I don’t believe that the editors of the Wall Street Journal have fairly characterized the problems that could be created by the U. S.’s imposition of sanctions against Pakistan:
Aid is only one part of the leverage the U.S. can use to persuade Pakistan to change. An interagency policy review is considering the more potent step of rescinding Pakistan’s status as a major non-NATO ally. That would have serious consequences for the country’s military as it would lose access to U.S. military equipment, training and intelligence-sharing.
The U.S. could even designate Pakistan a state sponsor of terrorism, which would bring sanctions. Already the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering, a multilateral organization, has warned Pakistan it could be placed on a watch list for failing to stop terrorism funding.
Such steps are not to be taken lightly. The U.S. relies on Pakistani ports and roads to move heavy equipment in and out of Afghanistan, and rising U.S. tensions with Russia and Iran make alternate routes through Central Asia unfeasible. China gives Islamabad unconditional support and has promised to invest $57 billion in Pakistan’s infrastructure. If it is forced to rely more on Beijing, Islamabad might give the People’s Liberation Army Navy greater access to the Gwadar Port and other strategic advantages.
“Heavy equipment” is a misstatement. The U. S. moves the munitions they need to prosecute the war in Afghanistan via air. Everything else including food and, importantly, fuel is transported by ground transport through Pakistan. For that privilege we pay the Pakistanis—presumably part of the “aid” we supply. It’s actually a pay-off for right of way.
Additionally, Pakistan is so fragile that throwing a spanner into the works presents dangers we would probably prefer not to face. Pakistan’s Inter-Service Intelligence Agency, considered by many the best intelligence service in the world, is known to support terrorists, have close ties with Islamist groups, and provides them with support. Overthrowing the present Pakistani government, such as it is, risks putting Pakistan’s nuclear weapons (probably the third largest nuclear arsenal in the world) in the hands of those groups.
The sad reality is that we can either prosecute a war in Afghanistan or antagonize the Pakistanis. We can’t do both.
Welcome to the world of the 21st century. We have no allies. We have clients, rivals, and enemies. We’ve got to choose very carefully whom we can afford to antagonize and how much we can afford to antagonize them.
Pakistan can completely (100%) deny us any access to Afghanistan. Russia closed the route through their territory some time ago. China and Iran are contiguous, but good luck with that.
We either leave Pakistan alone, ignore its double dealing, which serves its own interests, or we ask their permission to bring our troops home. If they don’t grant it, our troops are essentially POW.
Our military units in Central Europe, the Middle East, Africa, Central Asia and East Asia are increasingly at risk of capture and destruction. Someone in Washington needs to get real.
We could transport our troops out of Afghanistan by air without Pakistani permission. We just can’t continue a war in Afghanistan without it.