In a highly undiplomatic move, U.S. officials coordinated with Ambassador Haqqani to have the India-Afghan transit trade concession forced on Pakistan. The issue raises once again the perennial question: Does Ambassador Haqqani represent Pakistani interests or is he working for Washington? In March, Mr. Haqqani broke diplomatic norms and national security considerations by arranging a secret, one-to-one meeting between President Zardari and Mr. Holbrooke in Dubai to talk things behind the back of the entire Pakistani government, Foreign Office, and the Pakistani military.

ISLAMABAD, Pakisan—The initial draft of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed between the governments of Pakistan and Afghanistan at the U.S. State Department on May 6 to initiate negotiations for a new transit trade agreement and conclude it by the end of this year came from Washington, according to diplomatic sources.

The first draft of the MoU was sent to the Foreign Office by Pakistan’s Ambassador to the United States Husain Haqqani, who reportedly consulted the Americans on the matter. The draft arrived here around two weeks ahead of President Asif Ali Zardari’s first bilateral visit to the U.S. It was finalized after some back and forth shuttling between Washington and Islamabad with specific inputs from the Foreign Office.

The Americans played a key role in signing of this MoU, which was not high on Pakistan’s priority list at this stage when the country is facing unprecedented internal security challenges. In fact, it was on the U.S. insistence that Pakistan agreed to commit itself to a time frame for concluding and signing the revised transit trade agreement by December 31, 2009. Apparently, the Foreign Office was opposed to the idea of setting a specific timeline but the political leadership decided to go along with it.

The commitment to the time frame is clearly reflected in the second paragraph of the MoU, a copy of which was obtained by The News. It states that the two governments “undertake to conclude and sign a complete Afghanistan-Pakistan Transit Trade Agreement as early as possible, and no later than December 31, 2009.”

Some of the inputs given by the Foreign Office were incorporated into the final draft of the MoU. For instance, the Americans were also keen that Pakistan should commit itself to certain concepts but the Foreign Office’s view was that such details were unnecessary at this stage and should be discussed at the working-level negotiations.

Both sides will begin negotiations on the agreement here this week with top representatives of the two commerce ministries leading the process, sources told The News. In the one-page MoU, the two governments had committed to begin negotiations no later than May 14, 2009, with a first meeting of the Joint Working Group in Islamabad. “That meeting will establish a timetable for future negotiation sessions,” it said.

According to the understanding reached in Washington between the two sides, a joint Afghanistan Pakistan Transit Trade Coordination Committee will be set up by May 14, which in the interim period, pending the conclusion of the transit trade agreement, “will coordinate and resolve all issues relating to cross-border commerce and inland transit trade.”

The undertaking titled ëMemorandum of Understanding Between the government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and the government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to Improve Trade and Accession Facilitationí signed by the foreign ministers of the two countries on May 6 in Washington was overseen by the U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who hosted the Afghan and Pakistani presidents for the first round of the second trilateral talks.

While pointing out that the agreement had been in discussion for 43 years without resolution, Hillary termed it a “historic event” and an “important milestone” that the two neighbouring countries had reached in their efforts to generate foreign investment and stronger economic growth and trade opportunities.

But the MoU, which is said to eventually pave the way for India to use the Wagah-Khyber route for trade with Kabul, was not received with such enthusiasm in Pakistan where neither parliament nor the cabinet was taken into confidence before its signing. Hence, it evoked much criticism and has become controversial. Since India, a major trading partner of Afghanistan is seen as the main beneficiary of it, serious reservations have been expressed about it by key political parties, including the PML-N, the PML-Q and the Jamaat-e-Islami. The MoU issue is also likely to be debated in the upcoming session of the National Assembly, which begins Monday (today). PML-Q leader Marvi Memon has submitted an adjournment motion seeking a discussion on this issue of ìurgent public importanceî.

Concerns about the MoU have also been voiced by retired Pakistani diplomats who have warned about its grave and far-reaching ramifications. Former foreign secretary Riaz Khokhar has cautioned that it is fraught with risks and would undermine Pakistanís security as well as strategic interests.

Although, India has not once been mentioned in the MoU, reference to it is implicit in its opening paragraph which underlines the need to improve the conditions of “international and cross-border trade and transit”, recognizing “the advantages of greater regional and global trade linkages and export-oriented business development.”

At the last weekly news briefing on Thursday, Foreign Office Spokesman Abdul Basit had to face a volley of questions echoing concerns about the major unilateral concession that would be given to India by virtue of this MoU. The spokesman tried to downplay it, saying this was just an MoU and nothing was finalized as negotiations on the agreement were yet to begin. While widely perceived as an “agreement to agree”, his contention was that it was not an agreement itself but a MoU on negotiations.

The report was published by The News International.