Alice Wells is a professional diplomat, trained in the art of nuances. One would imagine the power she represents allows her to speak softly, without having to show the stick. Blustering Trump is no Theodore Roosevelt. His weapon of choice is brashness, not quiet diplomacy. If you have the right worldview you would rather stay out of the orbit of his stick. You have the same approach to his envoys.
Why, then, did Ambassador Wells find it necessary to opt for public bellicosity on CPEC when speaking softly to the powers in Pakistan - that she seemingly has unlimited access to - would have yielded more? No need to brandish the stick there either. Between IMF and FATF, with a nod and a wink from our patron saints across the gulf, Pakistani authorities needed no lessons in gun boat diplomacy.
Last November she used the Woodrow Wilson platform to lecture to us on the pitfalls of CPEC, without offering any alternatives, and blissfully forgetting beggars can't be choosers. She used more than one platform to repeat the same message during her recent visit to Islamabad.
Quite predictably, there was a strong blowback to her unsolicited advice. The gatherings she addressed were unequivocal in what they thought of her prognostications and wasted no time in reminding her of the quintessentially transactional nature of US-Pakistan relations, and all the 'arm twisting' and the economic hit men that came with it.
By going public she made the task of her official interlocutors that much more difficult. Privately, they could have assured her of greater accommodation of US concerns on CPEC. Publicly, they had no choice but to tell the envoy to go mind your own business.
She has put a beleaguered government, still reeling from the Kuala Lumpur fiasco, in an awkward position. If progress on CPEC stalls, even if it is for unrelated reasons, the government will expose itself to the discomforting charge of surrendering to US pressure and compromising the country's best interests.
It is so much easier working the corridors of power, spraying subtle threats at will, than trying to sway public opinion at the think tanks. Her 'open diplomacy' got her nothing except a chafed government of Pakistan: It will now be that much more difficult for the government to go slow on CPEC.
Why did she do it? Surely she can't be that naïve to underestimate the negative reactions, if not outright hostility, that her 'friendly' call for caution was likely to generate. There is no way she could have gone off-script; if she had, the US embassy would have tried to mitigate the damage. It didn't.
The world of diplomacy is familiar with the concept of 'posturing', where you blow hot and cold when your real objective is something quite different. Diplomats are trained to tell posturing from 'positioning'. Was she posturing for someone else's benefit? Did the Chinese see through it?
The US position on China and the OBOR ('silk road') is well known. The US wishes to restrain China's growing influence, generally everywhere and more particularly in Asia. Even a novice diplomat would use his country's clout behind the scenes, rather than rushing into the public domain as clumsily as Ambassador Wells did.
There are books written on Thucydides's trap in the context of Sino-US relations: when a rising power threatens to displace a ruling power alarm bells ring; the two get on a collision course. The wise thing for the smaller fry is to stay clear of their path - to the extent they can.
So what was Ambassador Wells, no diplomatic spring chicken, up to? Did she seriously think she will be able to build enough of a public opinion pressure on the government to abandon CPEC? The thought that there could be a backlash never crossed her mind, nor that of her minders?
Clearly, it was a well thought out stratagem, with full realization of the stinging reaction that it was sure to ignite.
OBOR, ultimately carrying a price tag of an estimated $8 trillion and spreading over some 70 countries, is facing stiff resistance from some countries and accusations of neocolonialism and 'debt traps' are bandied around with gay abandon. CPEC is quite miniscule in terms of OBOR ambitions. But CPEC is almost like an OBOR flagship, showing the developing world that it goes beyond a trade- facilitating infrastructure to meeting the developmental needs of countries.
That is probably why Pakistan, hosting the most visible manifestation of OBOR potential, was chosen for going public. The audience, apparently, was not Pakistan but the budding aspirants of Chinese largesse. "Watch out, we don't like what we see - and we carry the big stick" seems to have been the Morse code to them.
OK, if that is too speculative an explanation for your taste, how about this one: the audience was India. The idea is to placate Indian worries; to curry favour with it: "we are playing for you" kind of message.
Wells came to Pakistan via India. Doesn't matter if the highest access she had there was at the Joint Secretary level. For the US it is India that's the more important player in the region. Besides other commonalities of interest, that is the country that can be relied upon to check-mate the Chinese dominance - and Pakistan is the cheeky nuisance in the way.
Using the stick to make the truant behave is not a viable option. Also, for its own reasons US would like to see a thawing of the frosty relations between the two South Asian powers. It reassures India that its terrorism bogey will be taken care of through FATF and its Chinese concerns by beating the drums of CPEC.
Pakistan is playing on a sticky wicket. Its economy needs help from anywhere and everywhere. Its Foreign Policy has become subordinated to economic compulsions. Its options are severely limited.
Western winds are often ominous. But sometimes there are unintended consequences. By going public with her message Ms. Wells has seen to it that the government is restrained from making any deals behind the scenes. She has also helped renew the national resolve. We may be down but not out; we will not take kindly to unabashed bullying.
No wonder, on this trip Wells was denied the red carpet to where it matters.
Comments
Comments are closed.