Why the US-Pakistan ‘Situationship’ Against India Is Destined to End in Disappointment | Explained
GLOBAL EVENTS
The United States and Pakistan are once again caught in a familiar cycle, marked by alternating phases of partnership and estrangement.
Why the US-Pakistan ‘Situationship’ Against India Is Destined to End in Disappointment | Explained
In geopolitics, as in life, not every relationship is built to last. Some are mere conveniences — situational alliances formed to address short-term goals, only to crumble under the weight of conflicting long-term interests. The so-called “situationship” between the United States and Pakistan, particularly when viewed through the lens of India’s strategic rise, is one such complicated arrangement.
This isn’t a new story. For decades, Washington and Islamabad have shared a love-hate dynamic — cooperating on counterterrorism, military aid, and regional stability, only to drift apart when their priorities clash. Today, with India emerging as a critical partner for the U.S. in balancing China’s influence in Asia, Pakistan’s relevance to Washington seems to be fading. And yet, Pakistan still attempts to play its old card — positioning itself as the indispensable partner in South Asia.
From where I stand, this “situationship” is destined to end in disappointment — for Pakistan more than anyone else.
The Historical Context — A Relationship Built on Convenience
To understand why this dynamic is so fragile, we need to look back. The U.S.-Pakistan relationship has rarely been about deep trust or shared values. During the Cold War, Washington saw Islamabad as a useful ally in containing Soviet influence in the region. Pakistan, in turn, leveraged American support to strengthen its military and bolster its position against India.
This transactional pattern continued after 9/11, when Pakistan became a key U.S. partner in the “War on Terror.” Billions of dollars in aid flowed in exchange for counterterrorism cooperation. But the relationship was always strained — Washington accused Islamabad of playing a “double game,” harboring militant groups even as it helped target others.
For India, this was frustrating. Every time U.S. weapons and aid went to Pakistan, there was concern that they would be used not just against extremists but potentially against India itself.
The Changing Strategic Landscape
Fast-forward to today, and the situation is radically different. The U.S. now sees India as a cornerstone of its Indo-Pacific strategy. New Delhi is not just a regional power but a global one, with a growing economy, a robust democracy, and a military that is increasingly interoperable with Western forces.
Meanwhile, Pakistan’s leverage has diminished. The withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan removed one of its primary bargaining chips — its geographic importance for U.S. military operations. The Pakistani economy is struggling, political instability is rampant, and its relationship with China has deepened through the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC).
In short, Islamabad no longer has the same strategic weight it once did.
The “Situationship” Dynamic — Why It Still Exists
Despite all this, Washington occasionally re-engages with Pakistan. The reasons are pragmatic: counterterrorism, intelligence sharing, and a desire to prevent Pakistan from completely falling into China’s orbit. Recently, there have been efforts to reset ties, with U.S. officials visiting Islamabad and discussing cooperation on security and economic fronts.
But let’s be clear — this is not a relationship based on shared values or vision. It is, at best, a “situationship”: useful in certain contexts, but not built for the long term.
And this is precisely why it will end in disappointment.
Why It Won’t Work Against India
Here’s the thing — Washington cannot afford to alienate New Delhi. India is simply too important to the U.S.’s long-term strategy. The two countries share a common interest in countering China’s assertiveness, ensuring freedom of navigation in the Indo-Pacific, and building resilient supply chains. The QUAD alliance (U.S., India, Japan, Australia) is a cornerstone of this vision.
Any overt alignment with Pakistan at India’s expense would damage these efforts. New Delhi is not just a partner; it is a pivotal player in shaping the balance of power in Asia. Washington knows this, and despite occasional frustrations over India’s neutral stance on global conflicts (like Russia-Ukraine), the U.S. is unlikely to jeopardize its relationship with India for the sake of Pakistan.
This is why Pakistan’s hopes of using U.S. support to counterbalance India are misplaced. The era when Washington might have considered such a move is long gone.
Pakistan’s Dilemma — Between Washington and Beijing
Another reason this “situationship” is fragile is Pakistan’s deepening ties with China. The CPEC is not just an economic project; it is a strategic one. China has invested heavily in Pakistan’s infrastructure, ports, and energy projects. For Washington, this makes Islamabad a less reliable partner.
You can’t play both sides forever. The U.S. may tolerate Pakistan’s relationship with China to some extent, but it will never fully trust a country so closely tied to its main strategic competitor.
My Personal Take — India’s Patience Will Pay Off
As someone who follows geopolitics closely, I see this as a positive development for India. For decades, New Delhi has had to watch U.S. arms and aid flow to Pakistan, even when Islamabad supported groups hostile to India. Today, that leverage is weaker. India doesn’t need to react defensively — its growing economic and diplomatic clout ensures that Washington will prioritize its relationship with New Delhi over Islamabad.
In a way, India’s best strategy might be simply to wait this “situationship” out. Washington will eventually realize that its attempts to balance ties with both countries are unsustainable. When push comes to shove, the U.S. will choose the partner that aligns with its long-term vision for Asia — and that partner is India.
The Road Ahead — Pragmatism Over Sentiment
Going forward, we can expect Washington-Islamabad ties to remain transactional. There will be cooperation on counterterrorism, humanitarian issues, and maybe even trade. But it won’t translate into a strategic partnership capable of countering India’s rise.
For Pakistan, this will be disappointing, but perhaps necessary. It might push Islamabad to focus on its own internal reforms, stabilize its economy, and rethink its security-first foreign policy. For India, it means continuing to strengthen its own partnerships, diversify its defense ties, and maintain its position as a key player in shaping the region’s future.
Final Thoughts
The U.S.-Pakistan “situationship” may have its occasional moments of warmth, but it is not built on the kind of trust and shared goals that define lasting alliances. In the long run, it will be India — not Pakistan — that enjoys Washington’s strategic embrace.
For those of us watching from the sidelines, this is a fascinating reminder of how global politics is ultimately about interests, not emotions. And right now, U.S. interests are firmly aligned with India.