Trudy Rubin is an editorial-board member for the Philadelphia Inquirer, where this first appeared.
Torrential rains have tormented Pakistan, flooding one-fifth of the country and affecting 15 million to 20 million people. Yet out of this human tragedy could come an opportunity for a much-needed improvement in U.S.-Pakistani relations.
Alternatively, the flood could wash away any hopes for a 2011 drawdown of U.S. troops in Afghanistan next door.
The floodwaters have created the greatest natural disaster in Pakistan's history, causing massive refugee flows, destroying roads and bridges, and isolating large swaths of the country. Hardest hit is the northwest province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, abutting Afghanistan, where the Pakistani army is battling jihadis. The disaster has also hit populous Punjab province, where militants have deep roots.
Pakistan's civilian government is totally overwhelmed. Public rage is rising, not helped by President Asif Ali Zardari's refusal to cancel a trip to Europe as the waters were rising. Symbolism matters - especially when the first groups to ostentatiously offer aid have been Islamic militants.
The United States has already pledged $150 million in aid, by far the largest international donation, and sent desperately needed helicopters. In principle, the United States is in a position to replicate the "Chinook diplomacy" that created immense goodwill toward America in 2005, when the United States conducted a massive helicopter airlift after an earthquake in Pakistani Kashmir. Such goodwill is sadly lacking at a time when the United States needs more Pakistani cooperation to close off havens for Afghan militants in Pakistan.
According to a recent Pew poll, only 17 percent of Pakistanis surveyed had a favorable opinion of the United States. Despite the recent long-term commitment of $7.5 billion in U.S. civilian assistance, 48 percent of Pakistanis polled believed America gives them little or no aid.
Why? The United States usually lets Pakistan take credit for U.S. aid projects. U.S. officials want to bolster the legitimacy of the country's elected government, and widespread anti-Americanism makes some Pakistani officials reluctant to be linked to U.S. funding.
Pakistani officials face a choice. Their people are desperate for help they can't provide. A failure to offer assistance could provoke massive civil unrest.
In this situation, the United States is best placed to provide swift help (in coordination with Pakistani private aid groups) and to facilitate lagging international aid. U.S. help will also be critical for reconstruction. But the Taliban - and some Pakistani pols and media - demand the rejection of U.S. aid.
This time, however, Pakistan's civilian leadership recognizes the need for diplomacy, and the Pakistani military appears to have signed on. The United States temporarily reassigned four Chinook and two Black Hawk helicopters from Afghanistan. Now, 19 heavy-lift helicopters (along with 1,000 Marines) have arrived on the USS Peleliu, docked in Karachi.
Perhaps Pakistan officials took a closer look at the Pew poll: 64 percent of Pakistanis surveyed said they want better relations with the United States. And 65 percent had an unfavorable view of the Taliban.
Now is the time for Pakistan and the United States to join forces to surmount this crisis. Pakistanis must be made fully aware of U.S. aid, and U.S. officials shouldn't hesitate to publicize their role.
The best hope for overcoming this disaster - and defeating al-Qaida and its allies - is for Pakistan and the United States to work in tandem. If the two countries can't publicly cooperate in the midst of a natural catastrophe, there is no hope at all.