Content uploaded by Muhammad Nawaz
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Muhammad Nawaz on Jul 06, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
Journal of Historical Studies
Vol. VI. No. I (Jan-Jun 2020) PP 267-288
267
The US Policy Toward South Asia: An Historical
Assessment
Dr. Muhammad Nawaz Bhatti
Associate Professor
Department of Politics & IR
University of Sargodha
Misbah Shaheen
Lecturer
Department of Politics & IR
University of Sargodha
Dr. Asia Saif Alvi
Assistant Professor
Department of Politics & IR
University of Sargodha
Abstract
The 21st century witnessed substantial changes in American
foreign policy with reference to South Asia; the US considered
this region as a "strategic backwater for long time. In the days
of Cold War, the US treated it only for detecting the Russian
expansion in the region. However, the incident of 9/11 and
increasing strategic collaboration between the US and India
forced the US not to underestimate this region. Moreover,
recent deposition of this region and its shifts in global power
affairs has augmented the role of South Asia. The presence of
the US Forces in Afghanistan, hostility between two atomic
powers, Pakistan and India, the US anxieties about the spread
of nuclear weapons, war against terrorism, vastly increasing
Chinese influence in the region, and revival of cold war are the
subjects that compelled US to entitled South Asia as a key
element in its policy.
Keywords: United States, Foreign Policy, South Asia,
Terrorism, Nuclear Powers
Introduction
It is noteworthy to describe here that during colonial period, the
term "South Asia" was usually renowned as the "Indian Sub-
Dr. Muhammad Nawaz Bhatti,Misbah Shaheen &Dr. Asia Saif Alvi
268
Continent” as it was consisted of series of kingdoms where
colonial powers had applied a diverse system of subservience.
Presently, South Asia is known for the number of huge
countries of the world. The countries belonging to this specific
region, for increasing collaboration among them, have set up an
association christened as SAARC (South Asian Association for
Regional Cooperation). The vitality of the region can be
determined through this point that 25 percent of the world's
population live in it
1
. Besides this, its geo strategic position
reflects its significance in the world politics. Strategically, it is
located at the cross roads of Asia, and making a defensive
perimeter for China. This region is detached from Central Asia
by way of a narrow strip of Wakhan (a name of Afghan
territory). Moreover, it forms the strategically most important
area bordering the Indian Ocean by linking the Middle East
with South East Asia. Hence, being the only Super power of the
world, the US (United States) has lot of benefits in this vital
region; consequently, South Asia has attained a distinctive
position in the US foreign policy. In spite the fact that the US
neglected the strategic importance of this area for a long time.
American foreign policy for South Asia, after WWII, focused
only for trade point of view as this region was a key source of
export for American Tobacco Company, but thereafter US
decided to get rid of the policy of "isolationism" and showed its
extreme concentration in global politics for minimizing the
Communist influence on the world
2
. Consequently, the
American interference in the regional affairs of South Asia rose
on account of the various ideological, political and military
disputes with Russia. The principal factor which played a
pivotal role in developing so much attraction of the US foreign
policy toward South Asia was the US view of region's
significance for tracking down of its wide-ranging global
strategic and geo-political ends in the region. The proximity of
major powers like Russia and China with South Asia forced the
US policy makers not to neglect this region. This connotation
was also based on this point that it is the region that administers
the dynamic sea lanes of communication in the Indian Ocean
where it joins Gulf and South East Asia the binary politically
unstable and economically precarious regions of Asia. Hence it
is very clear that the US interests in this particular region were
Journal of Historical Studies
Vol. VI. No. I (Jan-Jun 2020) PP 267-288
269
not of economic nature but were based on the strategic
competition with the Russia which had strong ambitions to
maintain supremacy on rest of the powers of South Asia.
However, the US regarded this area to control the communist
expansion during the Cold War era, but the current changes in
the pattern of global power affairs have augmented the strategic
status of South Asia. The changing scenario of South Asia,
after 9/11 attacks, and increasing strategic cooperation between
India and the US have reformed the dimensions of the US
foreign policy regarding this area
3
. The presence of the US
Armed Forces in Afghanistan, hostility between two atomic
powers of this region, Pakistan and India, the US anxieties
about the spread of nuclear weapons, war against terrorism,
vastly increasing Chinese influence in the region, growing
economic importance of South Asia and revival of cold war
between the US and Russia are the subjects which have
drastically constrained the US to give central position to this
region in its foreign policy. Hence realizing this perspective, at
present the US foreign policy depends upon multiple issues
instead of single one. The following paragraphs will explain
these issues as well as the role of these concerns in constituting
and organizing the US foreign policy.
Counter Terrorism
Terrorism and the related ferocious undertakings have
remained an undying problem in South Asia for the last several
decades. On the one hand, terrorism is being used as a weapon
by a number of groups for advancing their particular causes like
separatism, religious extremism, national self-determination, so
on and so forth. On the other hand, South Asia is badly
exaggerated by this global nature of terrorism that is playing a
significant role in altering the rhetoric and challenges in South
Asia. Currently, not a single state in this region is completely
safe from this nightmarish problem. Incidentally, Pakistan,
Afghanistan and India are directly facing this issue on their soil
in the form of terrorist activities. The states like Sri Lanka,
Bangladesh and Nepal are also passing through this trouble in
the shape of ethnic division or political chaos
4
. Essentially, all
the states belonging to this region are situated around India
such terrestrial closeness among these states have provided a
Dr. Muhammad Nawaz Bhatti,Misbah Shaheen &Dr. Asia Saif Alvi
270
golden chance for terrorist groups to create cross-border ethnic
turmoil as well as operate wide ranging accessible
communication system for promoting their activities in the
whole world. Moreover, ineligible and corrupt governments
along with socio-economic disparities among the people of
these states have made this region a bountiful land of terrorism.
In addition, the antagonism among the South Asian states
weakens political relation; consequently, it can also be
considered a principal obstacle in producing collaboration in
the region. Even though, a number of efforts have been made
from the SAARC platform to minimize these challenges that
are commonly faced by all regional states, however the
permanent hostility between two major states of South Asia,
Pakistan and India, has made all attempts fruitless
5
. In fact, the
'War on Terror' as it was posed by the US in Afghanistan,
provided solid foundations to South Asia in becoming hotbed
of international terrorism. At that moment, no one can deny this
reality that the peace and prosperity of the whole world is at
stake due to the menace of terrorism in this region. Therefore,
the threats posed by terrorist organizations are a great risk for
the US hegemonic design, security and her interests in South
Asia. As a result, the US revised its policy management styles
as it provides early indication of how important issues may be
tackled.
Nuclear Non-Proliferation
The matter of nuclear non-proliferation has remained a
keystone in the US foreign policy. Therefore, such issue has
become a major ground of shifting the US attention towards
South Asia. In this region, Pakistan and India is being provided
solid basis of anxiety for the US interests as both countries are
atomic power and traditionally hostile in nature.
Both neighboring countries have stronger nuclear arsenal, with
new weaponry and more aggressive doctrines, such nuclear
arms race between these two is intensifying the risk of
confrontation
6
. The US nuclear non-proliferation efforts had to
face a severe obstruction in May, 1998, when India showed
itself as atomic power by conducting five underground nuclear
tests. Similarly on 28th, May 1998, Pakistan repeated the same
Journal of Historical Studies
Vol. VI. No. I (Jan-Jun 2020) PP 267-288
271
practice by conducting six nuclear tests
7
. On 13 May, 1998 the
US President Clinton carried out military and economic
sanctions on India and Pakistan by applying section 102 of the
Arms Export Control Act
8
. These sanctions were however
lifted in the following years because both were not ready to
step down their nuclear program. In South Asia, the matter of
nuclear proliferation cannot be neglected due to a series of
contentions. For example, India is endeavoring to achieve
supremacy over China while Pakistan is trying to maintain
balance of power against its traditionally rival India. The main
concern of the US is about the present competition of nuclear
weapons between India and Pakistan as this confrontation may
transform into atomic war between these two. The US Deputy
Secretary, Strobe Talbot, on 12th November, 1998, expressed
following three major apprehensions of the US Government
about the said issue
9
;
a. Prevention of nuclear and missile race in South Asia,
b. Strengthening of global non-proliferation regime
c. Making efforts for better relations between Pakistan and
India and resolving of Kashmir problem
The US reservations are also about nuclear attack by either
Pakistan or India, which can cause vast destruction in South
Asia. However, the most alarming matter for the US is to
monitor and control of nuclear weapons as Dr A.Q. Khan (the
founder of Pakistan's atom bomb) and his associates were
alleged in December 2003 for sailing nuclear technology to
Iran, Libya, and North Korea
10
. Soon after, former high
ranking US officials Henry Kissinger, William Perry, San Nun
and George Shultz in an article published in January 2006
entitled, "A World Free of Nuclear Weapons" expressed their
reservations concerning nuclear technology in such a way that "
the world is entering into a new nuclear era, with nuclear know-
how proliferating and non-state terrorist groups seeking to
attain and use weapons of mass destruction"
11
. Therefore, the
most vital interest of the US policy makers is to prevent the two
nuclear states in South Asia from nuclear attack so that the
peace and prosperity of the whole region could be stabilized at
maximum level.
Dr. Muhammad Nawaz Bhatti,Misbah Shaheen &Dr. Asia Saif Alvi
272
Detailed U.S. Foreign Policy Objectives for Key Actors in
South Asia
India:
The perspective of the US foreign policy about India was not in
the pink during cold war era due to Indian fragile economy and
non-aligned foreign policy. Today by way of strengthening its
democratic institutions, solid defense on the bases of atomic
power, rapidly developing economy and more than a billion
populations, India has received a substantial status in
international circles
12
. Furthermore, because of above
mentioned characteristics it has become a key player for
maintaining security and stability of the region. Thus, the US
foreign policy makers are focusing on India in lieu of following
interests
i. Deepening strategic ties with India in order to
counterbalance China.
ii. To support India against the emergence of pro-
Western South Asian powers.
iii. Firming up India‟s influence in East Asia.
iv. Attainment of Indian support in order to safeguard
U.S. interests and presence in the region.
v. To ensure the US access in Indian markets and other
sectors at a greater extent.
Pakistan:
The main objective of the US is to make sure Pakistan‟s
stability and solidarity, so that it could preserve its nuclear
abilities, increases its export and averts extremist elements
from its country. The US believes that Pakistan can focus the
social and economic development of its people, if it would
establish good relations with India
13
. The US accepts, to
develop a secular and democratic government in Pakistan that
can harmonize their policies with U.S. viewpoint. Furthermore,
the US foreign policy in Pakistan depends upon following
interests.
i. Overthrow, disassemble, and eradicate al-Qaida
network along with other terrorist groups.
Journal of Historical Studies
Vol. VI. No. I (Jan-Jun 2020) PP 267-288
273
ii. To assist Pakistani Government in meeting with their
economic, political as well as social needs so that the
masses could not be misled towards violent activities.
iii. Keeping Pakistan‟s nuclear arsenal far from the reach
of extremists.
iv. Making joint efforts with Pakistan to maintain lasting
peace and stability in Afghanistan.
Afghanistan:
The first and foremost objective for the US is to defeat Taliban,
diminish extremism and strengthen political stability in
Afghanistan. In this respect, Washington is making its best
effort to advance the capability and legality of Afghan
government and institutions at military as well as civilian
level
14
. Therefore, the US interests in South Asia depend upon
two divergent type of strategy. The first target for the US is to
fight against terrorism which became a main cause of its
intervenes in Afghanistan. The situation after September 11
compelled U.S. to engage in Afghanistan till the complete
elimination of international terrorism. Although, the U.S. has
been fighting against terrorism in Afghanistan for the last
several years, yet there has not been any possibility of solid
political or military victory until now. As the U.S. has
endeavored a lot to promote capacity of Afghan government.
The second challenge before the US is to keep safe
Afghanistan‟s stability from negative impacts of armed
violence. However, the US has made substantial efforts in all
these fields but strategically cannot be considered satisfactory.
Hence, the main concern for the US strategists is to reshape the
future of Afghanistan in such a way that the process of nation
building could be protected. The US is also struggling to
prevent Afghanistan from civil war supported by Afghanistan's
neighbors.
The US is also focusing Afghanistan with reference to China in
spite of the fact that china is not part of South Asia. The US is
judging the worth of China by keeping in view of alliance of
China with Pakistan and its contention with India
15
. Besides
this, out of eight South Asian states five states including
Afghanistan, Nepal, Bhutan, India and Pakistan share their
Dr. Muhammad Nawaz Bhatti,Misbah Shaheen &Dr. Asia Saif Alvi
274
border with China; consequently, China exists as an important
stakeholder of this region and intended to perform a decisive
role
16
. In fact, China observes South Asia as its indispensable
part therefore; it has taken vigorous steps to present itself as a
dominant actor of this region. Strategically, China‟s foremost
interest in South Asia is to set in motion its access to markets as
well as natural resources of the region. Moreover, the sea Lanes
in the Indian Ocean is main source of communications for
China to pass its oil bulk. Therefore, Chinese main interest is to
secure these sea Lanes and create suitable environment in
South Asia for carrying out these activities that can be
influenced by Indo-US nexus
17
. As stated by China White
Paper on National Defense 2002, China has taken following
steps for countering Indo- US influence in the region.
i. China has increased the activities of People's Liberation
Army (The Name of China‟ Army) in the Indian Ocean
by way of making ports and creating electronic
intelligence facilities for safeguarding the Sea Lanes.
ii. Making efforts to strengthen the nuclear energy and
enhance defense capability of Pakistan.
iii. Supplying arms and other defense equipments to Nepal
for augmenting its military relations with it.
iv. China has strengthened military collaboration with
Myanmar through mounting Myanmar‟s transport
system and naval sectors.
v. China has enhanced defense support to Sri Lanka and
Bangladesh by developing strategic ports there and
similarly, intensified the struggles to normalize its
diplomatic relations with Bhutan.
Therefore, the US strategists have great concern by all these
emphatic changes in China‟s policy towards South Asia. In
fact, the US and China have similar type of interests in South
Asia that‟s why, foreign policy of both the countries regarding
this region has great significance for each other. As a
consequence the US foreign policy in South Asia on the
question of China is consisted of two elements: firstly,
cooperating with China on the issues of regional and global
peace and security without mobilizing the side of the expanse
of the US interests or strategic domination. Secondly,
Journal of Historical Studies
Vol. VI. No. I (Jan-Jun 2020) PP 267-288
275
Enhancing Confidence Building Measures (CBMs) with
Chinese military but also acting to comprehend its military
expansionism (perceived or actual).
US Policy towards South Asia
Cold War Period:
The U.S. foreign policy in any specific region of the world is
affected by multiple factors, which may be defined as the US
interests attached with a specific region, the devotion, sum and
quality of information provided at different levels of
government, the restrictions that occur in the U.S. government
and the limitations imposed by the State and non-state actors of
that particular region. Therefore, the U.S. interests in any
region of the world are determined by way of these patterns. In
this context, the U.S. foreign policy concerning South Asia has
witnessed a number of ups and downs and several phases of
engagement and disengagement. After WWII the U.S. interests
were centralized to the Persian Gulf, the Caribbean or in East
Asia because of their oil resources, vast trade and geographic
proximity. At same time, the US trade and investment in the
South Asia was insignificant as the market, resources and
location of this region had no attraction for the US interests
18
.
Hence, during the Cold War era, the only determining factor of
US policy regarding South Asia was to prevent this region from
absorption into the communist bloc
19
. As a result, only
geostrategic worth in the early stage of Cold War, the US
showed some association with regional security of South Asia.
In this framework, the US policy makers assumed that India
was not capable to perform a leading role against communism
in South Asia. Unlike this, Pakistan‟s image in the eyes of U.S.
was positive to cope with this problem owing to its religious
empathy towards Middle Eastern Muslim countries, its
geographical propinquity to oil rich countries of Persian Gulf,
its anti communist philosophy and particularly its policy to
create balance of power with India were definitely a great
source of attraction for Washington towards Pakistan.
Consequently, the US enhanced its military as well as air
alliance with Pakistan which was strictly criticized and opposed
by India. The US military aid to Pakistan isolated India and
Dr. Muhammad Nawaz Bhatti,Misbah Shaheen &Dr. Asia Saif Alvi
276
therefore, it activated India to gain the sympathies of Soviet
Union.
On the other hand, due to certain global changes, within the
South Asia during the period of late 1960s, the US shifted its
policy from engagement to disengagement in the region. The
leading global factors of this move were the development of the
Vietnam War, Sino-Soviet rift and the beginning of oil
diplomacy
20
. As result of this disengagement from South Asia,
the US remained neutral during the Indo-Pak wars of 1965 and
1971. However, this neutrality faced inordinate challenges in
the Indo-Pak War of 1971, as the Soviet-India Partnership and
the Treaty of 1971 compelled the US as well as China to
remain neutral during wars
21
. Besides this, some other factors
also strengthened the arguments of those who favored the US
policy of disengagement from the South Asia. The notion
behind these arguments was that Russia has assumed the
responsibility to maintain India's security; this would not only
be helpful in containing Chinese pressure but also creating a rift
between Sino-Soviet relations which was not bad for US
interests. They also argued that the region has a very low
profile of economic development and trade investment
therefore, it cannot prove affective in flourishing the US
economic interests. Furthermore, the weapons that had been
provided by the US to the South Asian countries, for checking
the communist expansionism, are often used by these countries
against each other. So these were the factors which forced the
US to carry on the policy of disengagement towards South
Asia.
However, the U.S. policy of disengagement brought to an end
with the invasion of the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. The
arrival of Soviet Union in Afghanistan repeated the terror of
communism in Western countries. Pakistan played a vanguard
role in the US war for overthrowing communists from
Afghanistan. Hence the stated narrative clarifies that the US
policy for South Asia during the Cold War period has not
remained consistent and durable for a long term. Furthermore,
The US has viewed South Asia on the basis of its global
Journal of Historical Studies
Vol. VI. No. I (Jan-Jun 2020) PP 267-288
277
strategic and material interests therefore; it interpreted regional
conflicts mostly from global angles.
Post-Cold War Period
The halt of Afghan War in 1989 and the collapse of Soviet
Union in 1991 brought to an end a long era of Cold War. This
major development not only altered all patterns of relationships
among the nations but also the landscape of entire world
politics. Thus, with this new strategic scenario, Washington
reformed regional, global as well as bilateral relations not just
with South Asia, but with the entire world. The post-Cold War
US foreign policy demanded a new assessment about
engagement and disengagement in South Asia. Guihong Zhang
states that with the culmination of Cold War, the US policy
regarding South Asia had required two main changes
22
. First, as
the Soviet Union was no longer capable to remain a paramount
actor in South Asia, so the US recognized the regional
importance of Sub-Continent and started to treat India and
Pakistan in a different way by understanding the vitality of
these countries. Second, the US identified that the dangers to its
interests in South Asia does not emerge from outside the region
but rather inside. Therefore, these threats can be overcome by
promoting democratic values, non-proliferation and economic
liberalization in the region. In addition, Cohen and Dasgupta
argued that after the end of Cold War epoch the US had
following identifiable interests in South Asia
23
.
i. Strengthening economic as well as strategic ties
with India.
ii. Safeguarding Pakistan‟s integrity for
maintaining peace in South Asia.
iii. Limiting the activities of Islamic extremists.
iv. Curbing terrorism in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
v. Inhibiting the possibly precarious arms race in
the region.
vi. Encouraging peace process between Pakistan
and India involving Kashmir dispute.
Consequently, during the first phase of post Cold War era the
US extremely felt the significance of South Asia. As a result, in
1992, the South Asia Bureau was established in the Department
Dr. Muhammad Nawaz Bhatti,Misbah Shaheen &Dr. Asia Saif Alvi
278
of State (DoS), and it was responsible for enhancing relation
with South Asian countries. The robust steps of this Bureau
categorically improved the US involvement in the region.
Similarly, National Security Policy Review of South Asia was
conducted in early 1997 as it made possible the US president‟s
visit in March 2000. It was a historic event as it was the first
presidential tour to South Asia in over two decades. It must not
be ignored that President Clinton did not give much importance
to South Asia in early phase of his regime, but from 1994, he
changed his strategy about this region and boosted the
economic and military relations with India and Pakistan.
President Clinton adopted the policy of previous Governments
and endeavored to check India and Pakistan from acquiring
nuclear armaments. He also stressed upon both the countries to
resolve Kashmir problem.
After 1994, President Clinton started his efforts to promote
Indo-US relationship on the base of several reasons. David S.
Chou has explained these reasons in such a way that the
dismemberment of Soviet Union had compelled India and U.S.
to review their foreign policies
24
. On one hand, India had no
option to use Moscow as an alternate to Washington but on the
other hand, the importance of India as compare to Pakistan with
respect to the US policy makers was expressively increased
after this disintegration. The main notion behind this theory
was that being the major stakeholder in South Asia, India could
prove more effective than Pakistan in sustaining peace and
security of the region. Being vast market for the US goods,
capital, and technology, the Washington could not
underestimate the economic significance of India. Furthermore,
as for as Clinton Administration was concerned, geopolitical
status of India was much more than Pakistan because
strategically the US considered, India has a strong counter
weight to China in spite of the fact that the US encouraged a
strategic partnership with China also.
These were the factors which played a pivotal role in softening
the hearts of U.S. policy makers towards India than Pakistan. In
addition, the U.S. government, during this period, also made
considerable efforts to prevent both India and Pakistan from
Journal of Historical Studies
Vol. VI. No. I (Jan-Jun 2020) PP 267-288
279
proliferating mass destruction weapons. All these efforts
proved in vain, when on 11 May, 1998 India conducted nuclear
tests and on 28 May, Pakistan also set off five nuclear devices;
followed by further tests on 30 May in response of India‟s tests.
The Clinton administration, contrary to these tests, imposed
economic and military sanctions against both countries.
However on 15 July, 1998, the Congress passed Brownback
Amendment in which sanctions were relaxed on both of these
countries because these sanctions did not prove successful in
changing nuclear strategy of India and Pakistan
25
. Thus it is
very clear that nuclear policy of Clinton administrations in
South Asia could not bound India and Pakistan from
conducting further tests in future.
Like Clinton administration, the G.W. Bush as the President of
U.S. also decided to carry on the policy of "India First" keeping
in view India‟s rising economy and its emergence as global
market. As a result of these developments; the Bush
administration was seen very active for improving its economic
as well as strategic relations with India. As for as the US policy
towards China was concerned, the Bush administration did not
treat China as a strategic partner and declared it as a strategic
challenger, despite the fact that, the Clinton administration was
the supporter of establishing good relations with China. The
Bush administration also considered China as a main rival of
the US interests in South Asia; therefore, China was taken as a
key part in Bush's policy regarding this region. The general
perception of Bush administration was that only India could
prove a better option for countering weight to China. The main
logic behind this perception was that China and India were
confronting each other for several decades on account of their
serious border disputes consequently; it was natural decision of
Bush administration to support India with the intention of
forming durable strategic coalition against China. Similarly, for
cementing the strategic relations with India; the Bush
administration not only relaxed the non-proliferation policy in
South Asia but also lifted those sanctions which were imposed
by the US on India and Pakistan after nuclear tests.
Dr. Muhammad Nawaz Bhatti,Misbah Shaheen &Dr. Asia Saif Alvi
280
Post September 11 Period
The situation after terrorist assaults on World Trade Centre and
Pentagon on 11 September, 2001 enforced the US to revise all
the objectives of its foreign policy
26
. The global war against
terrorism emerged as the only strategic objective of the US
foreign policy and all other priorities including the "China
threat" were ignored. As said by Christina Rocca the Assistant
Secretary for South Asia in the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee in March, 2004, that the core objective of U.S.
foreign policy concerning South Asia would be combat
terrorism and the eliminating those circumstances that promote
terror in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Thus it is very clear that the
situation after September 11 changed the dynamics of whole
world and specifically of South Asia. The said incident made
Pakistan the centre stage of whole U.S. foreign policy in South
Asian region. In this regard, two factors contributed very much
in mounting Pakistan‟s importance in the U.S. policy. First, the
close geographical affinity between Pakistan and Afghanistan
as well as good diplomatic relation of Pakistan with the Taliban
government attracted Washington towards Islamabad. Second,
the possible threats imposed by terrorism in Pakistan also
motivated the U.S. to promote its strategic ties with Pakistan
27
.
Thus the U.S. and Pakistan expanded their collaboration which
mainly aimed at enhancing the capability of Pakistan‟s law
enforcement agencies for countering terrorism and coordinating
the activities of intelligence agencies for tracing out the
terrorists of Al-Qaeda and other terrorist‟s organizations within
Pakistan and particularly along with Pak-Afghan border. Thus
after September 11, Pakistan‟s role as frontline State in war
against terrorism affirmed wrong the Clinton's policy of
declaring Pakistan as a failing state and India as the hegemonic
state in South Asia.
Moreover, the situation after September 11, Pakistan‟s role in
war against terrorism in Afghanistan compelled the U.S. to
recognize the frontline status of Pakistan. The growing
cooperation of U.S. with Pakistan created a gulf between Indo-
U.S. relations for a short period; however, this gap did not
affect long term joint trade, commercial interests and security
cooperation between U.S. and India.
Journal of Historical Studies
Vol. VI. No. I (Jan-Jun 2020) PP 267-288
281
Rebalancing Strategy of Obama Administration
It was the general perception of Obama‟s Government that after
the rising importance of South Asia, the U.S. would have to
apply certain implications in its policy. Consequently, the
Obama‟s administration reviewed his strategy with a purpose to
develop the U.S. links with the region at different imperative
levels. The main purpose of this strategy is to support the rise
of prosperous and peaceful Asia. A dynamic and prosperous
Asia, integrated with the global economy is central to the U.S.
interests particularly to the U.S. economy. In this context,
expanding the rebalancing to include South Asia is not just
indispensable, it is also vital in the U.S. foreign policy
calculations. The significance of South Asia lies in the fact that
a peaceful and stable South Asia that joins East Asia's
production networks will offer counter point to the
predominance of China's economic expansion in the region and
produce additional impetus and resilience to Asia's rise. Thus,
by extending the strategic rebalancing to South Asia, the U.S.
indicates a timely signal to its long term commitment to the
region.
China-India Policy
The U.S. foreign policy with respect to South Asia under
Obama administration did not display any change and sustained
the policies of his predecessor in preserving regional stability
as well as the U.S. domination in South Asia. On the one hand,
corresponding to this strategy, the Obama administration
carried on its policy of forging a cooperative relationship with
China but simultaneously remained energetic for tackling its
rising military power while on the other hand, the U.S.
maintained a good strategic partnership with India
28
. Obama
like Bush administration considered India as an emerging
power of South Asia in 21st century. It was because of this
reason that the Bush administration in his term, conferred de-
facto recognition of India's getting hold of nuclear weapons and
afterwards both countries expanded their cooperation in various
fields like economics, defense and security etc. Similarly,
Obama administration in spite of understanding Pakistan‟s
importance as a frontline partner in the war against terrorism
continued a decent strategic partnership p with India.
Dr. Muhammad Nawaz Bhatti,Misbah Shaheen &Dr. Asia Saif Alvi
282
Obama’s Policy for Afghanistan and Pakistan
The first foreign policy initiative that Obama carried out just
after assuming office as President of U.S. in 2009 was to
handle the declining situation along with the Afghanistan and
Pakistan border region. As this area had a historic connotation
due to its porous land and it known as the safe haven for the
Taliban, Al-Qaeda and other related terrorist organizations
29
.
Obama had also assured during his election campaigns to
resolve 'Pak-Afghan' border issues at priority bases so
therefore, Obama soon after holding office as President,
decided to create the post of special envoy for the 'Pak-Afghan'
region. The U.S. also reviewed its foreign policy and strategy
towards Afghanistan and Pakistan which demanded a deep U.S.
approach towards both these countries. Furthermore, the U.S.
decided to keep the security agenda of this region at top priority
in its foreign policy. In Afghanistan, the main focus of the U.S.
and International Security Assistance Forces was limited to the
training of the Afghan National Security Forces (ISAFs) so that
Afghanistan may able to maintain its security after the
departure of the U.S. and international coalition forces. As for
as Pakistan is concerned, the U.S. decided to focus on to
counter-terrorism, non-proliferation and ensuring the security
of Pakistan's atomic weapons.
The Changing Economic Landscape of South Asia and New
Requirements of U.S. Foreign Policy
In the consequence of recent economic developments in South
Asia, the strategic importance of this region has been totally
altered. The whole world and particularly the U.S. are
compelled to provide extraordinary significance to this region.
The project of China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) has
spread a panic among international circle due to its strategic
vitality. As the U.S. considers itself as a main stakeholder and
strategic rival of China in this region therefore, the U.S. has lot
of worries regarding this project.
A revolutionary measure in the field of economic has been
appreciated through CPEC. In order to develop infrastructure
and to overcome energy crises China is ready to invest $46
billion in Pakistan. Pakistan‟s rebalancing options from
Journal of Historical Studies
Vol. VI. No. I (Jan-Jun 2020) PP 267-288
283
geopolitics to geo-economics is being converted through this
multi dimensional project. The geopolitical position of the
region is gradually converted into favor of China instead of
USA. Resultantly, the existing position of the region, with the
development of CPEC and countering terrorism, is a big
challenge for the US to maintain its position in the region. The
CPEC is seemed like a binding force that is going to integrate
the regional countries through economic incentives.
Chinese expansionism with the vision of reconstruction of
ancient Silk Road under the new „One Belt, One Road‟
(OBOR) initiative is going to weaken the strategic position of
Washington in South Asia. It would connect Asia, Africa,
Europe and important points in Eurasia. If China fully
implements this project as like American base Marshall Plan of
1947, this region will become the hub of all economic activities
of the world. This was definitely unwelcome news for the
United States, who had a cautious concern on both countries,
but there was no way for Washington to directly intervene.
Consequently, the big requirements of the US in the 21st
century are
i. To counter terrorism and strategic rebalancing in the
region
ii. To maintain its image and strong hold on the region
with the help of economic initiative as it will be parallel
strategy to counter CPEC
iii. To build up Confidence Building Measures (CBMs)
between Pakistan and India
Another major economic development which has intensified
the importance of this region is the Iranian Chabahar Port. The
port basically, is a project between Iran and India which aims at
constructing a sea port in Chabahar the Iranian region. The port
is located in Iran next to the Gulf of Oman and at the mouth of
the Strait of Hormuz.
Dr. Muhammad Nawaz Bhatti,Misbah Shaheen &Dr. Asia Saif Alvi
284
Source http://iranprimer.usip.org/blog/2013/dec/09/iran-
south-asia-1- Pakistan%E2%80%99s-delicate-balancing-act
It is the only Iranian port with direct access to the Indian
Ocean. It located in close proximity to Afghanistan and the
Central Asian countries of Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan; it has
been termed as the Golden Gate to these landlocked countries.
In terms of distance Chabahar is 700km away from the capital
of Baluchistan province, 950 km away from Milak, the closest
city of Afghanistan and 1827 Km from Turkmenistan border. In
terms of sea distances the Pakistani port of Gwadar is 84 km
away from Chabahar, Dubai is 565 Km, Karachi is 728 Km,
and Mumbai is 1349 Km from Chabahar. The port is definitely
an opportunity for Iran, Afghanistan and India. It‟s also an
opening to the sea for the land locked countries of Central Asia.
Located close to Gwadar, it provides India an avenue to extend
its reach and contest the emergence of China as the
predominant influence in the region.
Revival of Cold War
The US-Russia tensions are increasing as both countries are
confronting each other in Syrian civil war. The Russia is
backing Syrian Government while the U.S. has showed its full
sympathies with democratic forces like Syrian opposition and
Journal of Historical Studies
Vol. VI. No. I (Jan-Jun 2020) PP 267-288
285
assured full logistic support in order to establish a democratic
government in Syria. This daunting situation can cause the
revival of cold war between two countries. Being a territorial
proximity and close strategic ties of Russia with all major
South Asian States the region is representing a battle ground for
super powers.
Conclusion
It can be asserted from the above debate on the U.S. foreign
policy for South Asia since the Cold War era to 21st century,
that U.S. has always treated this region on the bases of its vital
strategic as well as economic interests which has remained
dynamics and oscillated with lot of ups and downs or
engagements and disengagements in this region. The strategic
interests have no doubt played a dominant role in the
formulations of its foreign policy in South Asia. In fact, the
U.S. foreign policy in any part of the region does not like
influence of any other power except itself. In the 21st century,
the U.S. policy formulators observe China in that perspective in
which Soviet Union was observed during the cold war era.
Hence the U.S. will treat India as its mutual partner as long as
the U.S. policy makers take China as a major threat for their
wider global interests in South Asia. Simultaneously, as the
terrorism is not yet eradicated from Afghanistan and peace as
well as stability of the country has not been maintained
therefore, the U.S. will endeavor to uphold its current balanced
policy in both India and Pakistan. However, after changing
economic scenario of South Asia, keeping in view the
increasingly disturbing condition of the U.S. relations with
Russia, the U.S. will have to overview its foreign policy
towards South Asian region. Chinese growing pace in the
region is going to be proved that the US needs to replace its
realistic approach with economic one.
Dr. Muhammad Nawaz Bhatti,Misbah Shaheen &Dr. Asia Saif Alvi
286
References
1
- Worldometer, Southern Asia Population, Accessed, May 15, 2017
http://www.worldometers.info/world- population/southern-asia-
population
2
- Ganguly Shivaji, U.S. Policy towards South Asia, Westview Press,
Boulder Co., 27 (1990).
3
- Inderfurth Karl F., U.S.-India Relations, in America's Role in Asia: Asian
and American Views, Report prepared by The Asia Foundation, 253-
269 (2008)
4
- Kishore Madhubani, The New Asian Hemisphere The Irresistable Shift of
Global Power to the East, (Public Affairs: New York, 2008).
5
- Tomislav Delinic Nishchal N. Pandey, SAARC: Towards Meaningful
Cooperation,(Modern Printing Press Kathmandu, Nepal 2012)
6
- Ashley Tellis, India’s Emerging Nuclear Posture: Between Recessed
Deterrent and Ready Arsenal, (New Delhi: Oxford University Press,
2001)
7
- Volha Charnysh, Pakistan‟s Nuclear Program, Nuclear age Peace
Foundation accessed 13 May, 2017
http://www.nuclearfiles.org/menu/key-issues/nuclear
weapons/issues/proliferation/pakistan/charnysh_pakistan_analysis.pdf
8
- Blood Peter R., Indo-U.S. Relations, CRS Issue Brief for Congress,
Foreign Affairs, Defense and Trade Division, 6-5 (2002).
9
- Jain Rashmi (ed.), The United States and Pakistan 1947-2006, (Radiant
Publishers, New Delhi, 2007)
10
- Volha Charnysh, Pakistan‟s Nuclear Program, Nuclear age Peace
Foundation accessed 13 May, 2017
http://www.nuclearfiles.org/menu/key-issues/nuclear
weapons/issues/proliferation/pakistan/charnysh_pakistan_analysis.pdf
11
- Doug Bereuter, America‟s Role in Asia Asian and American Views, The
Asia Foundation accessed 26 February 217
http://www.asiafoundation.org/resources/pdfs/AmericasRoleinAsia2008.
pdf
12
- George Perkovich, Toward Realistic US India Relations, Washington,
D.C. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace 2010.
Journal of Historical Studies
Vol. VI. No. I (Jan-Jun 2020) PP 267-288
287
13
- K. Alan Kronstadt, Pakistan-U.S. Relations: A Summary, Congressional
Research Service accessed 1 June, 2017
http://www.operationspaix.net/Data/Document/136~v~Pakistan_US_Rel
ations__A_Summary.pdf
14
- Kenneth Katzman, Afghanistan: Post-Taliban Governance, Security, and
U.S. Policy, Congressional Research Service accessed 29 May, 2017
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL30588.pdf
15
- Xun Sun, New Nuclear Triangle and China's Role in South Asia, RCSS
Policy Studies 32, Colombo, 19 (2005)
16
- Malik J. Mohan, South Asia in China's Foreign Relations, Pacific
Review, 13(1), 73-90 (2001)
17
- Hassan Saadat, Indo-U.S. Nuclear/Strategic Cooperation: Chinese
Response, Strategic Studies, xxxi(4), 44-88 (2012)
18
- Alexander Evans, The United States And South Asia After Afghanistan,
(The Asia Society New York 2012).
19
- Kochanek Stanely A., The U.S. Foreign Policy in South Asia", Pakistan
Horizon, 46 (3), 19 (1993).
20
- Robert J. McMahon, United States Cold War Strategy in South Asia:
Making a Military Commitment to Pakistan, 1947-1954, The Journal of
American History 75, no. 3 (1988): 812–40.
21
- Chou David S., U.S. Policy towards India and Pakistan inthe Post Cold
War, Tamking Journal of International Relations, 8(3), 27-56 (2005)
22
- Guihong Zhang, U.S. Security Policy towards South Asia after
September 11 and its Implications for China: A Chinese Perspective,
Strategic Analysis, 27(2) (2003)
23
- Cohen Stephen P. and Sunil Dasgupta, U.S.-South Asia: Relations under
Bush, Brookings Oxford, Analttica, 2 (2001)
24
- Chou David S., U.S. Policy towards India and Pakistan in the Post Cold
War, Tamking Journal of International Relations, 8(3), 27-56 (2005).
25
- Rajesh Rajagopalan, Atul Mishra, Nuclear South Asia: Keywords and
Concepts, Abingdon Rutledge 2015.
26
- Naftali, Timothy, Blind Spot : The Secret History of American
Counterterrorism, New York: Basic Books. 2006.
Dr. Muhammad Nawaz Bhatti,Misbah Shaheen &Dr. Asia Saif Alvi
288
27
- Rudolph Lloyd I. and Susanne Hoeber Rudolp, The Making of Foreign
Policy for South Asia: Offshore Balancing in Historical Perspective,
Economic and Political Weekly, 41(8), 703-709 (2006).
28
- Daniel Twining, “Diplomatic Negligence: The Obama Administration
Fumbles Relations With India,” Weekly Standard, May 10, 2010.
29
- Mark Landler, “The Afghan War and the Evolution of Obama”, accessed
3 June 2017 https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/01/world/asia/obama-
afghanistan-war.html?mcubz=1.
