Let me refresh your ZIONIST memory, Genius.
In caps, just the way I like it!
From 1950 to 1965 , America was Supposedly Pakistan's so-called friend because America needed Pakistan at the height of Cold war with Soviet Union.
Pakistan received enormous quantities of U.S. military equipment for nothing or next to nothing. For this Pakistan had Nehru's flirtation with the Russians to thank: the U.S. realized that only Pakistan, with its claimed army of 250,000, could stand as a bulwark against Communist aggression in South Asia now that the Brits were gone.
In 1965 the good ole USA stabbed Pakistan in its back and Pakistan become not such a close friend anymore.
The military relationship, defined in written agreements, was a mutual defense arrangement. In 1965 Pakistan tried unilaterally to convert it into U.S. support for aggressive war. Ayub & Co. had gotten tired of diplomacy and wanted to try their hands at war; besides, Z.A.B., the power behind the throne, wanted to conquer a third of India so Pakistan could then deal with the Indians as "equals". Ayub offered to blood as many Pakistanis as necessary to achieve "victory" but the U.S. refused to resupply him, compelling Pakistan to stop offensive operations.
Please don't take my word for it. Look up the USG side of the 1965 story in the declassified
Foreign Relations of the United States, South Asia, 1965 and Z.A.B.'s 1967 book,
Myth of Independence.
Even so, the civilian development programs continued unabated after 1965. Pakistan was a model for development in the 1960s - my Encyclopedia Britannica has a photo of South Koreans coming to Pakistan for development advice. After 1971 civilian development took a hit for obvious reasons.
Pakistan helped destroy Soviet forces in Afghanistan which helped in destruction and demise of Soviet Union. After the demise of Soviet Union America decided it no longer needed Pakistan and so Pakistan was back in the doghouse.
As documented by several authors, after the Soviet military withdrawal the U.S. wanted to keep the Soviet-sponsored regime in Kabul. Pakistan, however, wanted its own puppets in Kabul and sponsored the push to destroy it, over U.S. objections. The relentless quest for empire (e.g., "strategic depth") at the cost of amity is what put Pakistan in the "doghouse".
Guess what genius, Pakistanis never considered America its Ally and has no qualms about America's sincerity with Pakistani people.
I know better than that because I had Pakistani diplomats as neighbors. What's your excuse?
On the other hand since 1950 till today, China has never betrayed Pakistan and this is why according to a PEW survey 86% of Pakistanis have a favourable view of China ( This is the highest rating of China in any country ).
Until the 1990s the Chinese were too poor to provide much military or economic aid. Now that they are rich they still hold back. I haven't seen this in books or newspapers but my assessment is that the Chinese see how America's generosity was warped by Pakistani politicians into claims of dependence and domination, as if America was a Pakistani feudal or crime boss writ large. The Chinese thus put no strings on their aid to Pakistan, yet they won't provide much aid either. Consequently China may be a better friend
of Pakistan but will never become as much of a friend
to Pakistan as America has been in the past and still is today.
