US National Security Advisor (NSA) Dr Susan Rice visited Pakistan and met Prime Minister (PM) Nawaz Sharif, Pakistani NSA Sartaj Aziz and COAS General Raheel Sharif. The statements from US and Pakistani officials and media reports suggest that the primary focus of Rice’s visit was the relations of Pakistan with its neighbours and its role in regional stability. Rice has extended an invitation to PM Nawaz Sharif from President Obama to visit Washington in October to continue the discussion on these key issues. This visit has made it quite clear that Pakistan’s role in the peace and stability of Afghanistan is essential to US-Pakistan relations, both in terms of military aid and goodwill from Washington. Rice has conveyed the US administration’s reservations about Operation Zarb-e-Azb, saying that while Pakistan’s counter-terrorism efforts are appreciable, the attacks of Pakistan-based militants on other countries (Afghanistan) are “absolutely unacceptable”. It is reported that Rice has also delineated the steps that Pakistan can take to fight the Haqqani network, which is responsible for much of Afghanistan’s unrest, and how the US will provide support in this endeavour. Whether Pakistan receives the $ 300 million Coalition Support Funds tranche depends upon whether the government and military will choose to act against the Haqqani network and play a positive role in the quest for a stable Afghanistan to ameliorate the mistrust that already exists. Pakistan’s military spending already constitutes an overwhelmingly large proportion of the country’s budget and we cannot afford to lose this respite in the expenses of the war on terror because that would have implications for the already flailing economy. The Pakistani state can no longer deceive its people, the US and the rest of the world about its intentions towards terrorist organisations. The spirit of reconciliation in which Afghan President Ashraf Ghani made efforts to reach out to Pakistan when he first took office, has now turned sour and Kabul seems to be losing patience with Islamabad. Kabul has blamed Pakistan for the escalation of violence in Afghanistan. After the recent wave of attacks in Kabul, in which many have lost their lives, including some US citizens, this criticism has grown stronger. After months of what seemed like empty promises, Pakistan finally hosted the first round of talks between Kabul and the Taliban. However, these negotiations can only be successful if the terrorist attacks in Afghanistan cease. A political settlement cannot be a possibility if the Afghan government and the country remain under siege. Any efforts to aid peace talks will prove meaningless if Pakistan does not attempt to help curb the attacks in Afghanistan.We can by no means continue the old pattern of following a duplicitous foreign policy that contradicts itself in speech and action. Neither Afghanistan nor the US believes that Operation Zarb-e-Azb is targeting terrorist groups operating from Pakistani soil without discrimination. The tall claims of state leaders in this regard fall flat when their practical measures do not back their assurances. It is clear that the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan and its allies have a diminished presence in the country and are no longer as active as they were before the start of the operation. However, the Haqqani network is still as powerful and brutal as it ever was, if not more so, suggesting that it has not been stymied. As we have seen in the past, these terrorist groups almost always end up biting the hand that feeds them. Pakistan’s descent into a state of perpetual chaos and violent terror attacks was in part the state’s own fault for fostering Islamist groups to use as proxies in the region. At this point, the state must realise that there is absolutely no benediction in fostering terror groups. At this critical juncture, Pakistan can either prove itself to be a true friend of Afghanistan and the US and emerge as the victor in the war against terror, or the state can continue its paradoxical foreign policy and be perceived as a threat to international security. The choice, it seems, is a simple one. *