WASHINGTON: A senior representative of a leading US think-tank believes that labeling Pakistan a ‘state sponsor of terrorism’ would be a profoundly unwise move.
In his recent post on the issue, Michael Krepon, the co-founder of the Stimson Centre, said: “The leverage this threat provides would be lost with its execution, along with the likelihood of remedial steps. The terrorism issue, as important as it is, is less consequential than the nuclear issue.”
He went on to say that, “Rawalpindi has figured this out, which helps explain why it doesn’t deliver on promises to take more than cosmetic action against the Lashkar-e-Toiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad leadership.”
Regarding Indo-Pak relations and looming crisis between the two neighbouring countries, Mr Krepon said ties between Pakistan and India, as well as between Pakistan and Afghanistan, were volatile, as is evidenced by raids and firing across unsettled borders.
He feared that a major crisis between India and Pakistan could well occur during the Trump Administration. “The United States is obliged to function as an effective crisis manager, which won’t happen by shunning Pakistan. What role do those leading the charge to squeeze Pakistan propose for U.S. crisis management and war prevention,” he asked.
An official of the Heritage Foundation, another US think-tank, also opposes Pakistan to be declared a ‘State Sponsor of Terrorism’ this year. He urged the Trump administration to keep the option open for future.
Besides, former US special representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan Daniel Feldman says that stopping assistance to Pakistan has been tried in the past as well and it failed to bring the desired change in the country’s attitude.