 1960 nearly 3 dozen countries gained independence. They were weak. They were fragile. Economically they were inexperienced. So, they had to choose sides. Things are different now as there is an emergence of middle powers who have considerable influence, geopolitically and geoeconomically, and this influence is augmented by multilateral organizations. In this whole scenario, within these dynamics, what should Pakistan’s Foreign Policy orientation be?
MK: … The jury is out on whether we are in a state of cold war because of this contestation between the US and China. Personally, I believe that we are in a state of a quasi cold war…
…If you look back, the process of perceiving China as a threat started from 2000-2001 during the tenure of President Clinton, because that is the time when President Clinton went to India and the US started propping up India as a counterweight… subsequent American administrations carried on that policy… in the context of containing China… President Trump and President Biden, more or less, continued that policy. Added to this single containment of China, Russia also came on to the scene, especially after the Ukraine invasion. So now it’s a double containment strategy of the US which is being followed…
… It’s a complex world… China, before the 80s, was a poor country. It was a large country, but nobody expected that its rise would be so phenomenal or so fast. All this has happened in a matter of 30 to 40 years—Russia’s decline, collapse rather, in the early 90’s… the Sino-Soviet split and then reproachment/détente between the US and China in the 70s in which Pakistan helped.
But right now, I think, to cap it all, I would say that there is no world order as such or it has disintegrated. The old world order which was conceived, planned and executed after WWII, especially at the unipolar moment – that is over.
Now we have China’s rise and a strategic partnership—I wouldn’t call it alliance—between China and Russia to fire back at the US wherever it is possible, in different theaters of the world. So, there is a containment and counter offensive, howsoever you would like to describe it, by these three powers…
…this new world order is emerging and, in the process, there is a lot of chaos, a lot of uncertainty, unpredictability. No doubt the US is still the sole superpower, but, slowly and gradually, due to multiple factors, its preeminence is declining in the world…
… We are in a state where I would call it bi-multipolarity… If China keeps on following this track that it is following—the estimates are that it is going to become the largest economy by 2030, although there are question marks—then we will have some kind of bipolarity…
….and then with this multipolar world of middle powers: emerging countries, emerging economies of varying sizes… we’ll see a very interesting constellation of the world in the years to come. But, at the same time, there is a lot of uncertainty and unpredictability about how things will evolve…
… Like other countries, Pakistan has to navigate its policy very carefully and deftly. It’s going to be a test of our diplomacy… we have had good relationship with the US all along. It has been an important security and development partner, but the relationship has seen ups and downs, and it has been transactional…
… and now, in our region they have chosen India to be, what they say, as the net security provider. There is no doubt. You see the congressional hearings, you see the bills, you see their security doctrines, you see their security papers, foreign policy papers—it’s very clear. They say that India is their long-term strategic partner. So, in that backdrop, India’s propping up is to contain China in South Asia, in Southeast Asia and the Indian Ocean region.
Now, in that scenario, where does Pakistan find itself? My theory is that, as far as South Asia is concerned, Pakistan is important. We are a country of almost 250 million people, we have a God-given geography which we have not utilized optimally to benefit and advance our key interest, and we are a natural bridgehead between three/four regions. That is the leverage which Pakistan has. At the same time…there is already a fallout on Pakistan’s choices; Pakistan’s options in terms of foreign policy from the US and, on the other hand, a time proven relationship with China which has stood its ground for the last 73-74 years. If you study its growth, the graph has gone up. The trajectory has been positive between Pakistan and China. But somehow because of the pressure and, as they say, realpolitik, I think we will have to keep a balance in the sense that we do not get embroiled in a crossfire and I think that Pakistan can do it. Most of the countries will do it and they are doing it. They do not want to ally themselves with one particular country or another particular power.
So, somehow this kind of balance will have to be exercised while keeping our core national interest in mind.
SttF: As far as our foreign policy options are concerned, there is certain level of internal fragility as far as the economy is concerned, governance, etc. The internal strength can be related to how strong our foreign policy is. So, the room that we have is limited. And then we have, as you just mentioned, long standing relations with China and the economic lifeline which is CPEC. But with the US we have the largest export market, then we have their FDI, Development aid coming in, and the Bretton Woods institutions—IMF, World bank—which the US has considerable influence in. How do we hedge this scenario, especially considering our internal weakness as far the economy and governance is concerned?
MK: Difficult but not impossible. The reason is that our relationship with one country or one power is not at the expense of the other. USA does not have that kind of interest now in Pakistan. It is our compulsion that we are part of this IMF program…
… Foreign policy is a reflection of your domestic strength. If you are domestically strong, of course your profile, your clout will be augmented. But, if you are weak then you will face pressures. And there are pressures… We cannot, for the time being, abandon the IMF program, although I am happy to note that the Government is saying that this is going to be our last program, but we have to walk the talk. The point is that we should focus on our internal challenges: concrete reforms, austerity, improvement of governance, civil service reforms, etc… we can’t afford dithering. I think it should be accepted as a national challenge; otherwise, pressures on Pakistan will continue to mount.
On the foreign policy front, as I said, we can keep a balance. We should be very clear that we are not abandoning our time-tested friendship with China for the sake of other countries, because CPEC has contributed to Pakistan’s socio-economic development, despite hiccups…and more importantly, there is convergence of views and convergence of interest as to how the regional and global situation is evolving.
Look at our region. I’ll focus on South Asia and Southwest Asia, because Pakistan is right in the center. On the one hand you have India with which you have historical baggage. Your disputes remain unresolved. It’s a constant security imperative for us, a foreign policy priority – a foreign policy challenge, I would say.
On the other hand, you have this neighborhood where you have China standing by you, then you have Iran, Afghanistan and the Central Asian Republics. And of course, in the extended neighborhood you have Russia.
Now, what is happening in this region? You exclude India for the time being because your relationship with India is not normal. You focus westward. In this region right now, the mainstream thought, and mainstream approach of regional countries is to focus on economic cooperation, connectivity and economic integration. And they see BRI as a kind of vehicle/window. Since Pakistan is a part of BRI through CPEC and CPEC has delivered, so all these regional countries also realize that aligning their policies or at least economic priorities with Pakistan will help them. The Central Asian Republics are all landlocked. They want to reach out to sea waters. Pakistan is the easiest route for them.
I recall that when I was in Tashkent, and that way back in the mid 90s, even at that time, the then President, Islam Karimov, would tell us that for them the shortest route to reach the Arabian Sea is through Pakistan. That sentiment has now grown. You can see now Pakistan is tying up with Uzbekistan for railway connectivity, Tajikistan is interested, all these countries are interested. The only problem is Afghanistan.
So that is the kind of vision on which we should work. We should work to normalize our relations with India. That will be important for peace and stability. But so far it has not happened and if it does not happen in the foreseeable future we should focus westward from where our economy can gain through trade, through commercial cooperation, through financial cooperation. This is a God-given opportunity for Pakistan. These countries have now started looking towards Pakistan because of the change in our policy…
…My point is that we should focus right now on our neighborhood and of course trying to forge as many economic linkages wherever they appear: ASEAN, EU and, you were right in saying that the US is our largest market, so we are not going to compromise that…
…and I can tell you, China never tells us to spoil or vitiate our relationship with any country; be it the US or be it others. They say that we need stability in the region. And China is very keen on stability because it has borders with 18 countries and it has settled borders with everyone except India and Bhutan. They want normalcy in the region. There is a very good Chinese proverb that says if you have fire in the neighborhood, that fire will also engulf you.
The full 3-part interview can be accessed through visiting our YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/@criterionq
