Opinion | Asim Munir, And Why Trump Must Be A Little Careful With Flatterers

If US President Donald Trump's March TV interview on Fox News with Laura Ingraham is any indication, the President of the United States is more gullible than a babe in the cradle. Talking about his renovations for the Oval Office, the POTUS suggested that real gold was used to give the office its much-debated gilded look. After Bill Clinton's candy stripe upholstery, this is one of the most visually dramatic transformations in presidential history. With golden vermeil figurines on the mantel, gilded medallions, golden cherubs above doorways, golden Crown mouldings and frames, and even a gold-wrapped remote control, the Oval Office is said to resemble Mar-a-Lago. The same contractor, John Icart, a cabinetmaker, has done the deed.

Did Trump get taken for a ride and erroneously claim the trimmings to be real gold? Or did he not bother finding out?

The Great American Naivete

This incident serves as a good parable for explaining the Pakistan-US relationship. With Pakistan's chief of army staff, Asim Munir, making nuclear threats against India from a dining hall in Florida barely a month after the latter was unconventionally received at the White House, the naivete of the US administration has been unmasked yet again. Has the US been too naive to understand the military-politics nexus of Pakistan, or has the latter been admirably suave in playing the US?

Threatening Indian infrastructure with missiles, Munir did not even blink before announcing Pakistan's willingness to commit nuclear harakiri to "punish" India in the crudest possible vocabulary. While Munir hasn't said anything that military leaders of Pakistan haven't said before him, the timing is of consequence. Pakistan has been riding high on the wave of its renewed fraternising with the US. 

Also Read | After Asim Munir's Threat, A Look Inside Pakistan's Nuclear Capabilities

Right from the 1950s, Pakistan has been taking advantage of US insecurities in the region. Receiving military aid to counter the Soviet Union through alliances like SEATO and CENTO, Pakistan promptly redirected the same against India. After collaborating in Afghanistan against the Soviets, the US again experienced the taste of Pakistani betrayal when the latter fostered militant networks that would attack US personnel and infrastructure. 

The Typical Double Game

It must be remembered that the nuclear arsenal that the Pakistan generals are so fond of tomtomming was built in secrecy, drawing the US's ire in the form of the Pressler Amendment of 1960, which stopped all aid to Pakistan for years. Then came the 'War on Terror', and Pakistan again played the US establishment to bolster its own weapon systems. Intelligence and strategic voices in Washington and elsewhere warned the White House about Pakistan's habitual double game, but the sense of urgency and information asymmetry created by Pakistan's military leadership prevailed over caution. Yet, it became clear in 2011, when Osama Bin Laden was neutralised in Abbottabad without prior information from Washington to its "major non-NATO ally", that the US knows when to pull the plug on trust. 

Pakistan Understood The Assignment

Trump's assessment of the US-Pakistan relations in his first presidential term was that of a parasitic arrangement. The volte-face in the current term has many reasons, the most important being Trump's proclivity for unabashed flatterers. Pakistan understood it better than most countries and spared no time in the second term in being effusive in praising the POTUS. While India refused to grant Trump any credit for the ceasefire in May, Pakistan made exaggerated gestures of gratitude.

Also Read | Opinion: A US Bailout? A 'Coup'? What Are Asim Munir's Nuclear Threats Really About?

During his second visit to the US in less than three months, Munir made incendiary remarks against India, not only in Florida but in Washington before that. The fact that the earlier remarks went largely unreported seems to have emboldened the army chief, who has consistently demonstrated his disdain for the political class. The pliability of the political leadership of Pakistan allows Munir's antics to go unchallenged. Deeply entrenched in Islamic theology, Munir's ideas are unpalatable to many of his compatriots, but the charade of a working civilian government keeps dissent in check. Munir has found the sweet spot of rights without responsibilities. 

Mere Performance

As far as India is concerned, the long experience of dealing with Pakistan's military leadership that desires destruction has taught that Munir's threats are primarily for domestic consumption. With an economy in dire straits, Pakistan relies on over-the-top nationalistic rhetoric to assuage its people's worries. Loaded with theological references, such speeches are meant to beguile citizens in the name of Pakistani exceptionalism. People in Pakistan should really be worried about the Mercedes and the dump-truck analogy. 

India's diplomatic response to the speech is measured and raises valid concerns. On the other hand, a verbose response to this response betrays Pakistan's caught-red-handed state. The lengthy reply does not even once deny the content in question. It seeks refuge in the hackneyed excuse of "out of context" interpretation. 

It is clear that Pakistan's zealous army chief has misstepped and, fearing a fallout in Washington, they are in a damage control mode .... Lest Trump figure out that all that glitters is not gold. 

(Nishtha Gautam is a Delhi-based author and academic)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author