It is expected to repair a fractured relationship between the two countries.
U.S. aid to Pakistan was suspended after the 2011 Navy SEAL raid revealed to the world that Osama Bin Laden was hiding within the vicinity of a Pakistani military complex.
However, animosity is by no means unique to American policymakers, as the Pakistani government has repeatedly called for an end to U.S. drone strikes in the country.
The renewal of military and economic aid represents a pervasive problem in American foreign policy: The U.S. still pledges unconditional support to unfriendly and dubious regimes because of their nuclear power.
Though some may argue the row between the two allies began with the killing of Bin Laden or the controversial drone strikes, the complicated relationship shared between the United States and Pakistan is deeply rooted in its nuclear arsenal.
For instance, the Guardian confirmed that during the 1970s — when the Pakistani government first embarked on its nuclear journey by enriching uranium — former President Jimmy Carter suspended all military aid to the country.
Similarly, assistance plummeted in the 1990s as President George H.W. Bush responded to an increasingly stronger nuclear program. The reason the United States never completely severed ties with its South-Asian ally is because of its geostrategic importance.
After the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, aid that was suspended by Carter was resumed in the mutual interest of defeating communism.
The same Islamic fundamentalists who were used to combat the Soviets have supplanted the threat of Communism and thus, counterterrorism now accounts for the basis of the U.S.-Pakistani alliance.
The Council on Foreign Relations reported the extensive number of radical groups operating in Pakistan falls within five categories: Sectarian, anti-Indian, the Pakistani and Afghan Taliban and al-Qaida.
However, Pakistan doesn’t seem too keen on eradicating the extremist militants lurking within its borders.
Husain Haqqani, former Pakistani ambassador to the United States, wrote in an opinion article for The New York Times that “a whole generation of Pakistanis has grown up with textbooks that conflate Pakistani nationalism with Islamist exclusivism.”
The main reason Pakistan can receive aid while housing terrorists such as Bin Laden is because it has nuclear weapons.
And the government is quite aware of it.
Nuclear weaponry is a key bargaining chip when negotiating with the U.S.
It has allowed Pakistan’s prime minister to focus heavily on the drone campaign in his country, acting oblivious of the anti-American elements he hosts while still collecting money.
With all of the economic problems the United States faces, it’s absurd the American government continues to dole out aid to those who harbor enemies.
The U.S. should support democracy in Pakistan and withhold aid until such changes occur.
Richard Vieira is a UF political science senior. His column runs on Fridays. A version of this column ran on page 6 on 10/25/2013 under the headline "Our love/hate relationship with Pakistan"
