SOME critics often blame Liaquat Ali Khan for pushing Pakistan in the American camp. Does history support this claim? Plainly, the answer is no. We need to make things clear today on the 71st death anniversary of the Shaheed-i-Millat, who was assassinated during a public meeting on Oct 16, 1951.

We also need to analyse the question at a time when Pakistan and United States celebrate 75 years of their diplomatic relations. It is a historic truth that the US greeted Pakistan on the eve of independence from colonial rule in August 1947. Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah had read out the congratulatory message from the US leadership in the Constituent Assembly at the time of transfer of power from

Britain to Pakistan on Aug 15. The US government had facilitated Quaid’s address to the American nation on state radio.

Prime minister Liaquat paid a state visit to the US in May 1950 on the invitation extended to him by president Harry Truman. Earlier, his Indian counterpart, Jawaharlal Nehru, had visited the US in October 1949. In America, Liaquat did not ask for any aid, but stressed the need for trade between the two countries.

Washington offered limited assistance of commodity supplies to Pakistan under the Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act of 1954, commonly known as PL-480, or Food for Peace. On the other hand, American leadership demanded Pakistan to delay having diplomatic ties with China. Pakistan, under Liaquat’s leadership, was one of the foremost non-communist nations that had recognised the newly-born People’s Republic of China.

The US also asked Pakistan to send an army contingent to the Korean war, and to provide air bases to supplement its Cold War against the communist Soviet Union. The Americans also urged the prime minister to use his friendly influence on the leadership in Iran in the matter of its oil installations.

Liaquat did not agree to accept the US demands at the cost of national sovereignty, and as a matter of principle. It is true that Liaquat had expressed his intention to visit the Soviet Union during his visit to US. According to a diplomatic cipher dispatched by US ambassador Warren Austin on Oct 12, 1951, the White House was told that Liaquat did not pay heed to the US proposal of alliance in the Middle East, and emphasised that the Kashmir question was of primary nature. Four days later, he was assassinated.

History also tells us that American influence on Pakistan emerged at a later stage after Liaquat’s murder when a troika of civil and military leadership coupled with some politicians captured power in the country. Pakistan actually entered the era of military alliance with the US in 1954 when it joined the defence pacts of the Southeast Asia Treaty Organisation (SEATO) and the Central Treaty Organisation (CENTO). Liaquat was not even alive at the time, and key posts were held by the likes of Ghulam Mohammad, Iskander Mirza, Ayub Khan and Mohammad Ali Bogra.

Pakistan provided air base to the US during the first martial law regime long after Liaquat had already gone. It was the time when Pakistan became more and more dependent on the US. Pakistan’s foreign policy was completely based on the principle of non-alignment during Liaquat’s tenure. It was continued till the dismissal of Khwaja Nazimuddin as the prime minister in 1953.

Considering these facts, does it make any sense to blame Liaquat for Pakistan’s entry into the American bloc just on the pretext of his visit to the US?

If that is the case, should the Indians today hold Nehru responsible for supposedly pushing India into the American fold? Does that make any sense at all? It does’nt.

Mahfoozun Nabi Khan
Karachi

Published in Dawn, October 16th, 2022