Naveed Javed Cheema

The National Security Policy (NSP) for 2022-2026, launched by Pakistan, sets forth broad and ambitious objectives but fails to offer clear strategies for addressing the complexities of an emerging multipolar world order. While it promises to reposition Pakistan at the “crucible of history,” emphasizing emerging trends and technological revolutions, the policy is criticized for its vague rhetoric and lack of actionable guidance. It uses sweeping statements about leveraging the country’s advantages and facing challenges but lacks the depth to confront the specific geopolitical realities and challenges Pakistan faces, both domestically and internationally.

Notably, the policy does not adequately address Pakistan’s existing engagements with key global players, nor does it provide a clear roadmap for future diplomatic and economic relations. These omissions are glaring given Pakistan’s deepening involvement in several high-stakes bilateral and multilateral relationships. The country finds itself navigating complex and often conflicting demands from both Western powers and its close economic allies, notably China and the Middle East.

One of the most significant areas where the NSP falls short is its treatment of Pakistan’s external debt, which, as of recent estimates, stands at $130 billion. Of this, $30 billion is owed to China, but there is ambiguity regarding whether this debt is directly government-to-government or includes sovereign guarantees tied to projects under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). The remaining $100 billion is largely owed to the West, including multilateral institutions and Western commercial banks. Pakistan’s growing debt to China, particularly in light of CPEC, has raised concerns about the country’s increasing reliance on Chinese funding, but it has also complicated relations with the West.

For instance, despite China’s growing economic influence in Pakistan, it remains the case that the vast majority of Pakistan’s trade and remittance inflows come from Western and Middle Eastern countries. Over 90% of Pakistan’s trade, for example, remains with the US and Europe, with the latter’s GSP Plus trade status significantly boosting exports. Meanwhile, trade with China remains limited, amounting to only $813 million in the first quarter of 2024. Additionally, remittance inflows come predominantly from the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and the West, with no significant remittances from China. This imbalance highlights the limitations of Pakistan’s economic engagements with China, which, despite being a significant investor, has not yet provided the same level of comprehensive economic support as Western and Middle Eastern allies.

The NSP also overlooks the critical role of foreign direct investment (FDI) and how it can be harnessed to boost Pakistan’s economic growth. The Special Investment Facilitation Council (SIFC), designed to facilitate foreign investment, has become a focal point for addressing these issues. However, challenges persist, including the need to ensure a level playing field for all investors, as noted in an IMF report from October 2024. The IMF has expressed concerns about the dilution of governance standards and the need to ensure transparency in the investment environment, issues that Pakistan must urgently address to attract sustainable foreign investment.

Moreover, Pakistan’s foreign policy challenges have been exacerbated by security concerns, particularly the growing number of attacks on Chinese nationals in Pakistan. These incidents, alongside diplomatic missteps by government officials, have undermined Pakistan’s relationship with China, the most significant foreign partner in its recent economic endeavors. One such example is the insensitive comments made by Pakistani officials about the deaths of Chinese nationals, which understandably upset the Chinese government. Such diplomatic missteps underscore the need for a more coherent and sensitive approach to handling Pakistan’s key foreign relations.

One of the more glaring weaknesses of the NSP is its failure to adequately address the regional security dynamics, particularly with India. Since the inception of the CPEC, India has raised consistent objections, viewing the project as a security threat due to China’s growing influence in the region, particularly in Gwadar, which India perceives as part of China’s broader strategy to encircle it through its control of key ports in the Indian Ocean. While India’s concerns may stem from historical conflict, the NSP does not offer a robust counter-strategy or diplomatic engagement to mitigate these tensions.

Pakistan’s growing ties with China, while strategically important, have also attracted criticism from Western powers. The US and its allies, particularly in Europe, have raised concerns over the lack of transparency in CPEC projects. For instance, US Ambassador Alice Wells expressed doubts about the openness of CPEC agreements, pointing to the involvement of blacklisted firms in the projects and the potential for unsustainable debt levels. These concerns continue to shape Western attitudes towards Pakistan’s economic policies, particularly as they relate to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Moreover, these tensions have intensified as Western countries accuse Pakistan of incentivizing Chinese economic expansion at the expense of Pakistan’s long-term economic stability and sovereignty.

The economic situation in Pakistan is further complicated by ongoing structural issues. The government’s reluctance to implement reforms has led to a deepening trust deficit with both the West and its other key partners. This lack of reform implementation has been a major sticking point with the IMF, whose staff have repeatedly highlighted the need for Pakistan to adhere to time-bound conditions and structural benchmarks to maintain its financial aid. Without substantial progress on reforms, particularly in fiscal discipline and governance, Pakistan will likely continue to face challenges in securing international financial assistance and in stabilizing its economy.

The lack of a coherent foreign policy strategy is also evident in Pakistan’s inability to leverage its strategic location in South Asia effectively. The country finds itself caught between competing global powers—China, the US, and India—and struggling to balance these relationships. The absence of a clear strategic vision within the NSP means that Pakistan is navigating these geopolitical challenges reactively rather than proactively, resulting in a series of missed opportunities.

In conclusion, the National Security Policy of Pakistan, while ambitious in its goals, falls short of offering a clear and actionable strategy to address the country’s multifaceted challenges. From managing external debt and attracting foreign investment to handling the complex security dynamics in South Asia, the NSP needs urgent revision. A more coherent, realistic, and long-term policy framework is required to ensure that Pakistan can navigate the changing global landscape effectively and safeguard its national interests in a rapidly evolving world order. The National Security Committee must urgently revisit the NSP and address the concerns raised by internal and external stakeholders to transform the policy into a more implementable and cohesive strategy.