About-turn.

Khan has surprised all by absolving the US of any conspiracy against his government. The government would wish Khan to provide answers for the change in his narrative on a foreign conspiracy that ousted him. Washington says there is not and there has never been a truth to such allegations. Economists and political scientists are trying to calculate the damage caused to Pak-US relations due to these allegations and open defiance. Foreign Office is pleased to note that bilateral relations would remain unharmed.

Time to clarify a point or two.

One: Inter-state relations should not be confused with human interaction. Whereas human relations are generally driven by emotions, the relations between two states are run and managed through the prism of national interest. Secondly, narratives of foreign policies are not built only on the basis of emotional dictums like ghairat or honour.

Two: Any significant change in foreign policy may not be conceived unless you have all the pre-requisites available to implement it. Statements need to be measured in millimeters. There is no need to show one's strengths or weaknesses unless it is absolutely inevitable. Diplomatic norms dictate that even if you fully qualify to issue a policy statement, you carefully choose the timing and platform to do so.

Three: As we are not Haruspices, one may avoid speaking in absolute terms while having some space available to deal with unforeseen future developments. Secondly, there is a very thin line between bravery and stupidity. Astute leaders know how to swallow personal pride when it comes to promoting one's country's national interest.

Four: There is no such thing as an 'independent' foreign policy. Barring a few powerful countries, no State can decide to run its foreign relations on its own. Both the centripetal and centrifugal forces need to be factored in to present and promote national interest in the comity of nations. Secondly, the convoluted concept of the master-slave relationship has no space in international relations. Applying the same analogy, the entire EU would seem enslaved by the US as the former generally tows the latter's line in dealing with important global matters. If the US is not vigorously pursuing the two-states solution in the Middle East, does it make it the slave of Israel? It's about 'give and take'. It's about reaching the middle ground.

Five: And it's also about 'affordability'. Russia can afford to say no to the world and go ahead with its...