For India, the fact that Pakistan could at any stage risk being low on reserves of ammunition is not a happy phenomenon. Pakistan supplied Ukraine with weapons despite China's staunch support to Russia

by Lieutenant General Syed Ata Hasnain (Retd)

The surprise of surprises for many unused to the wily ways of the geopolitics of the world is that Pakistan, a die-hard supporter and partner of China (remember the ‘higher than the skies and deeper than the oceans relationship’) has materially assisted the NATO partner, Ukraine in its war effort against the Russians in the ongoing Russia-Ukraine War. China has fully sided with Russia in the war and that is one of the reasons why Russia has sustained its war effort thus far. However, China is not known to have made any warlike equipment available to bolster the Russian effort but has extended its hand only in the diplomatic and the economic domain, buying lots of Russian energy and lending it support at multilateral bodies. So why has Pakistan gone against its ally and strategic partner. It is well known that on 24 February 2022, when the War in Ukraine broke out former Pakistan prime minister Imran Khan was in Moscow and awkwardly expressed his excitement about the war. It was an inappropriate moment to be there when war was expected and Imran’s lack of condemnation of the Russian action put him on the wrong side of the US and NATO but well up with the Sino-Russian combine.

Some months later Imran Khan faced with defeat in a no-confidence vote in the assembly, alleged a US-led plot to remove him as punishment for his Russia trip in 2022 and supposed neutral foreign policy. Everything had anyway lined up against him because of his alleged mis-governance and with the army refusing to further back him he lost power. The Pakistan Army has usually enjoyed the confidence of the US and often acts at its behest. Imran Khan is currently in jail with uncertainty about his continuation in active politics, or that of even his party, Tehreek e Insaaf. The army, earlier his supporter in 2018 is now ranged completely against him. Was it actually the US pressure which transformed Imran Khan’s fortunes? That is food for thought.

In the beginning of 2023 rumour was rife that Ukraine had fired so much ammunition in the ongoing war, especially tank munitions, artillery shells and rockets that even NATO’s stocks were insufficient to sustain the rate of expenditure. With ratcheting up of manufacturing by the NATO nations the Ukrainians seem to have developed even greater hunger to consume and fire. Finally, a consignment of ammunition probably from Pakistan’s War Wastage Reserve stocks was airlifted to Ukraine. The pipeline of supply apparently continued for some time. Not many paid attention to this, although it was well known that a $450 million deal for refurbishment and overhaul of Pakistan’s 75 odd F-16 aircraft was an outcome of Pakistan’s promised supply of ammunition to Ukraine.

The Pakistan government’s support to Ukraine at the behest of the US appears to have gone on for some time. Obviously, Pakistan’s dire economic state was a major factor in its decision making to go along with the US. The economic capital and political goodwill from the arms sales played a key role in helping secure the promised bailout from the IMF and even the FATF. The US State Department probably took the IMF into confidence to enable the nearly $3 billion to be released from the promised loan. Imran Khan had been resisting the conditions that the IMF had laid down in terms of cutting down populist measures. Most of these were eventually adopted by the government of the Pakistan Democratic Movement but some reprieve was probably extracted in turn for the crucial ammunition supply to Ukraine.

So how do the geopolitical equations work here. China is Pakistan’s perennial friend and cannot afford to shun it completely on the basis of the frequent choices that the latter makes on cooperation with the US. It is only through Pakistan that China gets access to the west Indian Ocean, a crucial area for its energy security. With the proposed India-Middle East-Europe trade corridor energising BRI through CPEC is equally crucial. Through Pakistan, China also gets to open a full conventional war front against India, or at least the threat of it, and a half front through support for Pakistan’s proxy war in Jammu and Kashmir. China does not easily loosen its purse strings and is therefore unconcerned about a US supported bailout. In fact, it achieves two aspects for its own comfort level: one, it does not have to dole out too much to Pakistan for survival and two, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) remains intact. The effect that Pakistan supplied ammunition has had on the battlefield in Ukraine is not of major concern to China; it is pragmatic enough to realise that this war is un-winnable and a logistics leg up to one side or the other will only lengthen the war, not terminate it in anyone’s favour.

Of course, Pakistan would like us all to believe that it maintains a strict impartiality in the Ukraine war and has remained in denial about the supposed $900 million that it received for the ammunition sale. Public information on this or an official admission of the sale would also be an embarrassment for China. However, China’s need for Pakistan’s support is also strong. Besides all other reasons mentioned, it is believed that Pakistan manages China’s perception and outreach to the Islamic world especially to the OIC.

The Russians on the other hand will surely have an axe to grind with Pakistan. It obviously perceives the war situation as something winnable and any support to Ukraine would almost amount to an act of war against Russia. The Russia-Pakistan relationship has never been beyond the transactional; Pakistan has always been a part of the US camp. As such nothing much is lost except in one sphere, Afghanistan. Russia was one of the countries which retained its embassy in Kabul after the US withdrawal. Its relationship with the Taliban 2.0 is better than almost all others. The Taliban 2.0 has been pressuring Pakistan on the Durand Line and extending full support to the renegade Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan in the western districts of Pakistan. Helping Taliban 2.0 to wreak revenge on Pakistan may not be the most prudent policy but by doing that Russia can buy temporary peace for Central Asia. With its huge military commitment towards Ukraine, Russia is definitely vulnerable in its south, in the Central Asian Region where a population of 72 million Muslims resides. Russia would definitely value the Taliban 2.0 on its side and that is possible if both are ranged against Pakistan.

For India, the fact that Pakistan could at any stage risk being low on reserves of ammunition is not a happy phenomenon. It can only lead to one surmise that Pakistan continues to remain at frontline status for the US which will extend its facilities and wherewithal whenever Pakistan needs it. In this case it appears obvious that Pakistan received some assurance from the US about ensuring no Indian proactive stance on the border while its ammunition holdings were low.

The above combined with the US stance on Canada’s recent/current allegations against India does not make for an enduring Indo-US Strategic Partnership either, something to which both nations seem reasonably committed.

The age-old adage ‘no permanent friends and no permanent enemies’ continues to hold good for all spheres of geopolitical activities. Alignments and realignments will always examine fresh advantages and effectiveness for either side. While it is being fought the Ukraine war is constantly producing sets of protagonists and antagonists. Hypothetically if it gets over in the next one year, a whole new set of stakeholders will probably emerge. That is true geopolitics.

The writer is a former GOC of the Army’s 15 Corps