CSS Prepare

compulsory · CSS study notes

Reserve R2 — Pakistan–US Relations: Transactional or Strategic?

Reserve question: "Pakistan–US relations have always been transactional." Discuss in the light of the Trump-era warming, the critical-minerals partnership and Pakistan's mediation role. How can Pakistan balance its ties with the US and China? (20)

🎯

Why it is likely: the US is a named syllabus item; US policy toward Pakistan was asked in 2018 (Trump's South Asia policy), 2020 (Indo–US partnership) and 2024 (Biden and the Indo-Pacific). The 2025–26 warming is a striking reversal. Probability: medium–high.

What the examiner wants

  • Discuss the transactional pattern (history)
  • The recent warming: minerals, mediation, trade
  • Balancing the US and China
  • Marks split: history ~4 · recent warming ~6 · still transactional? ~4 · balancing strategy ~5 · conclusion ~1

Outline

  • I. Introduction
  • II. The cycle of engagement and estrangement
  • III. The Trump-era warming (2025–26)
  • IV. Still transactional? Both sides of the argument
  • V. Balancing the US and China
  • VI. Conclusion

Model Answer

I. Introduction

  • Pakistan–US relations have swung between close partnership and cold distance, depending on what Washington needed at the time.
  • Thesis: the Trump-era warming is again driven by US needs (minerals, Iran, counter-terrorism), but it has a new economic base. If Pakistan uses it to build trade and investment rather than aid, the relationship could finally become durable, while Pakistan keeps its strategic partnership with China.

II. The cycle of engagement and estrangement

  • 1954–55: SEATO and CENTO, followed by the 1965 arms embargo.
  • 1979–89: the Afghan jihad and massive aid, followed by the Pressler sanctions (1990).
  • 2001–2021: the War on Terror and Coalition Support Funds, the Kerry–Lugar Bill (2009), then mistrust after Abbottabad (2011) and aid cuts (2018).
  • Pattern: each phase followed a specific US interest and ended when that interest faded.

III. The Trump-era warming

  • 2025:
    • An ISIS-K suspect handed over (March).
    • The India–Pakistan ceasefire, which Trump claimed credit for (May).
    • Field Marshal Asim Munir's White House lunch (June).
    • A trade deal with lower tariffs (July).
    • A $500 million critical-minerals framework between US Strategic Metals and the FWO (September).
  • 2026:
    • Pakistan joined the US Critical Minerals Ministerial (February).
    • First shipments of rare earths, antimony and copper went to the US (March).
    • Mediation in the US–Iran war: the April ceasefire, the Islamabad Talks and the June MoU, which earned Trump's public praise.
    • A counter-terrorism dialogue (August), and a proposed $10 billion exchange-stabilisation facility under discussion.
  • Trade: about $11.5 billion (2025), up 14%; the US is Pakistan's largest single export market.

IV. Still transactional?

  • Yes:
    • Warmth depends on Trump personally and on immediate needs (minerals, Iran).
    • Spats remain, such as the US ambassador's visit to Indian Kashmir (August 2026).
    • The US–India partnership stays strategically deeper; Rubio said ties with Pakistan don't come at India's expense.
  • But possibly more:
    • Minerals and trade create long-term interests on both sides.
    • Pakistan has proven value as a mediator.
    • The US designated the BLA a terrorist organisation (2025), meeting a Pakistani demand.
  • Verdict: still transactional at heart, but with the best chance in decades to turn into an economic partnership.

V. Balancing the US and China

  1. Openness: reassure Beijing that US minerals deals don't touch CPEC or defence ties. China dominates mineral processing anyway, which leaves room for both.
  2. Separate tracks: China for infrastructure and defence; the US for markets, technology, finance and minerals.
  3. A bridge role: Pakistan facilitated US–China contact in 1971 and could again play a modest bridging role.
  4. Economic strength: a stable economy gives leverage with both.
  5. Institutionalise US ties: a bilateral investment treaty, strategic dialogues and diaspora engagement, so ties survive changes of administration.
  6. Secure Balochistan: minerals investment depends on security at Reko Diq and Chagai.

VI. Conclusion

  • History says Pakistan–US ties are transactional; the 2025–26 warming hasn't yet proved otherwise.
  • But for the first time, trade and minerals rather than war and aid lie at the centre. If Pakistan delivers security and reforms while keeping China close, it can turn a moment into a partnership.

Key facts

  • SEATO: 1954. CENTO: 1955. Pressler: passed 1985, applied 1990. Kerry–Lugar: 2009.
  • USSM–FWO minerals framework: 500million(September2025).∗∗Trade2025:∗∗about500 million (September 2025). **Trade 2025:** about 11.5 billion.
  • Islamabad Talks (April 2026) and the Islamabad MoU (17 June 2026).