The strings that threaten to shackle Pakistan

• Last Updated: October 11. 2009 10:25PM UAE / October 11. 2009 6:25PM GMT

The United States has overestimated its influence in Pakistan as it pushes a restrictive new aid package, a misjudgment that is neither supported by history nor helpful for its strategic goals in the region. In the past eight years, Washington has given $12 billion in aid, mostly in direct support for the military. That allotment reflected US priorities, although the actual distribution of the money shows how far the strategy went awry. Only about $500 million reached the military, while the bulk was spent by the former president Pervez Musharraf on economic stimulus measures to prop up his sagging support base.

The new aid package, the Kerry-Lugar bill, seems to put a stamp of approval on that shift of resources: the United States plans to triple non-military aid to Pakistan while keeping military support options open based on developments on the ground. In these pages, The National has consistently supported this new emphasis in aid towards economic development, the most effective strategy for stability and the most serious threat to militancy in the long term.

The bill’s fatal flaw, however, is the cobweb of strings attached. As it is currently formulated, it requires Islamabad to allow US oversight of its nuclear programme, to commit to fighting a basket of various militant groups and to keep the military from intervening in politics. Those are laudable goals in theory, but the bill is a tactical blunder that will worsen the US position if it is forced down Islamabad’s throat.

Even if those conditions were accepted, Pakistan’s myriad problems – with terrorism, corruption and political instability at the top of the list – cannot be solved by US diktat. The aid debate is instead driving a wedge between the president, Asif Ali Zardari, his tenuous political coalition and the military, with the issue cast as a battle for national sovereignty. In proud Pakistan, already smarting from US drone incursions over the Afghan border, the rancour would outweigh the gains.

And this is the wrong moment to be trying to hobble the military. The army chief, Ashfaq Kayani, has refreshingly abstained from political meddling. Instead the military has been making significant gains against the Pakistani Taliban in the North West Frontier Province and tribal areas, with a major offensive looming on Taliban and al Qa’eda sanctuaries in South Waziristan.

The Taliban’s attack on Saturday in Rawalpindi, the centre of military power, was a stark reminder that there is a war being waged for Pakistan that will continue to exact a heavy toll. As in many other symbolic attacks – on the Sri Lankan cricket team and the siege of a police academy in Lahore in particular – the goal was propaganda. Even when the Taliban pushed to within 100 kilometres of the capital in April, they could not hope for permanent battlefield victories once the military stood against them. And the shift to attacks within Pakistan, instead of India or Afghanistan, has further poisoned hearts and minds.

The United States should be offering its aid wisely instead of competing for public disfavour. The US president, Barack Obama or the bill’s sponsor, senator John Kerry, may now dilute the threat by saying publicly that the requirements are non-binding. That would be a backpedal that could have easily been avoided, but preferable to trying to tie strings to a Pakistan that refuses to be a puppet.