Eurasia has been the center of world power ever since the continents started interacting politically in the last half millennium,” observed Zbigniew Brzezinski in his book The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives. Two decades ago Brzezinski expressed his fears about ballooning American geostrategic dilemmas in the Eurasian heartland, proposing the need for a comprehensive and integrated Eurasian geostrategy for the U.S. Even today, it is imperative for the U.S. that no Eurasian challenger emerges that could dominate the region.

The situation is, however, transforming swiftly and it seems that such zero-sum games would be difficult to play in Eurasia. The regional powers are seeking greater cooperation and solidarity. As an extra-regional player, the U.S. considers Eurasian heartland the pivot to retain its waning global primacy. During a visit to Russia in April 2018, Pakistan’s Chief of Army Staff General Qamar Javed Bajwa and the Chief of General Staff of Russian Armed Forces General Gerasimov were of the view that zero-sum dynamics of Cold War era are still prevalent in the Eurasian region and South Asia. General Bajwa resonated Pakistan’s policy that the country wants to remove itself from the zero-sum dynamics of the Cold War era, which is also essential for the peaceful rise of world’s most populous and resource rich region.

As a peace-loving country, Pakistan welcomes any initiative that can bring peace and stability in Afghanistan, Eurasia, and the South Asian region. Russia, China, Iran, and Turkey have endorsed Pakistan’s stance that the use of force will not resolve the lingering conflict in Afghanistan and elsewhere. It appears that except few states all the regional players believe that the only way to achieve elusive peace in Afghanistan and the Eurasian landmass is through regional cooperative frameworks like the Shanghai Cooperation Organization Forum. While the SCO is making steady progress, the cooperation in South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation has been a victim of Indian intransigence.

Although New Delhi is part of both organizations and has made some gestures to mend fences with Beijing and prevent the decline in relationship with Moscow, it is escaping like an electron towards West. This is apparent in active Indian participation in the Quad Group with the U.S., Japan and Australia and its aspirations of becoming a net security provider in the Pacific and Indian Ocean. Although the U.S. and India have some scope in containing China and Russia in the Indian and Pacific Ocean rim, they face a geographic dilemma in Afghanistan and Eurasian landmass. All roads to the Eurasia primarily pass through either Pakistan or Iran, which are the gateways to this heartland. For the U.S., the geostrategic risks of access through Caucasus region or India are quite high. India has so far only played on American and Western fears about Eurasian rise but has not delivered on its geostrategic promise except in terms of being a big market.

Despite possessing the world’s largest navy, U.S. faces a serious dilemma of gaining a strong foothold in the Eurasian landmass. Like the Pacific and Indian Oceans which are large enough to accommodate the interests of major powers, Eurasia has enough room for extra-regional cooperation and will be increasingly resistant to extra-regional players’ zero-sum game for domination. As the cooperation in the SCO grows, it will become increasingly conscious of any attempts to shift the delicate balance of power that threaten the regional security and its member states. China’s peaceful rise and Russia’s resurgence have diluted American influence in the heartland.

The American desire for access to the heartland carries a price tag. Being the next door neighbors of this landlocked Eurasian region, Russia and China are already reaping dividends through positive win-win engagement in the region. China’s Belt and Road Initiative and Russia’s Eurasian Economic Union seek to revolutionize regional landscape through transcontinental multi-modal development projects. They are the co-architects of several new millennium enterprises too, such as the BRICS, SCO, AIIB, the Silk Road Economic Belt, the Eurasian Economic Union and a Comprehensive Eurasian Partnership.

Contrariwise, the U.S. is still seeing this peaceful transformation through the Cold War lens and has a containment strategy against China and Russia, terming both as the ‘biggest threats’ while the militarily leaning Pivot to Asia strategy is well in place. Reminiscent of Cold War, the big-power competition is thus amplifying the strategic instabilities of South Asia – stretching into larger Indian and Pacific Ocean regions.

Concerned utterly about this unhealthy competition, especially its growing axis with its perpetually nonchalant eastern neighbor India, Pakistan has taken certain defensive measures and a diversified foreign policy posture. As recently witnessed in the National Security Advisor and Pakistan’s Chief of the Army Staff’s recent visits to Russia, the scope of warming relations has expanded to include regional connectivity and prospects of closer cooperation in the fields of space, defense, security, economy and trade, cyber security, and intelligence-sharing.

Pakistan has repeatedly reiterated that it has no hostile designs towards any country and will keep on working towards a cooperative regional framework based on sovereign equality and mutual progress through connectivity. General Bajwa explicitly stated that Pakistan will keep the conflicts away from the region and will seek approaches which bring regional convergences into play rather than divergences. Washington, unfortunately, appears to have downplayed Pakistan’s critical role despite the latter’s continued decades-long efforts and support for mutually considered strategies particularly with respect to America’s war on terror.

Today, the regional powers are keen to expand their existing cooperation with Pakistan. Russia considers Pakistan a ‘geo-strategically important’ country. These developments are taking place at a time when Islamabad’s relationship with Washington continues to stay at crossroads. The challenging Pak-U.S. relations are a function of Washington’s strategic priorities in the region – in which it perhaps seeks a permanent footprint in Afghanistan without keeping Pakistan on board. This American position of accusing Pakistan for not doing enough is a stark contrast to the Russian position. This is apparent from Russia’s willingness to play a role in Pakistan's efforts towards reconciliation and peace in Afghanistan and appreciation of Pakistan’s achievements in the war against terror.

By seeking a military solution in Afghanistan, while aspiring for access to the heartland, U.S. risks inflicting itself another wound like Vietnam. America’s war in Afghanistan is the longest and most expensive in the country’s history. The U.S. could perhaps still achieve its core interest by giving political instrument the lead in its Afghanistan approach. Shifting the blame of a losing war in Afghanistan along with the missing elements of restructuring shall only drift the U.S. farther from attaining its key strategic goals. There is a need to make choices that carry long-term dividends.

Being a geographically insular power, which is also becoming politically inward-looking, America’s key predicament is the absence of a direct link to Eurasia – a geographical irony that cannot be undone. The biggest naval nuclear power in history can only exercise freedom of navigation and project its immense influence up to the shores of the open seas. For averting a loss in Afghanistan and for a sustainable presence in Central Asia, U.S. needs a geographical anchor to generously apply its political instrument. Which is only possible through peaceful engagement.

Even though American geostrategic imperatives pair with Indian geopolitical interests in the prevailing geopolitical situation, New Delhi offers little value in gaining land access to Eurasian landmass with Himalayas and Sino-Indian competition stand as great geographical and strategic barriers. India can only serve as a spoiler for America in Eurasia by investing in non-Pashtun minorities in Afghanistan, creating troubles for Pakistan and others through Afghanistan, and keeping Balochistan – vital territory linking Arabian Sea to Afghanistan – on the boil.

In an environment where the Eurasian powers are seeking greater cooperation and solidarity, there will be little appetite for allowing an extra-regional player to disturb the balance of power and prosperity.  In order to overcome the geostrategic dilemma in the heartland the  zero-sum dynamics of Cold War era shall have to be eschewed. This is essential for the prosperity of the most resource rich strategic region and the world.

The writer is a senior research & policy analyst at NUST Global Think Tank Network, Islamabad.

E-mail: [email protected]