DON'T MENTION THE (AFGHAN) WAR: BRITAIN'S CURIOUS RELATIONSHIP WITH PAKISTAN

Abstract

The article is based on Professor Lieven's recent book, Pakistan: a hard case. He starts by contrasting British and American attitudes, emphasising that Pakistan is far more important to Britain than Afghanistan as a result of the sheer size of the diaspora. And British officials and soldiers spent decades dealing with the North-West Frontier. They would not have been surprised by the shifting loyalties of the tribes, which are simply a fact of life. But the basic point of the book is to explain how the Pakistani system works. Pakistan is a troubled, but not a failing state. It is tougher than we think. But the very reasons for its toughness inhibit change. The military are over-powerful and the tax system is grossly inadequate. Cooperation over the terrorist threat to the West is good, but Afghanistan is another story. Pakistan is making its calculation on the basis of a western withdrawal, which would be welcomed by the average Pakistani. At some point the West will need to cut a deal with the Taliban and only Pakistan can get them to the table.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Anatol Lieven

Professor Anatol Lieven is chair of international relations and terrorism studies at King's College London. In the late 1980s he was correspondent for The Times (London) in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and he has visited this region frequently since 9/11. His most recent book Pakistan: A hard case was published in April 2011. This is the edited text of the lecture which he gave to the Society on Wednesday 28 April 2011.