A Netflix series, The Diplomat has a line that, “it might be dangerous to be America’s enemy, but to be its friend its fatal.” This could well have been written about Pakistan. Few relations in modern geopolitics embody this paradox more explicitly than Pakistan’s with Washington.
The Pakistan- USA relationship used to be an aid fueled relationship, and Islamabad danced between dependence and disillusionment with Washington as if it was a partnership that thrives during crisis and fades in calm. But now as the new political events being unfold in the world followed by new global alignments and the emergence of new economic realities, Pakistan got a chance to redefine itself as a strategic and material partner to the USA rather than a needy ally.
Pakistan took the USA as a gateway to global legitimacy and development, but for the USA it was always transactional. Pakistan used to frame its significance out of geopolitical emergencies and tries to be relevant through its geostrategic location and expects permanence. As soon as the USA’s strategic objectives are fulfilled, Pakistan is left grappling with the consequences of being used.
But this time Pakistan sits at the table not only with its geostrategic location but with rich resources. The tone of engagement is changed because Pakistan got fine bargaining chips. The discovery and revival of Reko Diq gold and copper project, one of the world’s largest untapped mineral resources, and offshore energy resource potential, had altered Pakistan’s bargaining landscape. The geography, connecting South Asia with Persian Gulf and western China, altogether grabbing America’s interest.
If framed intelligently, the USA can be engaged in renewable energy, digital infrastructure, and regional integration without any old security baggage. In an era of rethinking supply chains and energy routes, the geography would instantly be converted into a potential corridor of cooperation which was once a curse for conflicts.
The partnership stands at a crossroads between reinvention and repetition. The shift from aid to assets, and from counterterrorism to soft diplomacy, presents a rare chance to renegotiate the terms of engagement. The real test, however, lies in Islamabad’s ability to sustain stability, policy consistency, and strategic patience. If Pakistan plays its cards wisely, it may finally rewrite the decades-old script, no longer the girlfriend for the USA’s rainy days, but a partner for clear skies
Two sizzling questions arises here, one is, what if it’s another phase of transnationalism masquerading as a paradigm shift? while the second is, Can Pakistan this time bargain from a position of strength rather than dependence?
So, for the first, it seems to be dependent on the success of these projects. Although the USA’s policymakers may now discuss minerals and trade, the USA’s attention rarely drifts and the subtext of counterterrorism still dominates. The designation of the Balochistan Liberation Army as a terrorist organization by the USA demonstrates that the long-dismissed narrative of Pakistan is now getting traction in Washington’s security corridors.
This shift suggests that Pakistan’s counter terrorism cooperation is being repurposed as a tool of soft diplomacy, a mean to rebuild trust and legitimacy, and a chance for both states to operate with the same political grammar. Also, Pakistan is framing its painfully earned counterterrorism experience into diplomatic capital. A country once was accused of being a terrorist hub, now is a partner for regional stability. Intelligence cooperation, participation in international counterterrorism initiatives, and border management with Afghanistan have all been Islamabad’s new language of persuasion. Counterterrorism has become a new narrative for Pakistan to rebrand itself from a problem state to a valuable partner.
As long as it’s about positional bargaining, Islamabad must be very explicit to the USA that its minerals, geography, and counterterrorism leverage are embedded in policy coherence, not in crisis management. To get the USA engaged deeply, Pakistan’s political stability is very essential. Moreover, Pakistan’s emerging resource diplomacy demands institutional discipline. Reko Diq’s success or failure will shape not only investor sentiment but also Pakistan as a reliable economic partner. The government’s renewed engagement with US firms in mining and energy must be backed by transparency, environmental prudence, and fair profit-sharing models. This is where Pakistan can turn the resource conversation into a genuine strategic pivot if it avoids falling into the same dependency patterns disguised in new rhetoric.
Meanwhile, Pakistan’s security narrative must evolve. Counterterrorism cannot remain a perpetual selling point; it must transition into a broader framework of regional peacebuilding and economic resilience. The US designation of BLA, while significant, should not be the endgame. It should be a starting point for a new security discourse that integrates economic development, border cooperation, and counterextremism in the social sphere. In other words, Pakistan’s diplomacy must move from “security as a favor” to “security as a shared investment.”
Approaching to an unescapable conclusion, Pakistan’s diplomacy has long oscillated between hope and heartbreak. Pakistan thinks it is in a Catholic marriage with the USA while Washington, treats it more like a girlfriend for rainy days. One is seeking permanence, while other convenience. Yet today, the partnership stands at a crossroads between reinvention and repetition. The shift from aid to assets, and from counterterrorism to soft diplomacy, presents a rare chance to renegotiate the terms of engagement. The real test, however, lies in Islamabad’s ability to sustain stability, policy consistency, and strategic patience. If Pakistan plays its cards wisely, it may finally rewrite the decades-old script, no longer the girlfriend for the USA’s rainy days, but a partner for clear skies.
