Pakistani parliament may also seek to renegotiate a deal the Musharraf regime concluded in 2002, which includes language that can be interpreted as allowing drone strikes.    — File Photo

WASHINGTON: The Pakistani parliament is holding a joint session in Islamabad on Tuesday to finalise recommendations for rebuilding US-Pakistan ties.

“The parliamentary package could add new roadblocks, especially if it includes a demand to end drone attacks,” said two former US ambassadors — Teresita C. Schaffer and Howard B. Schaffer — in a joint piece they wrote for the Foreign Policy news site.

If the drone strikes stopped, “the pressure on the terrorists would be lifted, and Al Qaeda would be free to reconstitute”, observed an editorial page article in The Washington Post.

US officials also are believed to have expressed similar concerns in their meetings with Pakistani officials but the Pakistanis apparently told the Americans that they had little control over parliamentary recommendations, diplomatic sources said.

Ambassadors Teresita and Howard Schaffer noted that the involvement of parliament in this decision was a welcome step towards shared responsibility between civilians and the military, “but comes at the price of adding an unpredictable element to decision-making in Pakistan”.

The two former diplomats who returned last week from a visit to Pakistan argued that demanding an end to drone strikes was “not a good starting point for a post-2014 relationship that fosters internal stability in Pakistan and healthier regional and international relationships”.

But the Pakistanis argue that no elected body could allow an external power to bomb its territory. Instead, they urge the Americans to strengthen Pakistan’s capability to fight Al Qaeda and other militants.

“Ultimately, it is the Pakistanis who have to fight militants within their borders,” said a diplomatic source. “The Americans are not going to be there forever.”

While the Americans accept this argument, they point out that during the last two years; relations between the two countries have deteriorated so rapidly that it will require a lot of effort and time to rebuild the trust needed for such cooperation.

They say that Osama bin Laden’s discovery, and subsequent elimination, by US forces in Abbottabad, has created a trust gap which will be difficult to bridge.

The Pakistanis say that they are willing to take the first step towards rebuilding this trust by reopening Nato supply routes to Afghanistan.

But reports in the US media claim that Pakistan is demanding higher charges for transit facilities, which they say “is not a very friendly gesture”.

Diplomatic sources in Washington say that the Pakistani parliament may also seek to renegotiate a deal the Musharraf regime concluded in 2002, which includes language that can be interpreted as allowing drone strikes.

The Americans fear that reopening this subject may create new hurdles for promoting US-Pakistan ties. They point out that the Pakistanis have already been refusing visas to official US visitors and military advisers. The only exceptions are military officials dealing with F-16 supply and maintenance.

Ambassadors Teresita and Howard Schaffer noted that the Pakistanis were more focused on reaching an agreement on the end-game in Afghanistan.

“This end-game will indeed drive US-Pakistan relations in the short run, but the United States is likely to achieve little beyond resumption of logistical support,” they warned.