In the latest round of the diplomatic tussle between Washington and Islamabad, the powerful US Senate Appropriations committee has voted to make aid to Pakistan dependent upon Islamabad's efforts to combat the ongoing Islamist insurgency in the tribal areas bordering Afghanistan and in Afghanistan itself.

The committee approved one billion US dollars in military assistance but did not mention any specific figures for other aid to Islamabad. This is a significant development seeing as Washington has in recent months threatened to reduce its financial assistance to Pakistan across the board after providing 20 billion dollars in assistance in the last decade. Seen in this context, the creation of linkage between US aid and Islamabad stepping up effective counter-insurgency operations reveals a dramatic deterioration in relations between the two countries and comes on top of months of disagreement and mutual backbiting.

The decision was taken just four days after a lengthy meeting between U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Pakistan's Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar on the sidelines of the annual UN General Assembly in New York. According to a US official, Clinton did some blunt talking putting Khar under strong pressure to take more effective action against Islamist insurgents. The meeting - scheduled as a courtesy call to last 30 minutes - went on for three-and-a-half hours. This is highly unusual in the world of diplomacy and shows clearly the extent of Washington's displeasure with Islamabad.

Official Washington has been convinced now for some time that Pakistan's powerful intelligence agency, the ISI, is playing on both sides of the fence in Afghanistan. The latest allegation by US officials is that ISI was instrumental in encouraging the radical Islamist Haqqani network, located in the rugged tribal areas of northwest Pakistan, to carry out an attack on the center of the Afghan capital Kabul last week. The attack targeted the U.S. Embassy and a NATO headquarters. US Intelligence sources are now openly charging ISI with directing the attack. The fact that the US has made such allegations public is quite unprecedented and very undiplomatic, not least because Washington has not yet actually produced any clear evidence for ISI complicity in the attack.

The Haqqani network has been a thorn in Washington's side for some time. The group is led by Sirajuddin Haqqani, the son of the group's founder Jalaluddin Haqqani, a veteran guerilla fighter who fought the Soviets with CIA backing in the 1980s. It claims to have more than 4,000 fighters and has proved adept at organizing suicide attacks, planting roadside bombs or striking without warning and melting away before Western forces can respond. It is closely allied with the Pakistani and Afghan Taliban and al Qaeda and is seen as the biggest insurgent threat to Western forces and security in Afghanistan in general. It has carried out a string of attacks on US forces and is believed also to be responsible for the deaths of seven CIA agents killed in a bombing in 2009. Moreover, it is ardently opposed to the idea of peace talks in Afghanistan.

Mike Mullen, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and a regular visitor to Islamabad followed up on the Clinton-Khar meeting by revealing the agenda of his recent talks in Islamabad, billed as "consultations." They had also focused on what the US sees as the need for ISI to "disconnect from Haqqani and from this proxy war" they are fighting. ISI had, he said last Tuesday, been supporting proxies for "an extended period of time". Experts will regard this statement as being an understatement of epic proportions. His remarks followed similar comments by the US ambassador to Pakistan last weekend in an interview with Pakistan Radio.

The question is why Washington has chosen this moment in time to vent its anger with Pakistan in public in such a well orchestrated fashion. Clearly, the US officials have a game plan. The rhetoric may be designed to soften up Pakistan and underline its dependence on US support. After all, Pakistan's 11 billion dollar loan from the International Monetary Fund is due to run out at the end of September and Islamabad has not yet announced how it plans to keep the economy afloat in the coming months. Also the US has put an offer of assistance for Pakistan's outdated and inadequate energy section on the table. But this kind of carrot and stick approach has not worked in the past. It is hardly likely to work now.

There is also the possibility that Washington is battering Pakistan verbally in preparation for more anti-insurgency operations in Pakistan. Only recently Washington threatened to pursue Islamist insurgents into Pakistan. Moreover it has been suggested in intelligence circles that new al Qaeda leader Ayman Al-Zawahiri - like his predecessor Osama bin Laden who was slain in northern Pakistan by elite US forces last May - is also hiding in Pakistan. Either way, relations between Washington and Islamabad are unlikely to improve any time soon. Indeed a further escalation may be imminent.

Author: Grahame Lucas
Editor: Anne Thomas