Pakistan and Russia

Pakistan’s relations with the Russian Federation, which emerged as the successor state to the USSR after its dissolution in December 1991, are quite naturally inseparable from the legacy of more than four decades of Pak-Soviet relations. Historically these relations were unsatisfactory. USSR perceived Pakistan in the military aspects sponsored by the US and Pakistan’s friendship with China in the context of the Cold War, while Pakistan felt threatened due to USSR close relations with India.

The Soviet military intervention in Afghanistan once again dealt a serious blow to Pak-Soviet relations. Pakistan felt a direct threat to its security from the presence of Soviet forces in Afghanistan while USSR demanded accommodation in Pakistan’s policy on Afghanistan and predicated the entire bilateral relationship on its response. The collapes of Soviet Union provided an opportunity for a new beginning in Pak-Russia relations, which was taken up by both sides. High-level bilateral contacts took place between Pakistan and the Russian Federation immediately thereafter. In November 1991. Pakistan’s minister of state for economics affairs visited Moscow followed by his well-Known tour of the Central Asian States. It was the first ministerial visit from Pakistan to the Russian Federation after years of neglect by past government and contributed significantly to the opening a new chapter of relations with Russia.

Several high-level exchanges of trips have taken place between the two sides since then, which include the visits of the vice-president (December 1991), foreign minister (July 1993) and first deputy foreign minister (May 1994) to Pakistan and those of Pakistan’s then secretary-general of foreign affairs (September 1992) and the foreign minister (July 1994). A broad range of bilateral issues was discussed during these visits, which, besides other areas of co-operation, also included collaboration in the fields of defense outer space technology and peaceful uses of nuclear energy. The exchange of these visits in indicated the Russian desire to upgrade relations with Pakistan and was a radical departure from the previous Soviet policy.


There are several other indication to show that Pakistan’s desire for a normal relation-ship with Russia, which is also reciprocated by Russian Federation. Pakistan had been appreciative of Russian balanced approach towards South Asia and attached independence significance “to its relations with Pakistan.” While Russian tried to maintain its traditionally close cooperation with India, it may not have a special relationship with that country at the expense to its ties with Pakistan. The Indians were not pleased with the development but the fact was that India has lost it strategic value. After the end of the cold war and the normalization of china-Russia relations, India no longer enjoyed the importance.


The relation between Pakistan and Russia began to develop, when Russia made concern on Kashmir issue, non-proliferation or the sale of defense equipment by Russia to Pakistan. Russia had moved away from its unconditional support to India on these issues. Russia’s expression of deep concern in October 1993 over the aggravation of the human rights situation in connection with the Hazartbal siege and its call upon all sides to work for a positive solution through peaceful means. This new development received the considerable concern in India. The Indians were also disappointed when the Russian leader made no statement on the Kashmir issue during Indian Prime Minister visit to Moscow in July 1994.


The Russian Federation did not oppose Pakistan’s resolution in the UN General Assembly on the nuclear-free zone in South Asia for the first time in 17 years in 1991. But it voted in favour of the proposal of Pakistan for first time in history Pakistan and Russia also pleaded for promotion of peace and stability in Afghanistan and Tajikistan. Russia demanded for the containment of turmoil to Central Asian States. Pakistan also sought tranquility and peace and to develop mutually beneficial co-operation with Afghanistan and Central Asian States.


Pakistan and Russia co-operated in the UN-sponsored talks on Tajikistan. Russia had been using its influence over the Tajik government while Pakistan doing the same. These rounds of talks held in Tehran and Islamabad in 1994. The Russian president extended the invitation to Pakistan’s Premier to visit Russia, which showed a balanced approach for the established of good relation with Pakistan.


At minister level many trips visited both the countries for normalization of relations between Russia and Pakistan. New era of co-operation of scholars had played an important role in normalization of relations between the both countries. Leader of the Russian Parliament visited Pakistan in September 1998 and disclosed that Russia was ready to supply military hardware to Pakistan. He also said the Russian technology could find its way into many fields of Pakistan markets.


In April 1999 the Pakistan Prime Minister visited Moscow, which was the first visit to Russia by a Pakistani Head of Government after twenty five years and the first ever between Pakistan and the Russian Federation. During the visit many important bilateral issues, as well as a whole range of regional and global issues of common concern, came under discussion. Some important documents were signed. Inter-Governmental Agreement on Trade and Economic Co-operation and an agreement on co-operation between the Chambers of Commerce and Industry of the two countries were concluded. It was also agreed to establish a Joint Inter-Government Ministerial Commission on Economic. Trade, Scientific and Technological Co-operation.


Recently Pakistan purchased transport helicopters from Russia. Another big deal involving “Kamaz” trucks in the being negotiated while a joint venture for producing small cars is in the offing. Although, trade between Pakistan and Russia has declined in recent years owing to the economic crises in both the countries, serious efforts are being made to revive the bilateral trade as well.


Pakistan attaches great importance to its relations with Russia, which it feels has an important role to play in peace and stability in Asia and particularly in South Asia. It is desirous of expanding mutually beneficial cooperation with Russia in all spheres, which can contribute to the peace and stability of region. Russia shares this desire and also recognize the importance of Pakistan in peace and stability of south Asia and South Central Asia. Based on their keenness for close and cooperative relations, the two countries are moving towards a more fruitful relationship. Pakistan welcomes the fact that Russia is in the process of evolving a more even handed approach towards the major countries in South Asia and believes that Russia could act as a mediator for the establishment of a congenial atmosphere in South Asia conducive to the economic development of the region.


Realizing the importance of Pakistan in the region. Russia intended to improve relations with Pakistan by offering help to ailing economic condition of Pakistan. It also offered to Pakistan to sell its armaments. The danger of National Missile Defense programme of United States also made Russia closer to Pakistan along with China.


On the invitation of Russian Government the President of Pakistan visited Russia on an official visit in February 2003 and concluded many pacts of friendship and mutual understanding. Thus Pakistanbegan to enjoy a pivotal position in the region.

Pakistan and USA

 
Introduction

Pakistan was founded on 14 August, 1947 along with India when the two nations achieved independence from the British Colonial Empire. The partition of the sub continent along ethnic religious lines with Pakistan created in those adjoining territories that had majority Muslim populations. Thus the country of Pakistan with seventy million people had above 90% Muslim population. On the other hand, India had a majority Hindu population but Muslims were also a sizeable second minority group comprising 15% of the Indian population. The regions comprising Pakistan included the provinces of Sind, Punjab, Baluchistan and Northwest Frontier Province on the western side of India and the province of East Bengal in the east of India. The two wings of eastern and western Pakistan were separated by a thousand miles of Indian territories. India inherited most of the infrastructure from the colonial establishment and Pakistan received some share out of assets. However, the regions comprising the land of Pakistan were less developed as compared to India and the administrative infrastructure was also limited. Both countries gained some military assets left over after the end of the World War Two. The main
challenges that Pakistan faced at the time of its independence were related to its security fears, lack of infrastructure in the country and limited financial resources. The creation of two separate states and the division of the countries over ethno-religious lines had create a large migration across the two countries accompanied by ethnic cleansing, rioting and looting. The partition of the sub continent had been a contentious debacle and India and Pakistan had disputed division of assets as well as territories of the two countries. The state of Kashmir was a major cause of dispute as both India and Pakistan made claims for the state. The dispute led to a limited war in 1948 that resulted in one third of the Kashmir state occupied by Pakistan and the other two thirds overtaken by India.

Although Pakistan's foreign policy has been dominated by problems with India as well as by efforts to maximize its own external support, its relationship with the West, particularly Britain and the United States, was of major importance. At independence in 1947, Pakistan became a member of the British Commonwealth of Nations.
After Pakistan's independence by the partitioning of the British Raj, Pakistan followed a prowestern policy. The Indian government followed a different, non-aligned policy stance, which leaned closer to the Soviet Union rather than the United States of America. Pakistan was seeking strong alliances to counter its neighbour, India. At this time, India was neutral and went on to be a part of Non Aligned Movement. The first government of Pakistan was headed by Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan and it chose the seaport of Karachi as its capital. Jinnah, considered the founder of Pakistan and hailed as the Quaid-i-Azam (Great Leader), became head of state as governor-general. The government faced many challenges in setting up new economic, judicial,and political structures. It endeavored to organize the bureaucracy and the armed forces, resettle the Mohajirs (Muslim refugees from India), and establish the distribution and balance of power in the provincial and central governments. Undermining these efforts were provincial politicians who often defied the authority of the central government, and frequent communal riots. Before the government could surmount these difficulties, Jinnah died in September 1948.

In foreign policy, Liaquat established friendly relations with the United States when he visited President Harry S. Truman in 1950. Pakistan’s early foreign policy was one of nonalignment, with no formal commitment to either the United States or the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), the two major adversaries in the Cold War. In 1953, however, Pakistan aligned itself with the United States and accepted military and economic assistance.Pakistan's relations with the United States developed against the backdrop of the Cold War.
Pakistan's strategic geographic position made it a valuable partner in Western alliance systems to contain the spread of communism. In 1954 Pakistan signed a Mutual Defense Agreement with the United States and subsequently became a member of the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) and CENTO. These agreements placed Pakistan in the United States sphere of influence. Pakistan was also used as a base for United States military reconnaissance flights over Soviet territory. During the Cold War years, Pakistan was considered one of Washington's
closest allies in Asia. Pakistan, in return, received large amounts of economic and military assistance. The program of military assistance continued until the 1965 Indo-Pakistani War when President Lyndon B. Johnson placed an embargo on arms shipments to Pakistan and India. The United States embargo on arms shipments to Pakistan remained in place during the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971 and was not lifted until 1975, during the administration of President Gerald R. Ford.

The initial years 1947 -1952

After the creation of the two countries, Pakistan followed a more pro western policy whereas the Indian government defined its foreign policy with a more leftist to non aligned stance. Pakistan was looking for strong friends in order to persuade its bigger and much stronger neighbor India to give in to its claims over the territory of Kashmir. Pakistan also needed financial support for its infrastructure development and modernization of its armed forces. Right from the beginning the founder father of Pakistan sent its representative to the US government for financial and
military assistance. Pakistan based its case on the post World War scenario of confrontation between the Soviet Union and the West. Pakistan contented that the Soviet Union wanted to get access to the Arabian Sea and to increase its influence in the Middle East. Pakistan was a nation beyond Afghanistan that could avert such Soviet designs. Pakistan as a Muslim state had no affiliations with the communists and was a natural regional ally for the United States.On theother hand, the ruling party in India, the Indian National Congress, and India’s leaders were closer in ideology to socialism and the Soviet Union.
As a US ally in the region, Pakistan could provide a foot hold for the US in the region against any Soviet expansionist efforts in South Asia.From the US perspective, the United States was more occupied in the post war reconstruction in
Western Europe and Japan, its containment efforts in South East Asia and the Middle East. The United States in the initial years of Pakistan was less interested in getting involved in the emerging conflicts of South Asia. The Pakistanis wanted to strengthen their relations with the US so as to get an advantage in their confrontation with India over Kashmir. On the other hand, the US did not see the usefulness of a strong relationship with Pakistan and US interests in Pakistan were limited. The Kashmir dispute dragged on despite UN Security Council resolutions that were agree upon by both Pakistan and India in 1949 for a ceasefire and proposal for a plebiscite. The Kashmir issue remained unresolved and became the main bone of contention between India and Pakistan resulting in three subsequent wars.

The evolving relations & Ayub Era 1952-1969

Prospects for Pakistan’s relations with US improved after Republican Eisenhower came to power in 1952 in the White House. Pakistan pushed its case as an ally that could provide support for Middle East security and in return it asked for military and economic support for its flail economy. Unstable domestic politics had led to political and economic distress while the bureaucratic and military officers were getting stronger in the country. The Republican government was more receptive of the Pakistani position and its claims of anti communist stand and an available allied state. Pakistan joined with Turkey as member of the Middle East Defense
Organization (MEDO) in 1954. This allowed Pakistan to formally seek aid as a regional ally of the US. In January 1955, Pakistan joined South East Asian Treaty Organization (SEATO) with a view to adding security to the East Asian flank of anti communist alignment. However, it was not clear how Pakistan’s role in both these organizations would actually materialize in the case of an actual conflict. However, for the Pakistanis, becoming part of these alliances allowed the country to create stronger links with the US administration and seek increasing aid.

In September 1955, Pakistan became a member of the Baghdad Pact organization which later became known as CENTO. Turkey, Iran and Iraq were its earlier members with the US as the backer of the security arrangement. The role of this organization was similar to the earlier MEDO as a northern-tier defense arrangement against communist influence in the Middle East.
"In the end, neither the Baghdad Pact not SEATO amounted to much militarily. …Joining the Baghdad Pact and SEATO gave Pakistan a strengthened claim on US resources and, in turn, the US acquired an even larger stake in Pakistan’s well being. As Pakistan’s president Ayub Khan put it in his biography, “Friends Not Masters”, Pakistan had become America’s “most allied ally in Asia”" (Reference 1).

A key development from Pakistan’s perspective was the amount of development and military aid that started in 1954 and increased to $500 million by 1957 as a result of Pakistan’s joining the regional defense organizations and allying with the USA. During the second Eisenhower term, the relations between the two countries became even stronger. Pakistan’s Army Chief staged a military coup in 1958 and later became the President of Pakistan. Field Marshal Ayub Khan had developed strong relations with the Americans and his era from 1958 to 1969 turned out to a
strong era of US- Pakistan relations. In 1959, Aub’s government allowed the US to set up an intelligence facility in Badaber, NWFFP province and operate U2 surveillance flights over the Soviet Union from its Peshawar Airport. This arrangement and the closer relationship of the Pakistani government with the US administration allowed it to acquire increasing military hardware and arms for its defense services. The issue troubling the US was Pakistan’s closer relations with China. The Indians and Chinese had fought a war in 1962 in which China had given India a bloody nose. As a result Pakistan moved to improve and strengthen its relations with China in order to position itself as a stronger foe for India. However, Pakistan’s growing friendship with communist China irked the US who was facing a proxy war against the communists in Vietnam. Pakistan and India fought a war in 1965 that was an ill fated affair started by a limited guerilla war in Kashmir that Ayub started in order to pressurize India to come to the negotiating table over Kashmir. However, as the war spread, Pakistan could not sustain a long term conflict and asked for a truce and both forces moved back to their previous borders.

Creation of Bangladesh 1969 – 1972

Army Chief General Yahya took over power from President Ayub Khan in March 1969. The country had been in a pseudo military rule since 1958. Political representation had been insufficient and regional succession movements were strengthening in the country especially in the eastern Pakistan province of Bengal. Elections were held in the country in 1970 with the East Pakistani party Awami League taking a majority in the elections. The military government did not hand over power to the winning party and in a political deadlock, unleashed a crackdown
against the East Pakistan population. This led to a limited civil war in 1971 and India siding with the dissidents launched a war in December 1971. After a fortnight of fighting, the Pakistani forces in East Pakistan accepted default and the state of Bangladesh was established. The US Policy in this debacle was aligned with the military establishment of Pakistan due to its earlier links and defense relationships .

On the other hand, President Nixon used the Pakistani links with China to start a secret diplomacy with China which culminated with Henry Kessinger’s secret visit to China in July 1971 while he was visiting Pakistan . The Chinese relationship was vital for the US as it was trying to fix the mess in its Vietnam policy. With these concerns, the US administration neglected the internal domestic issues of Pakistan and allowed the dictator to have its way in East Pakistan. "The opening to China was an essential element in Nixon’s strategy of creating a new global balance of power. His aim was to bring China into the family of nations – reversing two decades of US efforts to isolate Beijing – and to use an improved US-Chinese
relationship as a lever with Moscow to press for US-Soviet Union.

Rather than focusing on their domestic problems and working effectively to find solutions, the military rulers in Pakistan had been focusing in international affairs and the Great Game and considered the close relationship with the US as a guarantee for their own domestic survival.However, this proved to be a false notion and Pakistani military lost big time in the war with India in 1971. Over 90,000 soldiers were taken as prisoners of war by India and East Pakistan declared its independence. With this large defeat, the military finally gave in and handed over
power in the remaining country of West Pakistan to Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, who took over as the first elected Prime Minister of the country.

President Richard Nixon used Pakistan's relationship with China to start secret contacts with China which resulted with Henry Kissinger’s secret visit to China in July 1971 while visiting Pakistan. America supported Pakistan throughout the war and supplied weapons to West Pakistan although Congress had passed a bill suspending exporting weapons to the nation. Near the end of the war and fearing Pakistan's defeat by the joint forces of Mukti Bahini and Indian forces, Nixon ordered the USS Enterprise into the Indian Ocean, although it was never used for
actual combat. United States-Pakistani relations preceding the 1971 war were characterized by poor communication and much confusion. The administration of President Richard M. Nixon was forced to formulate a public stance on the brutal crackdown on East Pakistanis by West Pakistani troops that began in March 25, 1971, and it maintained that the crackdown was essentially an internal affair of Pakistan in which direct intervention of outside powers was to be avoided. The Nixon administration expressed its concern about human rights violations to
Pakistan and restricted the flow of assistance--yet it stopped short of an open condemnation.

Despite the United States widely publicized "tilt" toward Pakistan during the 1971 war,Pakistan's new leader, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, felt betrayed. In his opinion, the United States could have prevented India from intervening in Pakistan's civil war, thereby saving his country the trauma of defeat and dismemberment. Bhutto now strove to lessen Pakistan's dependence on the United States.
The foreign policy Bhutto envisioned would place Pakistan at the forefront of Islamic nations.Issues central to the developing world would take precedence in foreign affairs over those of the superpowers. Bhutto called this policy "bilateralism," which implied neutrality in the Cold War with equal treatment accorded both superpowers. Bhutto's distancing of Islamabad from Washington and other Western links was accompanied by Pakistan's renewed bid for leadership in the developing world.
General Zia initially promised elections but later firmed his grip on the government and started a murder trial against Bhutto which eventually led to Bhutto’s hanging for the alleged crime in 1979.

Bhutto Years 1972 – 1977

Prime Minister Bhutto initially focused his attention with normalizing the domestic situation in the country. The Government of Pakistan signed a truce with India, recognized the government of Bangladesh and eventually the 90,000 prisoners were returned by India. The major challenge for the new government came in May, 1974 when India executed an underground nuclear test.This forced the Pakistanis to also seek a nuclear weapons program to match India’s capabilities.This became a major cause for concern for the US administration. Pakistan started efforts to
acquire a nuclear fuel reprocessing plant from France and a heavy water facility from West Germany. During Bhutto’s government Pakistan’s foreign policy was aligned to see ka balance between its relations with China, Russia and the USA. Pakistan placed a special emphasis on its relations with the Arab countries in the Middle East.During Ford and later Jimmy Carter’s administration, sanctions were placed on Pakistan related to export control and restriction of aid grants. Prime Minister Bhutto called elections in March 1977 from which he gained a landslide victory. However, the opposition blamed it on massive rigging and started a public campaign to oust Bhutto. Prime Minister Bhutto claimed in public rhetoric that the American were behind the opposition movement and wanted to punish his government for its nuclear weapons program and alignment with the Arabs. In July 1977, the Army seized power in a coup for the third time in the country.

Zia Years 1977 – 1988

After hanging the former Prime Minister, Zia strengthened his hold on the government and used a cover of Islamic reforms to give credibility to his government. Jimmy Carter’s administration developed closer relations with India while Pakistan was more or less isolated due to its new military dictators. On the nuclear front, General Zia continued the previous policy of Bhutto in acquiring and developing capabilities for nuclear weapons. The chilling relations between the US
and Pakistan took another a U-turn when the Soviet Army entered neighboring Afghanistan in December 1979 to support the local communist government. "Just four days after the Soviet invasion, On December 29, 1979, Jimmy Carter approved a broader covert action program that instructed the CIA to provide military weapons and ammunition …for the Afghan anticommunist fighters, who soon became widely known as “mujahideen”…At Pakistan’s insistence, the CIA funneled all aid through the Pakistani intelligence service ISI, which in turn handed over supplies to Afghans." (Reference 1).

With the Reagan Administration in the White House, the support for
the covert war in Afghanistan increased along with the value of the Pakistani cooperation.Pakistan was rewarded with a $3.2 billion aid package for the next six years. As the Afghan war progressed more than three million refugees entered Pakistan.During this period, Pakistan was considered a valuable ally and the US ignored the increasing developments on the nuclear front as well as the human rights abuses by the Zia regime. The success of the Afghan war effort was crucial for the American Administration as it was bled the Soviet Government and placed huge pressure in terms of resources. Fed up with the costs of the war and covert operations by the mujahideen, supported by the CIA and the Pakistani ISI, by
1988, the Russians had had enough and were ready for a respectable evacuation from Afghanistan. The usefulness of Pakistan for the USA with respect to Afghanistan, thus, ended when Mikhail Gorbachev agreed to a retreat in April 1988. General Zia died in a mysterious plane crash months later in August 1988 and political elections were held in Pakistan.

In 1979, a group of Pakistani students burned the American embassy in Islamabad to the ground killing two Americans.
In the 1980s, Pakistan agreed to pay $658 million for 28 F-16 fighter jets from the United States;however the American congress froze the deal citing objections to Pakistani nuclear ambitions.Under the terms of the American cancellation, they kept both the money and the planes, leadingto angry claims of theft by Pakistanis.

In 1979, Pakistani students, enraged by a radio report claiming that the United States had bombed the Masjid al-Haram, Islam's holy site at Mecca, stormed the U.S. embassy in Islamabad, and burned it to the groun. There actually had been a terrorist attack there, but the U.S. was not involved. The diplomats survived by hiding in a reinforced area, though Marine Security Guard Steve Crowley and another American were killed in the attack.
The event started as a small, peaceful protest against U.S. policies in Cambodia, as well as suspected U.S. involvement surrounding the military coup d'état of Zulfiqar Bhutto in 1977. The protesters shouted anti-American slogans. Although, at first glance it seemed to be a small protest outside the embassy’s walls, buses later started pulling up filled with far-right Jamaat-i- Islami supporters in front of the main gates. Hundreds of people began climbing over the walls and trying to pull them down using ropes. According to an American investigation, after a bullet was fired at the gate’s lock by one rioter ricocheted and struck protesters, the protestors opened fire believing that an American marine on the roof of the embassy had fired first. Who actually fired first cannot be confirmed one way or another. Twenty-year-old Marine Stephen Crowley was struck by a bullet and transported to the embassy’s secure communication vault along with the rest of personnel serving in the embassy. Locked behind steel-reinforced doors the Americans waited for help to come and rescue them from a smoke-filled building.

Soviet invasion of Afghanistan

The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in December 1979 highlighted the common interest of Pakistan and the United States in peace and stability in South Asia. In 1981, Pakistan and the United States agreed on a $3.2 billion military and economic assistance program aimed at helping Pakistan deal with the heightened threat to security in the region and its economic development needs. With U.S. assistance – in the largest covert operation in history – Pakistan armed and supplied anti-Soviet fighters in Afghanistan, eventually defeating the Soviets, who
withdrew in 1988.

Unstable democratic governments 1988 – 1998

After the 1988 elections, Benazir Bhutto, the daughter of former Prime Minister Bhutto, came into power. Until 1990, the $600 million military and economic aid that had started after the Afghan War effort by the US had continued. However, every year, the US president had to certify under the Pressler Amendment, enacted in 1984, that Pakistan did not posses a nuclear device. "After October 1, 1990, passed without certification, the $564 million economic and military aid program approved for fiscal year 1991 was frozen. At the time, Pakistan was the third-highest recipient of US aid; only Israel and Egypt received more assistance" (Refrence 1) .

At this point the main occupation of the Pakistan government was to try to create a friendly mujahideen regime in Afghanistan, continue to develop its nuclear and missile program and support the militant insurgency in Kashmir. Since the US and Pakistani interests had diverted at this point, with the Soviets retreating from Afghanistan and the US involved in the Middle East, the Pakistanis felt isolated by their “old friend” and “ally”.

Domestic politics, once again, became unstable and four successive governments in Pakistan were dissolved one after another in a matter of 11 years with the Army, as always, the main power broker among the political stalwarts. Benazir held the Prime Minister’s office twice from 1988-1990 and from 1993-1996. Her main opponent, Nawaz Sharif, held office from 1990-1993 and 1996-1999. Gross fiscal mismanagement, political instability and US sanctions created large fiscal deficits and the governments borrowed heavily from international lenders. The Clinton
Administration had a tilt towards the more democratic Indian government during this time. The Pakistanis contented that the Pressler Amendment was specific to Pakistan and the sanctions were unjustified. Additional sanctions were placed after Pakistan acquired M11 missiles and delivery systems technology from China which violated the MTCR regime. By 1996 Pakistan’s Afghan efforts were bringing some success and the ISI backed Taliban government was established in Afghanistan.

The US administration initially welcome the prospects of peace in the country but later opposed the Taliban regime based on their extreme fundamentalist views and gross violations of human rights. A new turn of events unfolded in May 1998 when the new Indian government tested several nuclear devices. The Clinton Administration put a lot of pressure on the Pakistani government to refrain from tit for tat nuclear tests. However, Pakistan government came under intense internal
pressure and detonated their nuclear devices two weeks later. Although a new nuclear deterrent had been established between India and Pakistan, another wave of international sanctions followed from the international community. This put further pressure on the already weak political economy of Pakistan.

The US had a new interest in Afghanistan by mid 1998 after the terrorist attacks on US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania which killed two hundred people and were carried on by an organization belonging to Osama Bin Ladin, a former Saudi national living in Afghanistan. The US administration wanted Pakistan to use its influence on the Taliban to make them handover the culprit over to the US. However, the Taliban refused and new animosity started in the region.

In early 1999, Pakistan had a spate of diplomatic discussion to improve their relations with India but by mid 1999, a limited war had erupted in Kargil between the two countries which had been covertly engineered by the Pakistani Army. As India increased pressure and an escalating war scenario emerged, the US intervened on the request of Pakistan and the armies retreated to their pre war positions. The main casualty in the war turned out to the Pakistani Premier Nawaz Sharif who tried to oust the military commander but a military executed a coup and the military came
into power for the fourth time led by General Musharraf.The stage was set for a very tumultuous situation; the 1990s was an era of intense upheaval in Pakistan. Pakistan found itself in a state of extremely high insecurity as tensions mounted with
India and Afghanistan’s infighting continued. Pakistan’s alliance with the U.S was strained due to factors such as its support for the Taliban and public distancing of the Pakistani government from the U.S.

Musharraf – 9/11 and beyond – partners in the fight against Terrorism

General Musharraf took power at a time when the economic situation of the country was in deep trouble. The rupee was sliding, foreign reserves had been depleted and rampant corruption had messed up the infrastructure of the country. By year 2000, Pakistan after more than 53 years of independence was still struggling to find a stable political system and an economic infrastructure that would generate sustainable development and improve the quality of life for its people. From the United States perspective, Pakistan was moving closer to a “failed state” case and it’s nuclear and missile programs were a constant concern for policy makers in Washington. A failing economy could easily lead to another coup backed by the Islamists and the country could fall in fundamentalist hands along with its arsenal of nuclear weapons. With this scenario in view, the US administration more or less supported the Musharraf regime.
9/11 changed the nature of US – Pakistan relations once again. Terrorists supported by Osam Bin Ladin’s organization had executed successful attacks in New York and Washington in September 2001. The US President George Bush asked the world to make a clear choice to side with the US with the slogan “you are with us or against us”. President Musharraf’s regime, which was previously a supporter and backer of the Taliban regime since its inception, made a U-turn and
sided with the US in its war against terrorism. Siding with the US, Musharraf betted that the decision would result in improving foreign aid and support from World Bank and IMF on the one hand and US support for Pakistan’s cause for Kashmir on the other.

After the September 11, 2001 attacks in the United States of America, Pakistan became a key ally in the war on terror with the United States. However, US$5 billion earmarked to train the Pakistani army in counter terrorism were instead spent on unrelated military purposes. On November 6th, 2001, US President George W. Bush declared his policy: "You are either with us or against us". President Musharraf later claimed that the U.S. had made a so-called threat to bomb Pakistan "back to the Stone Age" after the September 11 attacks, if Pakistan refused to aid and help America with its war on terrorism.[4]Pervez Musharraf acknowledges the payments in his book:
We've captured 689 and handed over 369 to the United States. We've earned bounties totaling millions of dollars
—Former President of Pakistan Pervez Musharraf

On 11th June, 2008, a US airstrike on the Afghan-Pakistani border killed 10 members of the paramilitary Frontier Corps. The Pakistani military condemned the airstrike as an act of aggression, souring the relations between the two countries.[5]
In the November 2008 Mumbai attacks, the United States informed Pakistan that it expected full cooperation in the hunt for the plotters of the attacks.

In the last two years, Pakistan has helped the US capture several hundred operatives of the Al- Qiada organization and has allowed the US to execute military operations from its land, air and sea bases. In return for its cooperation, there has been some economic revival of the Pakistani economy. On the Kashmir front, however, not much progress has been made since India has projected Pakistan as a supported of terrorism in Kashmir itself, a label vehemently denied by the Pakistanis.

Present relations

Relations between Pakistan and the United States have been cooling recently after the visit of Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari to the United States of America.
U.S. Ambassador to Pakistan Anne W. Patterson addressed senior bureaucrats at the National Management College and emphasized that the United States will assist Pakistan’s new democratic government in the areas of development, stability, and security. The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the United Nations World Food Program,in Pakistan, officially announced the signing of an agreement valued at $8.4 million to help ease Pakistan's food crisis.[6] With relations between Pakistan and the United States cooling down, it is expected that Pakistan and the United States could return to being allies again not only in the
War on Terror but also in other possible threats to regional and world peace. It is also hoped by the United States that Pakistan under the administration of Asif Ali Zardari would only strengthen relations between Pakistan and the United States.

The CIA believes Osama Bin Laden to be hiding in Pakistan.On September 14, 2009, former president of Pakistan, Pervez Musharraf, admitted that US Foreign Aid to Pakistan (which is substantial) was diverted by the country from it's original
purpose to fighting the Taliban, to prepare for war against neighboring India. The United States government has responded by stating that they will take these allegations seriously.

Military pacts and suspension of aid

There have been six instances during the last 63 years since 1954, when the US military aid to Pakistan was suspended by Washington under one pretext or the other, though strings were attached nearly every other time Islamabad found funding parked under this head in its coffers.
Though the US was one of the first countries to recognize Pakistan as an independent state in 1947, it took Washington some seven years to dish out its first military assistance to Islamabad during the Dwight Eisenhower regime. On May 19, 1954, the ‘Mutual Defence Assistance Agreement’ between the two nations was inked in Karachi.
This pact was helped vastly by the refusal of Pakistan’s first prime minister Liaquat Ali Khan to visit Moscow in 1950. Liaquat Ali Khan had toured the US instead to the sheer delight of the Americans, resulting in the arrival of nearly $700 million military aid to Pakistan between 1954 and 1964. The military aid was dished out in addition to the $2.5 billion given to Pakistan as economic aid.
Hence, if the widely-expected curbs are imposed on the forthcoming $680 million US military aid to Islamabad, this would not be anything new for the Pakistan Army equipped today with not fewer than 66 Infantry Brigades, 15 Armoured Brigades, 30 Artillery Brigades, eight Air Defence Brigades and 17 Army Aviation Squadrons organised under 19 Division Headquarters and 9 Corps Headquarters, making it the world’s 8th largest armed force.

Here follows the chronology of six US military aid suspensions:

1) The first time when the US suspended its military aid to Pakistan was during the 1965 Pak-India War. Even though the United States suspended military assistance to both the neighbours at daggers drawn with each other, the suspension of aid affected Pakistan much more adversely.
Gradually, relations improved and arms sales to Pakistan were renewed in 1975. It is noteworthy that between 1954-1965, Pakistan had managed to receive $50 million in military grants, $19 million in defence support assistance and $5 million in cash or commercial purchases.
2) During the 1971 Pakistan-India War, the US again suspended its military aid to Pakistan, the second time in just six years. In 1972, US President Nixon visited China for the first time,marking the beginning of a process of normalisation of the estranged Sino-American relations.Since the historic visit was facilitated by Pakistan, the US resumed limited financial aid to Pakistan as a ‘reward.’
3) In April 1979, the United States cut off its military assistance to Pakistan, except food assistance, as required under the Symington Amendment. This time the suspension resulted due to Washington’s concerns about Pakistan’s nuclear programme. It is pertinent to note that during this period, Pakistan had managed to construct a uranium enrichment facility.
In December 1979, the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. The US offered $400 million worth of military aid, which was however rejected by Pakistan as inadequate. In 1981, the US again offered a package of military aid worth $1.5 billion, which was accepted. During the five years that followed after the influx of this aid, the US provided 40 F-16 fighters, 100 M-48 tanks, 64M-109 155 mm SP howitzers, 40 M-110 203mm SP howitzers, 75 towed howitzers and 1,005TOW anti-tank missile system, all of which enhanced Pakistan’s defence capability substantially.
The aid rose from around $60 million in economic and development assistance in 1979 to more than $600 million a year in the mid-1980s. In total, the United States gave $2.19 billion in military assistance from 1980 till 1990. The military aid was in addition to the $3.1 billion economic assistance for Pakistan.
4) As soon as the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan in 1990, US military aid was again suspended under the provisions of the Pressler Amendment. The US imposed curbs on all economic and military aid to Pakistan. The Larry Pressler-proposed Amendment required the then US president to certify to the Congress that Pakistan did not possess nuclear weapons.
However, in 1995, the Brown Amendment authorized a one-time delivery of US military equipment worth $368 million. However, no fewer than 28 F-16 aircraft costing $658 million were not delivered to Pakistan, despite the fact that Islamabad had paid for them well in advance.
5) The Pak-US relations underwent a severe blow with Pakistan’s nuclear tests and the ensuing sanctions in 1998. A presidential visit scheduled for the first quarter of 1998 was postponed and, under the Glenn Amendment, sanctions restricted the provision of credits, military sales,economic assistance and loans to Pakistan.
6) The ouster of premier Nawaz Sharif in 1999 in a military coup led by General Pervez Musharraf gave the US government another reason to invoke fresh sanctions under Section 508 of the Foreign Appropriations Act, which included restrictions on foreign military financing and economic assistance. The assistance was thus restricted to refugee and counter-narcotics assistance only. Aid to Pakistan dropped dramatically from 1991 to 2000 to a paltry $429 million
in economic funding and $5.2 million in military assistance.
Pakistan's partnership in the Baghdad Pact, CENTO and SEATO strengthened relations between the two nations. At the time, its relationship with the U.S. was so close and friendly that it was called the United States' "most-allied ally" in Asia. The U.S. suspension of military assistance during the 1965 Pakistan-India war generated a widespread feeling in Pakistan that the United States was not a reliable ally. Even though the United States suspended military assistance to
both countries involved in the conflict, the suspension of aid affected Pakistan much more severely. Gradually, relations improved and arms sales were renewed in 1975. Then, in April 1979, the United States cut off economic assistance to Pakistan, except food assistance, as required under the Symington Amendment to the U.S. Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, due to concerns about Pakistan's nuclear program.

Nuclear weapons

Recognizing national security concerns and accepting Pakistan's assurances that it did not intend to construct a nuclear weapon, Congress waived restrictions (Symington Amendment) on military assistance to Pakistan. In March 1986, the two countries agreed on a second multi-year(FY 1988–93) $4-billion economic development and security assistance program. On October 1,1990, however, the United States suspended all military assistance and new economic aid to
Pakistan under the Pressler Amendment, which required that the President certify annually that Pakistan "does not possess a nuclear explosive device."

India's decision to conduct nuclear tests in May 1998 and Pakistan's matching response set back U.S. relations in the region, which had seen renewed U.S. Government interest during the second Clinton Administration. A presidential visit scheduled for the first quarter of 1998 was postponed and, under the Glenn Amendment, sanctions restricted the provision of credits, military sales,economic assistance, and loans to the government. An intensive dialogue on nuclear
nonproliferation and security issues between Foreign Secretary Shamshad Ahmad and Deputy Secretary Talbott was initiated, with discussions focusing on CTBT signature and ratification,FMCT negotiations, export controls, and a nuclear restraint regime. The October 1999 overthrow of the democratically elected Sharif government triggered an additional layer of sanctions under Section 508 of the Foreign Appropriations Act which include restrictions on foreign military financing and economic assistance. U.S. Government assistance to Pakistan was limited mainly to refugee and counter-narcotics assistance.

Alliance with United States

Prior to 9/11, Pakistan, along with Saudi Arabia, was a key supporter of the Taliban in Afghanistan, as part of their "strategic depth" objective vis-a-vis India, and to try to bring stability to Afghanistan after years of civil war following the Soviet withdrawal. The Taliban,being primarily Sunni and Pushtun, are of the same ethnic origin as Pakistanis on the other side of the Afghan border and were natural allies.
After 9/11, Pakistan, led by military dictator General Pervez Musharraf, reversed course under pressure from the United States and joined the "War on Terror" as a US ally. Having failed to convince the Taliban to hand over bin Laden and other members of Al Qaeda, Pakistan provided the U.S. a number of military airports and bases for its attack on Afghanistan, along with other logistical support. Since 2001, Pakistan has arrested over five hundred Al-Qaeda members and handed them over to the United States; senior U.S. officers have been lavish in their praise of Pakistani efforts in public while expressing their concern that not enough was being done in private. However, General Musharraf was strongly supported by the Bush administration – a common theme throughout Pakistan's relations with the US has been US support of military dictators to the detriment of democracy in Pakistan.
In return for their support, Pakistan had sanctions lifted and has received some 10 billion dollars in US aid since 2001, primarily military. In June 2004, President Bush designated Pakistan as a major non-NATO ally, making it eligible, among other things, to purchase advanced American military technology.

Pakistan has lost thousands of lives since joining the US' war on terror in the form of both soldiers and civilians, and is currently going through a critical period. Suicide bombs are now commonplace in Pakistan, whereas they were unheard of prior to 9/11. The Taliban have been resurgent in recent years in both Afghanistan and Pakistan. Hundreds of thousands of refugees have been created internally in Pakistan, as they have been forced to flee their homes as a result of fighting between Pakistani forces and the Taliban in the regions bordering Afghanistan and
further in Swat. In addition, the economy is in an extremely fragile position.

A key campaign argument of President Obama's was that the US had made the mistake of"putting all our eggs in one basket" in the form of General Musharraf. Musharraf was eventually forced out of office under the threat of impeachment, after years of political protests by lawyers,civilians and other political parties in Pakistan. With President Obama coming into office, the US is expected to triple non-military aid to Pakistan to 1.5 billion per year over 10 years, and to tie military aid to progress in the fight against militants. The purpose of the aid is to help strengthen
the relatively new democratic government led by President Zardari and to help strengthen civil institutions and the general economy in Pakistan, and to put in place an aid program that is broader in scope than just supporting Pakistan's military.
Pakistan and the United States drew closer together, highlevel visits were exchanged, and the groundwork was laid for a security relationship that seemed to meet Pakistan's political needs and equipment deficit. At United States prompting, Pakistan and Turkey concluded a security treaty in 1954--the TurkoPakistan Pact--which immediately enabled United States military assistance to Pakistan under the Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement signed the same year.

Pakistan also became a member of the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) in 1954 and joined the Baghdad Pact, later renamed the Central Treaty Organization (CENTO) in 1959.Pakistan had little interest in SEATO and discerned no danger to its interests from China, joining mainly to oblige Washington. Even CENTO, which offered the advantage of a new approach to the Muslim world, was problematic because it drove a wedge between Pakistan and the Arab countries that remained outside it and was seen by Pakistanis as institutionally weak because the United States was never willing to become a full member. None of these arrangements addressed Pakistan's main concern, however--India.

At Pakistan's insistence, an additional agreement (the Agreement of Cooperation) on security was concluded with the United States in March 1959, by which the United States committed itself to the "preservation of the independence and integrity of Pakistan" and agreed to take"appropriate action, including the use of armed forces, as may be mutually agreed upon . . . in order to assist the Government of Pakistan at its request." The Agreement of Cooperation also
said nothing about India and was cast in the context of the Eisenhower Doctrine, which dealt with communist threats to the Middle East. Pakistan saw the agreement as representing a high level of United States commitment, however, and some United States officials apparently encouraged an interpretation that saw more in the agreement than was actually there. There was considerable self-deception on both sides--Pakistan believed that it had secured an ally in its rivalry with India, and the United States focused on Pakistan as an adherent to the anticommunist cause.
Tangible gains to Pakistan from the relationship were substantial.

Between 1954 and 1965, the United States provided Pakistan with US$630 million in direct-grant assistance and more than US$670 million in concessional sales and defense-support assistance. Pakistan received equipment for one additional armored division, four infantry divisions, and one armored brigade and received support elements for two corps. The Pakistan Air Force received six squadrons of
modern jet aircraft. The Pakistan Navy received twelve ships. The ports of Karachi (in West Pakistan) and Chittagong (in East Pakistan) were modernized. The program did not, however,provide for the wholesale modernization of the military, much less its expansion. Forces in Kashmir and East Pakistan were excluded, and there was a continuing tug-of-war between the United States and Pakistan as Pakistan sought to extend the scope of the program and wring more benefits out of it.
The impact on the military of this new relationship was intense. Pakistanis embraced the latest concepts in military organization and thinking with enthusiasm and adopted United States training and operational doctrine. The army and the air force were transformed into fairly modern, well-equipped fighting forces. In the course of the rearmament program, the military was substantially reorganized along United States lines, and hundreds of Pakistani officers were trained by United States officers, either in Pakistan or in schools in the United States. Although
many British traditions remained, much of the tone of the army, especially the officer corps, was Americanized.
Pakistan's hopes for an equitable settlement of its disputes with India, especially over Kashmir,were probably small in any event, but by bringing the United States directly into the South Asian security equation, rapprochement with India became virtually impossible. More important, India responded to Pakistan's new alignment by turning to the Soviet Union for military and political support--and the Soviet leader at the time, Nikita S. Khrushchev, was only too happy to oblige.
As a result, Pakistan not only incurred Soviet hostility but also ultimately triggered a Soviet military supply program in India that more than offset the United States assistance to Pakistan.Soviet displeasure was further heightened by Pakistan's decision to grant facilities at Peshawar for the United States to conduct U-2 aerial reconnaissance missions over the Soviet Union.
Prospects for Pakistan’s relations with US improved after Republican Eisenhower came to power in 1952 in the White House. Pakistan pushed its case as an ally that could provide support for Middle East security and in return it asked for military and economic support for its flail economy. Unstable domestic politics had led to political and economic distress while the bureaucratic and military officers were getting stronger in the country. The Republican government was more receptive of the Pakistani position and its claims of anti communist stand and an available allied state.
Pakistan joined with Turkey as member of the Middle East Defense Organization (MEDO) in 1954. This allowed Pakistan to formally seek aid as a regional ally of
the US. In January 1955, Pakistan joined South East Asian Treaty Organization (SEATO) with a view to adding security to the East Asian flank of anti communist alignment. However, it was not clear how Pakistan’s role in both these organizations would actually materialize in the case of an actual conflict. However, for the Pakistanis, becoming part of these alliances allowed the country to create stronger links with the US administration and seek increasing aid.

In September 1955, Pakistan became a member of the Baghdad Pact organization which later became known as CENTO. Turkey, Iran and Iraq were its earlier members with the US as the backer of the security arrangement. The role of this organization was similar to the earlier MEDO as a northern-tier defense arrangement against communist influence in the Middle East.
"In the end, neither the Baghdad Pact not SEATO amounted to much militarily. …Joining the Baghdad Pact and SEATO gave Pakistan a strengthened claim on US resources and, in turn, the US acquired an even larger stake in Pakistan’s well being. As Pakistan’s president Ayub Khan put it in his biography, “Friends Not Masters”, Pakistan had become America’s “most allied ally in Asia”" (Reference 1).

A key development from Pakistan’s perspective was the amount of development and military aid that started in 1954 and increased to $500 million by 1957 as a result of Pakistan’s joining the regional defense organizations and allying with the USA. During the second Eisenhower term,the relations between the two countries became even stronger. Pakistan’s Army Chief staged a military coup in 1958 and later became the President of Pakistan. Field Marshal Ayub Khan had developed strong relations with the Americans and his era from 1958 to 1969 turned out to a
strong era of US- Pakistan relations. In 1959, Aub’s government allowed the US to set up an intelligence facility in Badaber, NWFFP province and operate U2 surveillance flights over the Soviet Union from its Peshawar Airport. This arrangement and the closer relationship of the Pakistani government with the US administration allowed it to acquire increasing military hardware and arms for its defense services. The issue troubling the US was Pakistan’s closer relations with China. The Indians and Chinese had fought a war in 1962 in which China had
given India a bloody nose. As a result Pakistan moved to improve and strengthen its relations with China in order to position itself as a stronger foe for India. However, Pakistan’s growing friendship with communist China irked the US who was facing a proxy war against the communists in Vietnam. Pakistan and India fought a war in 1965 that was an ill fated affair started by a limited guerilla war in Kashmir that Ayub started in order to pressurize India to come to the negotiating table over Kashmir.

Major incidents that have marred the Pak-US ties:

Several incidents of violence against American officials and the US diplomats stationed in Pakistan turned the relationship sour. In November 1979, rumours that the United States had participated in the seizure of the Masjid Al-Haram, the Grand Mosque in Makkah, provoked a mob to attack the US Embassy in Islamabad. The Chancery was set ablaze, resulting in a loss of life.

In 1989, an attack on the American Center in Islamabad resulted in the killing of six Pakistanis in crossfire with the police. In March 1995, two American employees of the US Consulate in Karachi were killed and one wounded in an attack.In November 1997, four US businessmen were brutally murdered while being driven to work in Karachi. Pakistan tested its nukes on May 28, 1998 in retaliation to the Indian nuclear tests conducted a fortnight earlier. This proved a major setback for the never-so-exemplary Pak-US ties.

In March 2002, a suicide attacker detonated explosives in a church in Islamabad, killing two Americans associated with the Embassy. Unsuccessful attacks by terrorists on the Consulate General in Karachi in May 2002 also heightened the Pak-US diplomatic tension. Another bomb detonated near American and other businesses in Karachi in November 2005, killing three people and wounding 15 others. On March 2, 2006, a suicide bomber detonated a car laden with explosives near a vehicle carrying an American Foreign Service officer to the US Consulate
Karachi. The diplomat, the Consulate’s locally employed driver and three other were killed in the blast, while 52 others were wounded.
In September 2008, an explosives-laden truck exploded at Islamabad’s Marriott Hotel, allegedly killing US Embassy personnel.

Conclusion

In the historical context of US-Pakistan relations, it is obvious that the mutual relations between the two countries are based on convergence of common interests from time to time. When the US required U2 surveillance flight facilities and an intelligence base against the Soviets (1959-1968), backdoor diplomacy with the Chinese (1970-72), covert operations against the Red Army in Afghanistan (1980-88) and recently the war against terrorism (2001 - ??), it has extended its best hand forward in terms of military and economic aid as well as support for unelected military dictators. On the other hand, Pakistan during this time has had modest success in growing its economy with economic aid from the US and from the World Bank and IMF. Pakistan has performed better in achieving its goal of a nuclear balance with India with its extensive missile and nuclear programs. However, time will tell how long the present cooperation between the USA and Pakistan lasts and how much can the Pakistanis get in reward for their cooperation with US war against Osama Bin Ladin and his Al-Qaida organization.

Morley-Minto Reforms

 Taken from : http://storyofpakistan.com/minto-morley-reforms#prettyPhoto
In 1906, Lord Morley, the Secretary of State for Indian Affairs, announced in the British parliament that his government wanted to introduce new reforms for India, in which the locals were to be given more powers in legislative affairs. With this, a series of correspondences started between him and Lord Minto, the then Governor General of India. A committee was appointed by the Government of India to propose a scheme of reforms. The committee submitted its report, and after the approval of Lord Minto and Lord Morley, the Act of 1909 was passed by the British parliament. The Act of 1909 is commonly known as the Minto-Morley Reforms.
The following were the main features of the Act of 1909:

• The number of the members of the Legislative Council at the Center was increased from 16 to 60.
• The number of the members of the Provincial Legislatives was also increased. It was fixed as 50 in the provinces of Bengal, Madras and Bombay, and for the rest of the provinces it was 30.
• The member of the Legislative Councils, both at the Center and in the provinces, were to be of four categories i.e. ex-officio members (Governor General and the members of their Executive Councils), nominated official members (those nominated by the Governor General and were government officials), nominated non-official members (nominated by the Governor General but were not government officials) and elected members (elected by different categories of Indian people).
• Right of separate electorate was given to the Muslims.
• At the Center, official members were to form the majority but in provinces non-official members would be in majority.
• The members of the Legislative Councils were permitted to discuss the budgets, suggest the amendments and even to vote on them; excluding those items that were included as non-vote items. They were also entitled to ask supplementary questions during the legislative proceedings.
• The Secretary of State for India was empowered to increase the number of the Executive Councils of Madras and Bombay from two to four.
• Two Indians were nominated to the Council of the Secretary of State for Indian Affairs.
• The Governor General was empowered to nominate one Indian member to his Executive Council.

Lucknow Pact 1916

Posted by: HistoryPak

Introduction       
The Lucknow agreement took a new twist with change in Muslim League’s political doctrine. The Quaid-e-Azam inclusion in the Muslim league was a historic event, which gave new direction to Muslim league’s political struggle. Self-rule for India brought the Muslim league and the Congress closer to each other. The leaders of the both parties agreed that they should cooperate with each other to make the British accept their demands. They acknowledged that the objectives can be achieved if the two major communities of India forget their differences on petty issues and come closer to each other to see eye to eye on the important national issues. The political vicinity had taken a happy turn and ground for cherished Hindu Muslim unity had been smoothed.

Lucknow pact is considered as a significant event in the political constitutional history of India. It is regarded a high water marked of Hindu Muslim unity. It was the first and last pact signed between Congress and Muslim league.

Factor’s Behind the Pact
The relations between the British government and Muslims were tensed due to aggressive and unilateral policies of the British. The annulment of the partition of Bengal in 1911 was a jolt for the Muslims of India; consequently it shattered their confidence in British and brought Muslims closer to Hindus against the British. Similarly the Kanpur mosque incident and the British policies in the international system had caused deep anguish among the Muslims. Thus the Muslims leaderships decided to change the strategy of the Muslim league after the annulment of Bengal in 1911. In December 1912, Muslim league change its aim from loyalty to form self-government suitable to India. However, the league retained the right to modify self-rule in accordance with their needs and requirements.

Jinnah and the Pact
Jinnah arose as a devoted champion of Hindu Muslim unity, he convinced all India Muslim league to change their policies for the better of India. Muhammad Ali Jinnah in his early career was a member of both the Congress and the Muslim league and was well known as a man free of any religious prejudice, as well as a brilliant advocate and debater. In 1915, mainly due to his efforts, both the Muslim league and the Congress party had their annual meeting in Bombay. At the end of this meeting, a committee was formed with the intention to sort the common understanding between the two communities. The committee prepared a scheme in November, 1916. The scheme was approved by both the parties in December, 1916 at the respective sessions at Lucknow.  Quaid-e-Azam, in his presidential speech at Lucknow, said “India’s real progress can only be achieved by a true understanding and harmonious relations between the two great communities. With regard to our own affairs, we can depend upon nobody but ourselves.”

Features of the Pact
The congress party agreed to the right to separate electorate for the Muslims first and last time in the history of subcontinent. The Hindus conceded that the Muslims would have one third representation in the imperial legislative council. A weightage formula was proposed under which the Muslims would get less representation than their population in the legislative council in those provinces where they were in majority but more in provinces where they were in minority. The provincial legislative council will have fourth fifth as elected members and one fifth as nominated members. The member’s would be elected by the people directly for the term of five years. In the major provinces the strength of the legislative councils would be 125 and in the minor provinces the strength would be 50 and 75. The Muslims shall be elected through special electorates and their strength in the different provinces shall be as: Punjab 50%, Bengal 40%, U.P 30%, Bihar 25%, C.P 15%, Madras 15% and Bombay 33 %.

No bill, nor any clause thereof, nor a resolution introduces by a non-official member effecting one or other community shall be presented in the assembly without approval of the concern group. Provincial autonomy will be given to the province with maximum powers vested with the provincial council. The provincial council will have authorized to impose taxes, raise loans, and to vote on budget. All proposals for raising revenues shall have to be submitted to the provincial council for sanction. There shall be an executive council in the province headed by the governor whose half of the member’s shall Indian national elected by the elected members of the legislative council their term of office shall be five year. The members of the assemblies shall have the right to present adjournment motion. Seats were reserved for the Muslims in those provinces in which they were in minority under the system weightages. Protection shall be given to the Hindus in Muslim majority provinces. In the centre there shall be and imperial legislative council consisting of 150 members. Four fifth of the members shall be elected for a term of five years on the basis of direct election. The Muslims shall be given 1/3 seats of the elected members and they will be elected by separate Muslim electorates. The central Government will be headed by the government will be headed by the Governor General, who would be assisted by an executive council. Half of the members of the executive council shall be Indians elected by the elected members of the imperial legislative council.

Importance of the Pact
The Lucknow pact was a great achievement of Hindu and Muslim leaders, who were successful in offering for the first and the only time, a mutually acceptable solution of the Hindu Muslim problem. It appeared as a special significance in the history of India. It was the Quaid-e-Azam, who had always been a staunch supporter of Hindu-Muslim unity. The scheme provided for a substantial step taken halfway towards the establishment of self-rule in India which was main core of the jointly sponsored scheme of Lucknow pact. The Congress first time accepted the demand of separate electorate for Muslims. The pact ensured the protection of political rights of Muslims. Muslim league separate status was also being accepted. Through the pact the both parties were able to put a joint demand before the British. Congress got strength in term of political and masses because it had got All India Muslim League Supports.

It was basically give and take sort of agreement between the both parties. The Muslims had to pay a big price of loosing majority in Bengal and Punjab to obtain some concessions. Similarly, it carried great constitutional significance in the future for many developments. The scheme of representation of Muslim community in the central and provincial legislatures as embodied in the Lucknow pact was generally followed in the Montague Chelmsford reforms.

Conclusion
The agreement was very outstanding and its dreams were fulfilled the whole political scenario of Indian subcontinent were different. But, it was impossible to the parties to make a united India.  The Hindus and Muslims are two different nation and they have different culture and civilization. Therefore the Lucknow Pact failed to make a long lasting cooperation in India among the Muslims and Hindus.

India and World War One

 India and World War One

 India played a significant part in World War One. However, India’s part in the war is frequently overlooked as a result of the horrors experienced in trench warfare and by Europe’s tendency to home in on battles such as those fought at the Somme and Verdun, which many assume only Europeans fought in.

When was broke out in 1914, India was in a state of growing political unrest. The Indian National Congress had gone from being a group that simply discussed issues to a body that was pushing for more self-government. Before the war started, the Germans had spent a great deal of time and energy trying to stir up an anti-British movement in India. Many shared the view that if Britain got involved in a crisis somewhere in the world, Indian separatists would use this as an opportunity to advance their cause.

“The moment Britain gets into trouble elsewhere, India, in her present temper, would burst into a blaze of rebellion.” William Archer (author)

These fears were unfounded. When war was declared on August 4th, India rallied to the cause. Those with influence within India believed that the cause of Indian independence would best be served by helping out Britain in whatever capacity India could – including the Indian National Congress. Offers of financial and military help were made from all over the country. Hugely wealthy princes offered great sums of money, and even areas outside of British India offered help – Nepal offered help and in total sent 100,000 Gurkhas and the Dalai Lama in Tibet offered 1000 of his troops to the cause. Despite the pre-war fears of unrest, Britain, in fact, could take many troops and most of her military equipment out of India as fears of unrest subsided. Indian troops were ready for battle before most other troops in the dominions.

Indian troops were on the Western Front by the winter of 1914 and fought at the first Battle of Ypres. By the end of 1915, they had sustained many casualties. Along with the casualties from sickness, the decision was taken to withdraw the Indian Corps from front line duty at the end of 1915.

In total, 800,000 Indian troops fought in all the theatres of the war with 1½ million volunteering to fight. They fought in most theatres of war including Gallipoli and North and East Africa. In all 47,746 were classed as killed or missing with 65,000 wounded.

The Indian Corps won 13,000 medals for gallantry including 12 Victoria Crosses. Khudadad Khan won the Corps first Victoria Cross.

Such was the cost of the war, that India’s economy was pushed to near bankruptcy.

The Indian support given to Britain’s cause surprised the establishment in Britain. ‘The Times’ wrote:

“The Indian empire has overwhelmed the British nation by the completeness and unanimity of its enthusiastic aid.”

For its endeavours, India expected to be rewarded with a major move towards independence or at the least self-government. When it became obvious that this was not going to happen, the mood in India became more militant. During the last phases of the war Mahatma Gandhi said:

“Seek ye first the recruiting office, and everything will be added unto you.”

The British government’s post-war attitude quickly alienated Gandhi and was a great stimulus for his independence movement.

In 1919, the Government of India Act was introduced.

• This introduced a national parliament with two houses for India.
• About 5 million of the wealthiest Indians were given the right to vote (a very small percentage of the total population)
• Within the provincial governments, ministers of education, health and   public works could now be Indian nationals
• The act planned for a commission to be held in 1929, to see if India  was ready for more concessions/reforms.

However, the British controlled all central government and within the provincial governments, the British kept control of the key posts of tax and law and order.

Many in India felt that they had been badly let down by the British government for their part played in World War One. However, despite this feeling of being let down, India was to play a significant part in World War Two.

Taken From : http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/world-war-one/india-and-world-war-one/

How was India involved in the First World War?

The First World War had lasting consequences that extended far beyond Europe. It set in motion forces that developed into India’s independence movement. Anne Bostanci, co-author of the British Council report, Remember the World as well as the War, ponders a promising emerging shift in the UK’s discussions about the First World War.
The UK’s history must include the stories of people from the former British Empire
The UK has a particular responsibility to construct an inclusive history of the experience of the First World War. It was a truly global conflict, and involved many Commonwealth countries that made huge sacrifices vital to Britain’s war effort.
However, as the British Council’s recent international survey — carried out in Egypt, France, Germany, India, Russia, Turkey and the UK — showed, the UK public has only a limited understanding of the extent and significance of the role of Commonwealth countries in the First World War, and is therefore some way away from recognising them appropriately.
Take the example of India
India made a huge contribution to Britain’s war effort. It sent staggering numbers of volunteers to fight and die on behalf of the allied forces. Almost 1.5 million Muslim, Sikh and Hindu men from regions such as the Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Bihar volunteered in the Indian Expeditionary Force Opens in a new tab or window., which saw fighting on the Western Front, in East Africa, Mesopotamia, Egypt and Gallipoli. Volunteering offered a chance to break through the caste system, because becoming a soldier paid well and meant becoming part of the ‘warrior’ caste, which gave high status. However, of these men, around 50,000 died, 65,000 were wounded, and 10,000 were reported missing, while 98 Indian army nurses were killed. The country also supplied 170,000 animals, 3,7 million tonnes of supplies, jute for sandbags, and a large loan (the equivalent of about £2 billion today) to the British government.
But do the UK and India remember India’s role?
While the UK is one of the top ten unprompted associations with the First World War held by Indian survey respondents, India was not mentioned a single time as a top-of-mind association with the First World War among the 1,215 UK survey respondents. It is hardly surprising, therefore, that twice as many respondents in India compared to the UK feel that their country’s role in the First World War is — to this day — often misrepresented and misunderstood in global history (almost one quarter of Indian respondents indicated this).
At the same time, around three quarters of respondents in India as well as in the UK felt that their country is still affected by the consequences of the First World War.
Were Britain and India on the same side or fighting each other?
Looking for reasons why the First World War still looms large amongst people in India, it becomes clear that that period of history is inextricably bound up with the history of the independence movement. And this can sometimes cause confusion.
For instance, only just over half (51 per cent) of Indian survey respondents knew that Britain and India were fighting alongside each other in the First World War. Over one quarter (27 per cent) believed they were enemies.
And while 63 per cent of UK survey respondents correctly identified that India fought alongside Britain, a full third (33 per cent) thought that India was fighting against Britain.
The First World War and the independence movement in India
This is despite the fact that India was heavily involved in the First World War as a key contributor to the allied forces and at that time an important part of the British Empire.
Having made huge sacrifices and demonstrated military valour equal to that of European soldiers, Indians widely expected a transition to self-government. These expectations were shared by nationalist leaders such as Mahatma Gandhi Opens in a new tab or window. and Muhammad Ali Jinnah Opens in a new tab or window. (the founder of Pakistan), but were dashed by the extension of martial law at the end of the conflict.
Following this period, Gandhi launched his first India-wide campaign of civil disobedience against British authority in February 1919. It was not driven by anti-Western or anti-British sentiment per se, but by the pursuit of self-determination. It took a looming Second World War, and the resistance against risking more Indian lives for little tangible return, before nationalist efforts redoubled under the auspices of the Quit India Movement. But the origins of Indian independence can be traced back to the events of the First World War.
The UK’s nascent interest in India’s role in the First World War
Since February this year, when we published our report, Remember the World as well as the War, we have argued that the UK can only gain from developing a global understanding of what was a global conflict with global consequences, and from understanding specific countries’ experiences, such as India’s.
Other organisations and individuals are now echoing this message. In the recent TV series, The World’s War Opens in a new tab or window., the BBC’s David Olusoga Opens in a new tab or window. reveals the experiences of the ‘Forgotten Soldiers of Empire’ — with explicit reference to soldiers from India.
The London School of Economics and Political Science Opens in a new tab or window. has opened out some of its thinking about India’s role in the First World War to an increasingly interested public. TheIndia at LSE blog contains a growing number of articles from different perspectives.
And for those interested in original documents rather than commentary, the National Archives Opens in a new tab or window. have made the 171 First World War diaries of the Indian Infantry units deployed to the Western Front available to download via the First World War 100 Opens in a new tab or window. portal.
The relevance of India’s role for the UK
There’s a growing interest in writing that offers a deeper understanding of the First World War, and what it means for countries such as India, which are historically associated with the UK. The fact that these resources are now more easily available to the public can only be a positive trend.
As Lord Bhikhu Parekh, speaking at Asia House on 20 May 2014 Opens in a new tab or window., summarised: ‘It makes British people realise what they owe to Indians. Their history was not enacted just by them. If you go back in history, you see Indians, Arabs and other[s] all playing an important role. Throughout Britain’s history, they are as much the architects of British history as the British themselves.’
Conversely, he pointed out that ‘it is important for Indians in the UK to realise our history did not begin in the 1950s. Indians have been present in the UK in some form or another for several hundred years. It’s good for Indians in the UK to realise that they are part of Britain’s history — it helps bond a society and form shared memories of mutual gratitude.’
Taken From : https://www.britishcouncil.org/voices-magazine/how-was-india-involved-first-world-war

 

Swadashi Movement

The Swadeshi Movement: The Swadeshi movement had its genesis in the antipartition movement which was started to oppose the British decision to partition Bengal. The formal proclamation of the Swadeshi movement was made on August 7, 1905 at a meeting held at the Calcutta Town hall. At the August 7 meeting, the famous Boycott resolution was passed. Boycott was first suggested by Krishan Kumar Mitra in Sanjivani in 1905.

Phrases Of Swadeshi Movement
1	1905-1909	Movement confined to Bengal and launched as a protest movement
2	1909-1910	Countrywide spread of movement and launching of anti-colonical movement
3	1910-1911	Swadeshi movement merged with revolutionary terrorist movement of first phase and led to the foundation of numerous secret associations.

The boycott of British products was followed by the advocacy of Swadeshi and to buy Indian products only. The leaders of Bengal felt that mere demonstrations, public meetings and resolutions were not in of an something more concrete was needed and the answer was swadeshi and boycott.

An important aspect of the swadeshi movement was the emphasis placed on self-reliance or atmasaki. Self-reliance meant assertion of national dignity, honour and self-confidence.

Leaders of the Swadeshi movement beyond Bengal
Punjab	Lala Lajpat Rai and Ajit Singh
Delhi	Syed Haider Raza
Madras	Chidambaram Pillai
Maharastra	Lokmanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak
Andhra	Harisarvottam Rao

Swadeshi Movement and National Education
Setting of the Bengal Technical Institute Emphasis on education through vernacular medium Setting up of a National Council Of Education on August 15, 1906 Opening of way National College at Calcutta with Aurobindo Ghosh as its principle. Efforts of Rabindranath Tagor's Shantiniketan and Satish Mukherjee's Dawn Society to combine the traditional and modern systems of education.

Difference between Moderates and Extremists over Swadeshi and Boycott : The Extremists wanted to extend Swadeshi and Boycott movement from Bengal to the rest of the country. They also wanted to extend the boycott to every form of association with the Government. The Moderates, on the other hand, wanted to confine the boycott movement to Bengal and there who limit it to the boycott of foreign goods.

Simla Deputation

The Simla deputation proved a landmark in the history of modern India, because for the very first time the Hindu-Muslim conflict, which stared with the Urdu-Hindi controversy, was lifted to the constitutional plane. The Indians were not satisfied with the Indian council Act of 1892. Especially, the act failed to ensure the fair representation of Muslims. So, the Indians were agitating for more power. Due to the growing political pressure and increasing social unrest, the British Government decided to make constitutional reforms relating to the electoral bodies. On 20^th July 1906 John Morley the Secretary of State for Indian affairs, speaking on the Indian budget in the British parliament, announced that the Government wanted to increase the number of seats for the legislative councils and also their powers.

John Morley announcement created an anxiety among the Muslims of the sub-continent. The proposed reforms, if implemented, as was demanded by the Congress, would have suppressed the Muslims more under the Hindu Majority. Muslim leaders were of the view that neither elections nor nominations are fulfilled the requirements of the Indian Muslims, and that they needed a certain number of seats in both the central and provincial councils. Their seats should be filled up by votes of their own community.

The weekly Muslim Patriot penned down this important issue to clarify the assumption that India was inhabited by one class. It stated that India consists on a heterogeneous mass of different races whose interests were often different. It although supported the extended representation in the legislature, but also wished that the extension should be based on the class recognition and each distinct community should have representatives of its own in proportion to its population.

Now, many Mohammedans drew the attention of Mohsin-ul-Mulk, the secretary of the M.A.O College, Aligarh, to John Morley’s speech. So, Nawab Mohin-ul-Mulk wrote a letter on August 1906, to Archbold, Principal of the college, in which he expressed his apprehensions about the forthcoming constitutional changes. He was of the view that if combined election would be held on a more extended scale, Mohammedans will hardly get a single seat, while Hindus will carry more advantage because of their majority. He asked Archbold to advise for submit memorial from the Mohammedans to the Viceroy and to request his permission to accept a deputation for discus the issue of forthcoming constitutional amendments. Archbold contacted to Viceroy’s secretary and on 10^th August 1906. He informed Mohsin-ul-Mulk that the Viceroy was ready to meet the deputation.

After receiving the letter of Archbold, Nawab Sahib started to put together a deputation for this purpose. A meeting was held in Lakhnow on 16^th September 1906, in which an address, prepared by Sayyid Husain Bilgarami, was finalized by learned Muslim leaders. Finally, a deligation consisting of 35 leaders of Muslim community meet to the viceroy, under the leadership of Sir Aga Khan, in Simla on 1^st October 1906. The deputation was included the members from Bengal, Punjab, U.P., Bombay, Madras, Sindh, C.P., Deccan, and Delhi. The members of deputation were drawn from the Muslim elite class, but most of the members of deputation were connected with the Aligarh movement through the AIMEC. Besides these members, others were associated with different semi-political parties like Anjuman-i-Islam, National Mohammedan Association etc.

The deputation presented the memorial in front of viceroy, which was consisting of the demands that rights of separate electorates should be given to the Muslims; Muslims should be given three more seats in central legislature; quota should be given to the Muslims in civil services; Muslims should be given representation in universities senates and syndicates; an aid should be given to the Muslims for the establishment of a Muslin university.

Lord Minto, the Viceroy, assured the Muslim delegation that as long as he is associated with the administrative affairs if the country, their national rights would be preserved.

Congress made an allegation that the deputation was engineered by the Government to resist the activities of nationalists. A newspaper, Amrita Bazar Patrika, closed to the Congress, launched the propaganda that the deputation was the part of British policy of divide and rule. It also stated that the deputation did not represent the whole of the Muslim community and self-serving British officers were involved in its formation.

In order to prove the conspiracy theory, Congress leaders had referred to a certain letter written by Archold to an unknown person of Aligarh. There is not single solid evidence available to prove that the deputation was the part of British policy.

The deputation was purely representing the demands of the Muslim community. If it had been launched by the Government then there was no need of Mohsin-ul-Mulk to borrow a sum of four thousand rupees from King and King Company at the interest rate of 7% to meet the expenses of the Simla deputation. The company started correspondence, after the death of Mohsin-ul-Mulk, with the Muslim league for the return of loan and also threatened to get Moshin-ul-Mulk’s property confiscated.

The Simla deputation was unique, because for the first time Muslims were anxious to take their share in the political activities as a separate identity. Another purpose of the delegation was to get a silent permission form the Government to make a political platform for the representation of Muslims, and also was to take the Government into confidence. The demand of separate electorates, which were presented through the deputation, was the foundation of all future constitutional amendments for India. The inevitable consequence of deputation was the partition of Indian and the emergence of Pakistan.