Page 1 of 6 123456 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 107

Thread: Pakistan US relations

Share             
  1. #1
    Member Greater China's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    400
    Thanks
    674
    China China

    Pakistan US relations

    US-Pakistan relations still tense after apology

    Global Times | July 08, 2012

    Pakistan has agreed to reopen supply routes to Afghanistan for NATO convoys after a US apology for a cross-border NATO air strike which killed 24 Pakistani soldiers in last November. Why did the US apologize? Will the reopening of the supply lines improve the Pakistan-US relations? Global Times (GT) reporter Shu Meng invited Michael Kugelman (Kugelman), program associate for South and Southeast Asia at the Washington-based Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, and Aftab Hussain (Hussain), assistant research officer at the Islamabad-based Islamabad Policy Research Institute, to talk about these issues.

    GT: What is the importance of the supply lines? Why NATO and the US forces in Afghanistan attach great importance to the routes?

    Kugelman: NATO and the US have other means of transporting their material, particularly through the Northern route via Afghanistan and Central Asia, and via air. However, the Pakistan-based routes are by far the cheapest, safest, and most efficient. The US lost millions of dollars by not using the Pakistan routes. Given the struggling US economy, it is very difficult politically for the US government to spend so much money on alternate routes.

    GT: The US issued an apology for the killing of 24 Pakistani troops. Why the change in attitude?

    Kugelman: In fact the US attitude hasn't changed too much. It had wanted to apologize several times previously. However, it was stopped from doing so for a variety of reasons. In one case, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton wanted to apologize earlier on. She actually began negotiating the text of an apology with a high-level Pakistani diplomat. However, she backed out when Pakistan said it wanted to wait until the opportune political moment to release the apology.

    Additionally, US President Barack Obama late last year indicated an interest in apologizing, but his political advisors convinced him not to because it would make him look weak. His Republican opponents would also criticize him. This is a huge consideration in an election year.

    The apology was finally made because the US finally acknowledged that Pakistan was not going to flinch. In other words, Pakistan really meant what it said that it would not open the supply lines unless the US said it was sorry.

    Hussain: This is a positive sign which could lead to the improvement of relations between the two countries. Pakistan has been looking for a partnership with the US on the basis of mutual respect for each other's territorial sovereignty, integrity and non-interference of each other's internal affairs. But unfortunately, things did not work out the way they were assumed.

    The dictatorial attitude of the US is highly despised by the people of Pakistan, which led to anti-Americanism in the country. The US apology will certainly ease up things between the two countries.

    The US also seems to have realized that it needs Pakistan not only for logistics but also regional stability.

    The global environment has meant some changes in US priorities as well. The US is more focused now in its goals in the Asia-Pacific region. The US is trying to get out of Afghanistan and concentrate on China.

    GT: Some Pakistanis burned US flags to protest the reopening of the supply lines on July 4. Will this rile up nationalist emotions in Pakistan?

    Kugelman: Pakistan's government already faces tremendous hostility from the public about this and other issues. I don't think reopening the supply lines will really make things much worse. Some of the religious and ultra-conservative political parties in Pakistan have vowed protests to oppose the government's decision.

    However, it is true that the Pakistani people are unhappy about their government's decision to reopen the supply lines.

    Pakistanis feel that, once again, their government has sold out to the US and agreed to do what Washington wants it to do. I have also spoken to Pakistanis who feel the apology was not really an apology.

    Hussain: Anti-Americanism is a reality. It is not only confined to Pakistan but, it is global. People in some countries around the world burn US flags. Similarly there are certain groups, and people who dislike US policies in Pakistan.

    The air strike was a direct hit on the sovereignty of Pakistan. I believe over the period things will slow down, these are small protests. People also understand that as much as the US needs Pakistan, Pakistan also needs the US.

    GT: How much impact will the reopening of the supply lines have on the relationship between Washington and Islamabad? Will it dramatically improve US-Pakistan relations?

    Kugelman: No, the reopening of the supply lines will not improve relations at all. There will be several days of rhetoric about new opportunities for cooperation and bridging divides, but nothing significant will come from the decision otherwise.

    There are so many tensions that remain unresolved. These include drone strikes, the imprisonment of Shakil Afridi, the Pakistani doctor who helped locate Osama bin Laden, and the Pakistan-based militants who attack Americans in Afghanistan.

    Opening the supply lines will do nothing to make these issues more manageable. And in fact, given that both countries are facing upcoming elections, each side will be less willing to compromise on these issues. Neither side will want to be seen as the one caving in to the demands of the other.

    Hussain: I don't envision any dramatic improvement.

    However I hope things will gradually improve. The US needs to understand Pakistan the way it is. Most US perceptions of Pakistan are based on Indian input, which is often wrong, biased and misleading. Pakistan is a victim of terrorism. Many Pakistanis have lost their lives due to terrorism.

    Nonetheless, sustainable and long-term relations must be based on mutual respect and respect for each other's territorial sovereignty and non-interference in each other's internal affairs.

    Islamabad acknowledges US aid towards development projects inside Pakistan, since the US Agency for International Development and other US agencies are doing marvelous job for the development of Pakistan. But the US needs to do more to draw down anti-Americanism in Pakistan.

    Global Times
    The Following User Says Thank You to Greater China For This Useful Post: bilalhaider,Superkaif


  2. #2
    Member Phoenix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    477
    Thanks
    780
    Pakistan Pakistan

    Top military, civil leaders to head to Washington for renewed talks

    Inter-Services Intelligence Director General Zaheerul Islam will likely visit the United States on July 24 to discuss various aspects of counterterrorism cooperation with senior American officials, following the easing of tensions after the reopening of NATO supply lines through Pakistan.
    The settlement of Pakistan-US row over drone attacks would be on top of the spy master’s agenda along with talks on renewed pressure from Washington for a new military operation in North Waziristan. Apart from General Zaheer, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee (CJCSC) General Khalid Shamim Wyne and Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar will also undertake their visits to the US capital later this month to formalize the ‘new terms of engagement’ with US vis-à-vis counterterrorism cooperation.
    Inter-Services Intelligence Director General Zaheerul Islam will likely visit the United States on July 24 to discuss various aspects of counterterrorism Foreign Office spokesman Moazzam Khan also disclosed at his weekly press briefing on Thursday that an MoU on the formalization of NATO supplies would be signed with US soon. He said both sides had completed their technical level discussions for the purpose.
    The visit of General Zaheer to Washington is, however, said to be the most important one as he has been tasked with reviving the full counterterrorism cooperation with the CIA in light of the guidelines given by parliament on the nature of future ties with the US.
    The NATO supplies were blocked by Islamabad in November last year when American aircraft attacked a Pakistani border post and killed 24 soldiers.
    The airstrikes by US also impacted the anti-terrorism cooperation between the United States and Pakistan, with Islamabad asking Washington to call back all CIA operatives as well as military trainers from Pakistan. “Another important item on agenda of the ISI chief’s visit to the US and his talks there with his counterpart in CIA General David Petraeus will be to sort out differences on the drone strikes and reach some mutually acceptable solution to this contentious issue,” a senior official said, seeking anonymity.
    Pakistan wants the drone strikes to be very limited in number, when absolutely essential, and that too in accordance with its own intelligence information about the presence of any al Qaeda or Taliban-linked “high value target” in a specific area.
    Contrarily, the US is not in a mood to confine itself to any specific area or number of attacks when it comes to drone strikes and the CIA also fears that any sharing of intelligence with Pakistan could alert the intended targets. General Zaheer and General Wynne would also discuss the important issue of North Waziristan with top US officials in Washington, as the US is once again mounting pressure on Islamabad for launching a military operation in the region against the most powerful militant organization, Haqqani network, which is linked to the Mullah Omar-led Taliban in Afghanistan.
    The visit of the ISI chief and other aspects of relations with the United States were discussed in detail during the Corps Commanders meeting in Rawalpindi on Thursday, with Army Chief General Ashfaq Kayani in the chair.

    http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2012...renewed-talks/

  3. #3
    Administrator Aryan_B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Utopia
    Posts
    14,322
    Thanks
    8763
    Pakistan England

    US, Pakistani spy chiefs to hold meeting in Washington

    US, Pakistani spy chiefs to hold meeting in Washington


    Mon Jul 23, 2012 6:15AM GMT



    US and Pakistani spy chiefs are set to hold a crucial meeting in Washington after a US apology to Islamabad over the killing of 24 Pakistani soldiers abated tensions between the allies, Press TV reports.


    Head of the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) David Petraeus and Director General of Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) Zaheer al-Islam are scheduled to meet on August 2 to discuss Pakistan’s NATO supply routes to Afghanistan and the US drone attacks on in the south Asian country.

    The US and Pakistani intelligence officials will focus on several defense and security-related issues, including intelligence-sharing.


    The violation of Pakistan’s sovereignty by US unmanned aircraft would also be among the topics that Pakistani spy chief would raise during the meeting, according to our correspondent.

    The Pakistani general had earlier cancelled a visit to the United States due to rising tensions between the two states after Washington snubbed Islamabad’s demands for an apology for the killing of 24 soldiers in two military checkpoints near Afghan border in November 2011.

    The killing of Pakistani soldiers provoked retaliation by Pakistani government, prompting Islamabad to block NATO supply routes to Afghanistan.

    Prior to November incident, the relations between Islamabad and Washington were already strained over US assassination drone strikes on civilians under the excuse of targeting militants.

    The US and Pakistani officials had held several inconclusive meetings with the aim of ending the diplomatic deadlock between the two allies.

    Pakistan, however, agreed to reopen the NATO supply routes in early July after the US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced in a statement that she offered “deepest regrets for the tragic incident” during a telephone conversation with her Pakistani counterpart.

    Yet, Pakistan’s decision to reopen the blocked routes triggered massive anti-US demonstrations across Pakistan, with angry protesters demanding the government to shut down the lines permanently.


    http://presstv.com/detail/2012/07/23...s-due-to-meet/


    A very crucial meeting for both participants
    The Following User Says Thank You to Aryan_B For This Useful Post: Greater China


  4. #4
    Senior Moderator Superkaif's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Leeds, United Kingdom
    Posts
    14,888
    Thanks
    12096
    UK Pakistan

    Pakistan US relations

    Islamabad: Pakistan army chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani on Thursday called for transparent ties with US based on mutual trust as he met American commanders in Afghanistan, days after the two sides struck a deal ending a seven-month blockade of NATO supply routes.

    "The Pakistan-US relationship should be based on mutual trust, respect and transparency," Mr Kayani said during a meeting in Rawalpindi with General John Allen, chief of the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan.

    Mr Kayani said his meeting with Mr Allen, the first since Pakistan and the US signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) on transporting NATO supplies to Afghanistan, has "helped towards improving strategic and operational understanding between the Pakistan military and ISAF".

    Mr Allen said "significant progress" was being made in improving cooperation with Pakistan, according to a joint statement issued after the meeting.

    "I look forward to these visits and am pleased with the upward spiral in our relationship they represent. We are making significant progress toward building a partnership that is enduring, strategic, carefully defined and that enhances the security and prosperity of the region," Mr Allen said.

    The Pakistani military had earlier said that the meeting between Mr Kayani and Mr Allen would focus on border coordination matters and reviewing progress made in implementing issues discussed during the last tripartite meeting between Pakistan, Afghanistan and ISAF.

    The joint statement said today's meeting was "another in a series of opportunities for the commanders to continue building upon the growing operational cooperation between the Afghan National Security Forces, the Pakistan military and ISAF".

    The three parties have "many shared interests including their respective commitments to expanding opportunities for coordinated action against terrorists on both sides of the border who threaten Afghanistan, Pakistan and the region".

    The three sides are also "supporting Afghanistan's security, stability and efforts towards reconciliation" and share the "responsibility for protecting the brave Afghan and Pakistani soldiers working in the border region", the statement said.

    "The future security and stability of the region rests in large part on the strength of the partnership these discussions are forging.

    "The talks also recognised the importance of future opportunities for key ANSF, Pakistani military and ISAF senior leaders to meet, explore means to expand the partnership, and continue this vital work," it said.

    Allen's visit came after Pakistan and the US took several steps to improve their relations, which plunged to a new low after a NATO air strike killed 24 Pakistani soldiers last November.

    Pakistan ended a seven-month blockade of NATO supplies after the US apologised for the air strike.

    The two sides signed a MoU on Tuesday for transporting non-lethal NATO supplies to Afghanistan via Pakistan until the end of 2015.

    Pakistan army chief calls for transparent ties with US | NDTV.com
    The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Superkaif For This Useful Post: Aryan_B,bilalhaider


  5. #5
    Senior Moderator Superkaif's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Leeds, United Kingdom
    Posts
    14,888
    Thanks
    12096
    UK Pakistan

    Pakistan, US see ‘progress’ in ties

    * Kayani says strategic understanding between NATO and Pakistani military enhanced

    * General Allen says ‘significant progress’ was being made in improving cooperation

    ISLAMABAD: Pakistan and the United States on Thursday acknowledged progress in ties between the two countries, in the wake of a recent MoU signed regarding transportation of NATO supplies to Afghanistan through Pakistan, and subsequently the US releasing $1.1 billion to the latter.

    This was discussed during a meeting between Chief of Army Staff Gen Ashfaq Pervaiz Kayani and ISAF commander Gen John Allen at the GHQ on Thursday. Kayani said the meeting helped improve strategic and operational understanding between Pakistan’s military and NATO forces. He said the Pak-US relationship should be based on mutual trust, respect and transparency.

    General Allen said, "I look forward to these visits and am pleased with the upward spiral in our relationship they represent. We are making significant progress toward building a partnership that is enduring, strategic, carefully defined, and that enhances the security and prosperity of the region.”

    According to ISPR, this meeting was another in a series of opportunities for the commanders to continue building upon the growing operational cooperation between the Afghanistan National Security Force, the Pakistan military and ISAF.

    A joint statement released later, however, made no mention of the specific problems and difficulties that have increasingly characterised relations between Afghan, Pakistani and NATO troops.

    All three parties have many shared interests, including their respective commitments to expanding opportunities for coordinated action against terrorists on respective sides of the border who threaten Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the region, and supporting Afghanistan’s security, stability, and efforts towards reconciliation.

    ISI chief Lieutenant General Zaheerul Islam is also currently in the United States, the first visit by a head of the Inter-Services Intelligence agency to Washington in a year. staff report/agencies

    Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan
    The Following User Says Thank You to Superkaif For This Useful Post: bilalhaider


  6. #6
    Member Mustafa Shaban's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    393
    Thanks
    247

    Pakistan-US Fractured Relations

    By Brig Asif Haroon Raja

    Historically Pak-US relationship has always been marked by convergence and divergence of national interests that kept on switching from friendship to friction. The US gained more during the times of convergence of interests but periods of divergence outweighed the former. Although Pakistan earned the title of ‘most allied ally of USA’, it is also the most sanctioned country in the world. By putting all its eggs in the basket of USA, Pakistan gained less as it was not given the required support by the US when needed most. The US left Pakistan high and dry during the 1965 War and in the 1971 War which led to the disintegration of the country. In fact, the US later imposed severe penalties, embargoes and sanctions on Pakistan. This unholy practice of sanctions was repeated in 1979 owing to nuclear related suspicions and in 1990 after the successful culmination of Afghan War in which Pakistan had played a key role in defeating erstwhile USSR. Worst was that USA embraced India which had all along remained in Soviet camp. It imposed additional sanctions after our nuclear tests and after Gen Musharraf’s military coup. The US stood on the side of India during Kargil conflict and forced Pakistan to unilaterally vacate the occupied heights. Pakistan remained on the wrong side of USA from 1990 till September 2001.

    In the post-9/11 scenario, Washington decided to once again befriend Pakistan since it knew that without its active support, Afghanistan venture may prove very costly. Pakistan happily accepted the role of a front-line state to fight global war on terror and to forsake Mullah Omar led regime in Kabul under the illusion that all its economic woes would be addressed. It agreed to assist the invading forces by way of providing air bases, logistic supply routes, airspace for air sorties, and intelligence cooperation. Instead of extracting matching returns, all these concessions were doled out to the needy USA very cheaply.
    Pak-US alliance was purely a marriage of convenience but the US succeeded in duping Pakistan that it would not leave Pakistan in a lurch again. In reality, the US strategically aligned itself with India, Israel, Britain and Germany and Northern Alliance (NA). After capturing Afghanistan and installing a puppet regime led by Hamid Karzai, the six intelligence agencies of the strategic partners led by CIA embarked upon a massive covert war against Pakistan using Afghan soil to achieve its hidden objectives. Concurrently, the US gave a green signal to India to consolidate its position in Afghanistan. This was despite the fact that India doesn't share border with Afghanistan, it is a Hindu country where Hindu extremism is constantly rising, and has played no role in war on terror. Yet, the US vowed to let India fill the vacuum once it departs and to make it a key player in Afghan affairs. Other than lucrative defence and economic agreements, the US granted India civilian nuclear deal and is now striving to make it a permanent member of UNSC as well as of exclusive nuclear club.

    Since the US had made Pakistan its ally under an agenda, bilateral relations saw a shifting policy pattern to dubiousness, and Pakistan remained target of accusations from all sides. There were frequent swings in US mood towards Pakistan; particularly the inconsiderate warnings of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Secretary Defence Leon Panetta, former CJCSC Admiral Mullen and even Barack Obama which caused discomfiture and more annoyance in the country. To the utter dismay of Pakistan the US kept doling out series of highly productive rewards but gave very little to Pakistan. The US paid no heed to the security concerns of Pakistan but remained ever worried about India’s mostly fabricated concerns. Even now it is seeking critical favors for India at the cost of Pakistan’s national interests.

    The US brokered Pak-Afghan-Transit-Trade-Agreement (PATTA) on July 19, 2010 allowing transportation of Afghan goods through Wagah to India and in return Pakistan getting permission to use Afghan territory for trade with Central Asian Republics (CARs). The US twisted Pakistan’s arm to make India part of PATTA so as to allow India to export goods to Afghanistan and beyond through Wagah border, grant MFN status to India and liberalize visa regime. Efforts are now in hand to pressure Pakistan to allow India to transport merchandise goods to and from Afghanistan without giving anything in return except for deceptive promises that trade with India will be of great benefit to Pakistan. A new opening is being given to India despite the fact that there is a serious trade imbalance in Indian favor. Unable to compete with India, it will adversely impact Pakistan’s manufacturing industries and will also negatively impact Pakistan’s trade with Afghanistan and with CARs.

    In order to keep Pakistan bridled, the US coined ‘do more mantra’, kept leveling unsubstantiated allegations, resorted to coercive diplomacy and subjected it to drone strikes. It made Pakistan a convenient scapegoat to hide its failures. Pak-US relations, which remained lukewarm because of bossy and mistrustful attitude of American officials and their outright leaning toward India and Afghanistan, nosedived after the incidents of Raymond Davis in January 2011, stealth attack in Abbottabad on 2 May, Admiral Mullen’s diatribe in September describing Haqqani network as the ‘veritable arm’ of ISI, and brutal Salala attack on 26 November. In utter frustration, Pakistan was forced to close Shamsi airbase, block NATO supply routes for over seven months and cease military cooperation. These steps meant to impress upon the US to respect Pakistan’s sovereignty and to treat Pakistan as an ally rather than a target further widened the trust gap and brought Pak-US relations to a near-breaking point.

    Fighting the US dictated war on terror has had debilitating impact on Pakistan’s social, political and economic life. Strikes by CIA operated drones and US meddling in domestic affairs has resulted in gradual erosion of Pakistan’s sovereignty and honor. Despite suffering the most in terms of human casualties and economic losses, the US prefers India over Pakistan. While the US keeps prodding Pakistan to befriend India and not to treat it as arch enemy, it doesn’t press India to bring a change in its belligerent attitude and hegemonic policies and to lower its ever increasing defence budget each year. The US asks Pakistan to shift additional formations from the east to the west without realizing that India never misses an opportunity to harm Pakistan. The US and Israel have been constantly helping India to improve its economic, military and nuclear strengths and are responsible for disturbing the regional military balance of power. Rewards have been generously doled out in complete disregard of India’s ambitions and dangerous designs against Pakistan.

    India has constructed 40 dams over the three rivers flowing into Pakistan to turn its fertile lands arid but no concern has been expressed by USA or any western country. The US is least interested in finding an amicable solution to the 65 year old Kashmir dispute since any facilitation in this direction will annoy India. The US fails to comprehend that when it lectures on Indo-Pak amity, until and unless right of self-determination is given to the Kashmiris and water aggression by India is reversed, meaningful goodwill cannot be promoted between the two antagonists.

    In the wake of security situation in Afghanistan spinning out of control of US-NATO- forces despite the two US troops surges, depleting US economy and increasing home pressure to end the unwinnable war, the US initiated a political prong to induce the Taliban to negotiate for a political settlement. This initiative enhanced Pakistan’s importance and in order to lure Pakistan to help in convincing the hard-line Taliban leaders, the process of strategic dialogue was started in 2010 which provides a platform to both Pakistan and the US to convey their expectations and demands. The main purpose behind the Pak-US strategic dialogue was to understand and address the interests and concerns of each other. The US interest was to find a way for a safe and honorable exit from Afghanistan with Pakistan’s assistance. Pakistan on the other hand was mainly interested in US assistance to improve its faltering economy, overcome its energy crisis and to address its military imbalances.

    Pakistan has been seeking a civil nuclear deal like the one US concluded with India and consider it imperative for restoring balance in the region. It wants this agreement to overcome the energy crisis it is facing. Pakistan wants to have a balanced relationship with the US and not a discriminatory one. It expects from the US to restrain rather than encourage Indian meddlesome role in Pakistan using Afghan soil. Pakistan was not given an improved US trade access for its textile exports. It is crucial for Pakistan’s economy to restore its declining industrial sector through trade access which is more effective than aid.

    The US has been making tall promises but has failed to deliver. Pakistan didn’t receive from the US the support it expected over its national security concerns. Rather, it squeezed Pakistan by stopping the payment of committed aid installments and even withheld $1.2 billion which it had to pay against CSF for services rendered by Pak Army. Pakistan’s request for a free trade agreement has not been ceded to. The Reconstruction Opportunity Zones (ROZ) legislation that would give market access and trade concessions to Pakistan and Enterprise Fund Projects and construction of two hydro electric dams in FATA are still pending. As against total $ 18 billion Pakistan received from the US since 2002, it lost $70 billion in fighting the war on terror. Human losses have crossed the figure of 35000. 5000 fatalities suffered by Pakistan law enforcement agencies are far more than the casualties suffered by 48 countries involved in war on terror.

    With the continuously worsening situation in Afghanistan and setbacks at home for the US administration, Pakistan’s geo-strategic position in the region has once again presented hope for players engaged in Afghanistan. Indications are that the only reason that the US has so far not abandoned Pakistan is that it has lost the war in Afghanistan and its safe and honorable exit is to a large extent dependent upon Pakistan. Another reason is the breakdown in US-Taliban parleys which has placed the US in an awkward position. It has no roadmap for its safe exit and future stability of the region. It is pinning hopes on Pakistan to convince the Taliban to resume talks for a negotiated political settlement. However, despite knowing that Pakistan is the only country that can play a key role in solving Afghan tangle, the US wants to keep Pakistan out and India within its loop.

    Pakistan has already ceded lot of ground without extracting anything in return. America’s efforts to give enhanced role to India in Afghanistan and to pressure Pakistan to grant land access to India via Wagah should be firmly resisted. Concessions should be reciprocal and not unilateral

    Pakistan-US Fractured Relations | Opinion Maker

  7. #7
    Senior Moderator Superkaif's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Leeds, United Kingdom
    Posts
    14,888
    Thanks
    12096
    UK Pakistan

    Pakistan-US Fractured Relations

    Historically Pak-US relationship has always been marked by convergence and divergence of national interests that kept on switching from friendship to friction. The US gained more during the times of convergence of interests but periods of divergence outweighed the former.

    Although Pakistan earned the title of 'most allied ally of USA', it is also the most sanctioned country in the world. By putting all its eggs in the basket of USA, Pakistan gained less as it was not given the required support by the US when needed most. The US left Pakistan high and dry during the 1965 War and in the 1971 War which led to the disintegration of the country. In fact, the US later imposed severe penalties, embargoes and sanctions on Pakistan. This unholy practice of sanctions was repeated in 1979 owing to nuclear related suspicions and in 1990 after the successful culmination of Afghan War in which Pakistan had played a key role in defeating erstwhile USSR. Worst was that USA embraced India which had all along remained in Soviet camp. It imposed additional sanctions after our nuclear tests and after Gen Musharraf's military coup. The US stood on the side of India during Kargil conflict and forced Pakistan to unilaterally vacate the occupied heights. Pakistan remained on the wrong side of USA from 1990 till September 2001.

    In the post-9/11 scenario, Washington decided to once again befriend Pakistan since it knew that without its active support, Afghanistan venture may prove very costly. Pakistan happily accepted the role of a front-line state to fight global war on terror and to forsake Mullah Omar led regime in Kabul under the illusion that all its economic woes would be addressed. It agreed to assist the invading forces by way of providing air bases, logistic supply routes, airspace for air sorties, and intelligence cooperation. Instead of extracting matching returns, all these concessions were doled out to the needy USA very cheaply.

    Pak-US alliance was purely a marriage of convenience but the US succeeded in duping Pakistan that it would not leave Pakistan in a lurch again. In reality, the US strategically aligned itself with India, Israel, Britain and Germany and Northern Alliance (NA). After capturing Afghanistan and installing a puppet regime led by Hamid Karzai, the six intelligence agencies of the strategic partners led by CIA embarked upon a massive covert war against Pakistan using Afghan soil to achieve its hidden objectives. Concurrently, the US gave a green signal to India to consolidate its position in Afghanistan. This was despite the fact that India doesn't share border with Afghanistan, it is a Hindu country where Hindu extremism is constantly rising, and has played no role in war on terror. Yet, the US vowed to let India fill the vacuum once it departs and to make it a key player in Afghan affairs. Other than lucrative defence and economic agreements, the US granted India civilian nuclear deal and is now striving to make it a permanent member of UNSC as well as of exclusive nuclear club.

    Since the US had made Pakistan its ally under an agenda, bilateral relations saw a shifting policy pattern to dubiousness, and Pakistan remained target of accusations from all sides. There were frequent swings in US mood towards Pakistan; particularly the inconsiderate warnings of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Secretary Defence Leon Panetta, former CJCSC Admiral Mullen and even Barack Obama which caused discomfiture and more annoyance in the country. To the utter dismay of Pakistan the US kept doling out series of highly productive rewards but gave very little to Pakistan. The US paid no heed to the security concerns of Pakistan but remained ever worried about India's mostly fabricated concerns. Even now it is seeking critical favors for India at the cost of Pakistan's national interests.

    The US brokered Pak-Afghan-Transit-Trade-Agreement (PATTA) on July 19, 2010 allowing transportation of Afghan goods through Wagah to India and in return Pakistan getting permission to use Afghan territory for trade with Central Asian Republics (CARs). The US twisted Pakistan's arm to make India part of PATTA so as to allow India to export goods to Afghanistan and beyond through Wagah border, grant MFN status to India and liberalize visa regime. Efforts are now in hand to pressure Pakistan to allow India to transport merchandise goods to and from Afghanistan without giving anything in return except for deceptive promises that trade with India will be of great benefit to Pakistan. A new opening is being given to India despite the fact that there is a serious trade imbalance in Indian favor. Unable to compete with India, it will adversely impact Pakistan's manufacturing industries and will also negatively impact Pakistan's trade with Afghanistan and with CARs.

    In order to keep Pakistan bridled, the US coined 'do more mantra', kept leveling unsubstantiated allegations, resorted to coercive diplomacy and subjected it to drone strikes. It made Pakistan a convenient scapegoat to hide its failures. Pak-US relations, which remained lukewarm because of bossy and mistrustful attitude of American officials and their outright leaning toward India and Afghanistan, nosedived after the incidents of Raymond Davis in January 2011, stealth attack in Abbottabad on 2 May, Admiral Mullen's diatribe in September describing Haqqani network as the 'veritable arm' of ISI, and brutal Salala attack on 26 November. In utter frustration, Pakistan was forced to close Shamsi airbase, block NATO supply routes for over seven months and cease military cooperation. These steps meant to impress upon the US to respect Pakistan's sovereignty and to treat Pakistan as an ally rather than a target further widened the trust gap and brought Pak-US relations to a near-breaking point.

    Fighting the US dictated war on terror has had debilitating impact on Pakistan's social, political and economic life. Strikes by CIA operated drones and US meddling in domestic affairs has resulted in gradual erosion of Pakistan's sovereignty and honor. Despite suffering the most in terms of human casualties and economic losses, the US prefers India over Pakistan. While the US keeps prodding Pakistan to befriend India and not to treat it as arch enemy, it doesn't press India to bring a change in its belligerent attitude and hegemonic policies and to lower its ever increasing defence budget each year. The US asks Pakistan to shift additional formations from the east to the west without realizing that India never misses an opportunity to harm Pakistan. The US and Israel have been constantly helping India to improve its economic, military and nuclear strengths and are responsible for disturbing the regional military balance of power. Rewards have been generously doled out in complete disregard of India's ambitions and dangerous designs against Pakistan.

    India has constructed 40 dams over the three rivers flowing into Pakistan to turn its fertile lands arid but no concern has been expressed by USA or any western country. The US is least interested in finding an amicable solution to the 65 year old Kashmir dispute since any facilitation in this direction will annoy India. The US fails to comprehend that when it lectures on Indo-Pak amity, until and unless right of self-determination is given to the Kashmiris and water aggression by India is reversed, meaningful goodwill cannot be promoted between the two antagonists.

    In the wake of security situation in Afghanistan spinning out of control of US-NATO- forces despite the two US troops surges, depleting US economy and increasing home pressure to end the unwinnable war, the US initiated a political prong to induce the Taliban to negotiate for a political settlement. This initiative enhanced Pakistan's importance and in order to lure Pakistan to help in convincing the hard-line Taliban leaders, the process of strategic dialogue was started in 2010 which provides a platform to both Pakistan and the US to convey their expectations and demands. The main purpose behind the Pak-US strategic dialogue was to understand and address the interests and concerns of each other. The US interest was to find a way for a safe and honorable exit from Afghanistan with Pakistan's assistance. Pakistan on the other hand was mainly interested in US assistance to improve its faltering economy, overcome its energy crisis and to address its military imbalances.

    Pakistan has been seeking a civil nuclear deal like the one US concluded with India and consider it imperative for restoring balance in the region. It wants this agreement to overcome the energy crisis it is facing. Pakistan wants to have a balanced relationship with the US and not a discriminatory one. It expects from the US to restrain rather than encourage Indian meddlesome role in Pakistan using Afghan soil. Pakistan was not given an improved US trade access for its textile exports. It is crucial for Pakistan's economy to restore its declining industrial sector through trade access which is more effective than aid.

    The US has been making tall promises but has failed to deliver. Pakistan didn't receive from the US the support it expected over its national security concerns. Rather, it squeezed Pakistan by stopping the payment of committed aid installments and even withheld $1.2 billion which it had to pay against CSF for services rendered by Pak Army. Pakistan's request for a free trade agreement has not been ceded to. The Reconstruction Opportunity Zones (ROZ) legislation that would give market access and trade concessions to Pakistan and Enterprise Fund Projects and construction of two hydro electric dams in FATA are still pending. As against total $ 18 billion Pakistan received from the US since 2002, it lost $70 billion in fighting the war on terror. Human losses have crossed the figure of 35000. 5000 fatalities suffered by Pakistan law enforcement agencies are far more than the casualties suffered by 48 countries involved in war on terror.

    With the continuously worsening situation in Afghanistan and setbacks at home for the US administration, Pakistan's geo-strategic position in the region has once again presented hope for players engaged in Afghanistan. Indications are that the only reason that the US has so far not abandoned Pakistan is that it has lost the war in Afghanistan and its safe and honorable exit is to a large extent dependent upon Pakistan. Another reason is the breakdown in US-Taliban parleys which has placed the US in an awkward position. It has no roadmap for its safe exit and future stability of the region. It is pinning hopes on Pakistan to convince the Taliban to resume talks for a negotiated political settlement. However, despite knowing that Pakistan is the only country that can play a key role in solving Afghan tangle, the US wants to keep Pakistan out and India within its loop.

    Pakistan has already ceded lot of ground without extracting anything in return. America's efforts to give enhanced role to India in Afghanistan and to pressure Pakistan to grant land access to India via Wagah should be firmly resisted. Concessions should be reciprocal and not unilateral.

    Pakistan-US Fractured Relations - PakTribune
    The Following User Says Thank You to Superkaif For This Useful Post: Aryan_B


  8. #8
    Senior Member KingKong's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    London
    Posts
    8,846
    Thanks
    5485
    Pakistan UK
    Will the fracture ever be repaired? I dont think so
    The Following User Says Thank You to KingKong For This Useful Post: Superkaif


  9. #9
    Member ReoSpeedWagon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Karachi
    Posts
    1,551
    Thanks
    1136
    Pakistan Pakistan

    US Development Assistance to Pakistan: 2014 and Beyond

    The withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan in 2014 provides a critical moment for the United States to evaluate its development objectives in Pakistan and signal its credibility as a long-term partner. Afghanistan and Pakistan are at different points on the path of development and require different kinds of assistance delivered in different way. Short-term stabilization is the top priority in Afghanistan while long-term development is and should be the priority in Pakistan. Given this context, the key development considerations for Pakistan are as follows.

    Americans should be concerned about Pakistan's long-term stability

    Pakistan is poised to become the world's fifth most populous nation, with nuclear weapons and 100 million young people with few jobs but plenty of opportunities for radicalization. US investment in Pakistanis’ economic opportunities and hope for the future is an investment in the United States’ own security.

    The history of US assistance to Pakistan has been very volatile

    US aid levels to Pakistan have waxed and waned for decades as US geopolitical interests in the region have shifted. While Pakistan’s actions have of course contributed to this volatility, the subsequent mistrust on both sides has undermined the United States’ ability to contribute to a longer-term development agenda in Pakistan. Pakistan has become hesitant to use US aid for long-term investments in their people and institutions, focusing instead on projects with short time horizons and a more limited effect on long-term development. The US withdrawal from Afghanistan marks a critical moment for the United States to signal its credibility as a long-term partner to Pakistan.



    The 2009 Enhanced Partnership for Pakistan Act needs more time to be effective

    The intention of the 2009 Enhanced Partnership for Pakistan Act (commonly known as the Kerry-Lugar-Berman bill, or KLB) was to put security and development on two separate tracks, insulating the development agenda from unpredictable geopolitical and military events and facilitating longer-term planning for development. This is a good thing, but it will take longer than five years, particularly because of its emphasis on spending money through local partners to build Pakistan’s capacity. As recommended by the Center for Global Development in its 2012 assessment of the United States approach to development in Pakistan, the United States should “avoid the rush” and spend KLB over more years:

    given the large amounts of unobligated funds for Pakistan, constraints on the aid-delivery machinery, and the acute implementation challenges facing the United States and Pakistan, Congress and the administration should agree on a scaled-back program of development assistance for Pakistan for fiscal year 2013 at least. The United States can adhere to the KLB commitment of spending $7.5 billion on civilian programs, but the time horizon should be extended from 5 to 10 years. One could think of this as a no-cost extension, leaving open the possibility that US efforts will improve, that absorptive capacity in Pakistan will increase, and that there will be fewer bumps (such as Abbottabad) in the road ahead.

    Traditional aid is not the only instrument

    Developing a vibrant private sector is essential for generating economic opportunities and greater prosperity for ordinary citizens in Pakistan. While aid can help stimulate private-sector growth, efforts to reduce Pakistan’s trade barriers with the United States and India would have a much greater impact, with negligible adverse impact on the US economy. Additional opportunities include increasing investment in Pakistan’s private sector through OPIC projects or investment facilities such as the Pakistan Private Investment Initiative. Finally, the United States should collaborate with the IMF and World Bank to provide support on systematic macroeconomic and energy challenges facing Pakistan.

    http://www.cgdev.org/sites/default/f...-pakistan.html

  10. #10
    Senior Member Fassi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    3,774
    Thanks
    1828
    Pakistan France

    US for close defense ties with Pakistan

    WASHINGTON- The US Defence department, the Pentagon urged its government to maintain close defense cooperation with Pakistan.

    Testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in Washington, Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for Asian and Pacific Security Affairs, Kelly Magsamen, said the security cooperation with Pakistan has helped fight against militant groups. She said an improved relationship between Pakistan and India is essential to regional stability.

    US Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan James Dobbins also appeared in the same testimony on the U.S. Policy in Afghanistan and the Regional Implications of the 2014 Transition.

    http://www.nation.com.pk/national/20...-with-pakistan

  11. #11
    Facebook Editor safriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    5,658
    Thanks
    5027
    Pakistan Pakistan

    Re: US for close defense ties with Pakistan

    Hope Pakistan does not fall for it and keeps sourcing weapons from china and elsewhere.

  12. #12
    Elite Member T-123456's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    4,699
    Thanks
    4227
    Turkey Netherlands

    Re: US for close defense ties with Pakistan

    Quote Originally Posted by safriz View Post
    Hope Pakistan does not fall for it and keeps sourcing weapons from china and elsewhere.
    There is no falling for anything,take what you can get and still have your own agenda.
    I dont see a problem in that,it only shows how important Pakistan is.

  13. #13
    Facebook Editor safriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    5,658
    Thanks
    5027
    Pakistan Pakistan

    Re: US for close defense ties with Pakistan

    Quote Originally Posted by T-123456 View Post
    There is no falling for anything,take what you can get and still have your own agenda.
    I dont see a problem in that,it only shows how important Pakistan is.
    Yaar... i am old school..I saw our pilots flying without Functional ejection seats in 1990s.. That time i was frequent visitor of Masroor air base Karachi,and could talk to F-16 pilots.

  14. #14
    Elite Member T-123456's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    4,699
    Thanks
    4227
    Turkey Netherlands

    Re: US for close defense ties with Pakistan

    Quote Originally Posted by safriz View Post
    Yaar... i am old school..I saw our pilots flying without Functional ejection seats in 1990s.. That time i was frequent visitor of Masroor air base Karachi,and could talk to F-16 pilots.
    Those were lessons to be taken how harsch it may sound,now you know what to expect as do we(Turkiye).
    You think we dont know why we lost 19 Blackhawks/Seahawks through ''technical failure'' untill now?
    Use it to your advantage.

  15. #15
    Senior Member Jameel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    3,802
    Thanks
    1714
    Pakistan Pakistan

    The US-Pakistan ties that bind

    No Exit from Pakistan: America's Tortured Relationship with Islamabad by Daniel S Markey

    Reviewed by Majid Mahmood

    As events unfolded in the this month's audacious terror attack on Karachi International Airport, discussion in the Twitter space in Pakistan buzzed with hash tags like #Karachiairportattack, #ASF ,#raymonddavisnetwork and #dirtywars. This underlines the deep skepticism of many, if not all, in Pakistan about United States involvement in stoking creative chaos in the country.

    So what does this mean for the future of Pakistan-US relations? Daniel S Markey's latest volume on US-Pakistan relations attempts to answer exactly this difficult question.

    Markey argues that Pakistan is potentially a hostile and difficult state for United States to manage but despite several setbacks and failures in the bilateral relationship, neither Pakistan nor the United States can afford a permanent breakup.

    He maintains that immediate, vital and emergent threats emanating from Pakistan will have a negative impact on US regional interests in South Asia, Central Asia and the Middle East. It is due to this, the author argues, that contrary to what many experts and officials may feel in Washington, the United States cannot afford to disengage.

    Markey systematically survey's Pakistan-US relations, as he sees them, at the three levels of domestic, regional and international politics - helping the reader easily grasp book's arguments presented. He skillfully links all arguments on these three levels to broader US interests in the region.

    The broad theme of this book is that Pakistan has become a more dangerous country for US interests and poses difficult challenges for it to manage. The author makes this conclusion based on his observations of societal trends - a move towards the radical right - and a deterioration of state institutions and governance weaknesses.

    The author says that these trends, coupled with Pakistan's geopolitical and geostrategic location, will create problems for US policy if the bilateral relationship is not stabilized.

    Detailing the domestic milieu, Markey identifies four different faces of Pakistan: an elite-dominated country where feudals and top industrialists have appropriated its resources, a garrison state where the political center of power is the military, a terrorist incubator and lastly, a land of youthful idealists.

    The author explains the evolution of this politico-socio-economic structure and arrives at three potential scenarios in the trajectory of the Pakistan state.

    The first is that there will be a revolution and a failure of the state, the second is there will be a continuation of crisis without a revolution, and the third scenario is the success of reformist politics.

    The roots of anti-American sentiment within all the camps inside Pakistan - ie the liberals, the nationalists and the Islamists - are also identified in detail and the author discusses how these beliefs have played a role in frustrating US financial and political investments.

    A significant portion of the book covers the larger geopolitical context of US engagement with Pakistan and the South Asia region. The author has correctly identified that US engagement with Pakistan does not exist in a vacuum and is influenced by what was happening in the broader region and at the international level.

    In the Cold War days, the author argues, containment of communism was the strategic context of US engagement with Pakistan, and this led to security alliances and economic support. In contemporary times, the managing of China's rise has become the operative context. So the interest is not in Pakistan per se but the broader region which has driven US policy towards Pakistan.

    The author also outlines policy options and their consequences for the United States in dealing with Pakistan. The options he presents are: "defensive insulation", "military first cooperation" and the "comprehensive approach".

    The option of "defensive insulation" entails a more robust US pressure on Pakistan in case the US fails to get cooperation from a hostile Pakistan government. This can be achieved by building diplomatic, military and political barriers around Pakistan's geographic surroundings. The US should also be prepared to target Pakistan's nuclear program militarily, he argues.

    For "military first cooperation", Markey says that the US should enhance its military to military cooperation with Pakistan in order to cultivate officers within the ranks. The objective of this strategy is to counter increasing Islamist and anti-American currents within the army.

    "Comprehensive approach" argues for expending more US economic, cultural and political capital in order to build moderate constituencies. Markey does not argue for the US to subsidize Pakistan's economic growth and maintains that this work has to be done by Pakistanis themselves.

    For South Asia watchers, this book will enhance understanding of US policy towards Pakistan and South Asia. Three other books on similar topics have come from United States recently, written by important policy scholars. It is interesting to note that Markey's assessment offers nothing fundamentally different from what these have discussed.

    In fact, this book represents continuity in the US thinking towards South Asia, anchored around three principles of its rebalancing to Asia-Pacific: the containment of China, propping up India as a regional counter-weight to China, and pressurizing Pakistan to subsidize India's growth in the region.

    Since the present government came to office in Pakistan in 2013, it has become clear that Obama administration has reviewed the tactics of its approach towards Islamabad - but not the strategic paradigm.

    The US tactics includes components of all the three policy options laid out by the author of this book, such as managing anti-Americanism sentiment through less visible involvement, giving time to the Nawaz administration to settle down, and suspending drone strikes. It can also be seen in US moves to push the International Monetary Fund to inject money into Pakistan's economy, in increasing people-to-people contacts and in support for Nawaz's overtures to India.

    The book reaffirms a rare consensus among the nationalists, Islamists and to a certain extent the liberal class within the policy elites in Pakistan: that US-Pakistan relations will remain transactional to say the least and outright hostile in other cases - despite the pleasantries of strategic dialogue process.

    It is also difficult to agree with any author that says radical political change in Pakistan will lead to collapse of the state. Linking the two without any reasonable proof reflects simplicity on the behalf of many Western academics in studying an otherwise complex subject of state, society and political order.

    Navigating the country through the negative currents of contemporary US policy in South Asia will be a real test of Pakistani statecraft.

    No Exit from Pakistan: America's Tortured Relationship with Islamabad by Daniel S Markey. Cambridge University Press, 2013. ISBN-10: 1107623596. Price: US$24.68; 253 pages.

    Majid Mahmood is a research officer for foreign affairs at the Center for International Strategic Studies Islamabad (CISS) and a post -graduate scholar in the International Relations Department at the National Defense University, Pakistan.

    http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_A...01-200614.html
    The Following User Says Thank You to Jameel For This Useful Post: Superkaif


  16. #16
    Elite Member sparkling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    5,371
    Thanks
    2444
    Pakistan Pakistan

    Pakistan military chief quietly meets with Pentagon brass to smooth relations

    With the world’s attention diverted to the hot spots of Iraq, Ukraine and Syria, top Pakistani military commanders slipped into the Pentagon this week as part of a quiet effort to smooth military relations between the two countries.

    A senior U.S. military official on Friday confirmed to The Washington Times that Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey and Gen. Rashad Mahmood, chairman of Pakistan’s Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, have spent time together within the halls of the Pentagon and other U.S. government facilities while working toward rebuilding the relationship between their respective countries.

    This is the first chairman-to-chairman engagement since 2007, according to the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity due to sensitivities surrounding ties between the two nations.

    Pentagon officials have been eager to rebuild their relationship with Pakistan’s military elite ever since late 2013, when the political climate in Pakistan shifted to accommodate a new prime minister. Not long after Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif was elected, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, Pakistan’s former Chief of Army staff, and former Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee Chairman Gen. Khalid Shameem Wynne retired.

    To date, Pentagon officials have only rubbed shoulders with Mr. Sharif and Gen. Mahmood, according to the official. And although this week’s military-to-military engagement was significant, the Pentagon specifically has its eye set on facilitating a meeting between Gen. Dempsey and Pakistan’s Chief of Army Staff Gen. Raheel Sharif, the official said.

    “One of the challenges with the political environment in Pakistan is that, traditionally, the Chief of Army Staff has really been the more powerful of the two,” the official said. “So this is like one of the first steps in building, like, a chairman’s position to something similar to ours, but it will take a period of time.”

    Although Gen. Dempsey and Gen. Mahmood discussed intelligence issues during his visit, it is unclear if any of those conversations centered around a recent drone strike that took place in northern Pakistan Wednesday. Six suspected militants were killed when the drone fired missiles at the ground, striking a house and a pick-up truck, according to CNN. For Pakistan, it was the third drone strike within a recent weeks after a six-month lull in air-to-ground operations.

    Michael Kugelman, senior program associate for south and southeast asia at The Wilson Center, a Washington based think tank, said the U.S.-Pakistan partnership has improved but remains dysfunctional following a string of milestone political mishaps that “really spun the relationship into a terrible state.”

    Mr. Kugelman pointed to January 2011 as a marker for when the rift between the two countries began to deepen. That year, a former contractor for the CIA killed two men in Lahore, Pakistan, and another Pakistani died when the vehicle driven by a person headed to assist that contractor hit and ran over him. Four months later, in May 2011, a team of U.S. Navy SEALs launched a raid from Afghanistan on a compound in Pakistan that was home to Osama bin Laden, who is believed to have plotted the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center buildings and the Pentagon.

    That, Mr. Kugelman said, is when the relationship between the U.S. and Pakistan “hit rock bottom.”

    The issue of U.S. drone strikes against suspected terror targets inside Pakistani borders further strained relations over the years, though those incursions have waned.

    Even before the most recent fallout, the United States has never enjoyed an ideal relationship with Pakistan due to mutual distrust and divergent interests, but when compared to the past few years, communication improvements have certainly been made, according to Mr. Kugelman.

    But that does not mean that the political and military ties between the two countries will remain intact, he said.

    “Things are going quite well now, but all it takes is another crisis for the relationship to suffer again,” he said.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...-pentagon-bra/

  17. #17
    Senior Member Amjad Hussain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    4,762
    Thanks
    2241
    Pakistan Pakistan

    ‘Good relations’ with US get $960m for Pakistan

    US Senate committee approves $960 million for Pakistan in 2015, lauds improvement in Pak-US ties

    The US Senate Committee on Appropriations has approved around $960 million in assistance allocation for Pakistan in the 2015 fiscal year as the powerful panel acknowledged improved relations between the two countries since last year’s elections and urged sustained commitment to common goals.

    “The committee recognises an improvement in bilateral relations following elections in Pakistan, and encourages continued commitment to shared security and development goals,” the panel says in the fiscal year 2015 State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Bill that provides $48.285 billion to the State Department.

    WE WON’T STOP HELPING PAKISTAN:

    In another development at the Capitol Hill, the US House of Representatives Friday dismissed a move by Congressman Dana Rohrabacher to halt assistance for Pakistan.

    The Republican legislator from California was seeking an amendment to the defense appropriations bill to stop US support for Pakistan.

    In its measure for the State Department expenditures, the Senate Appropriations Committee recommends up to $816 million for assistance programs in Pakistan and directs that assistance in Pakistan target unemployment, illiteracy, and disenfranchisement among the most impoverished communities. The US financial year starts on October 1 each year.

    The committee’s approval of a total of $959.7 million for Pakistan is $65.8 million – less than the Obama administration’s request of $1.03 billion – while for Afghanistan, the approved amount of $1.9 billion is $700 million below the US president’s request of $2.6 billion.

    Of the $1.9 billion appropriated amount for Afghanistan, the measure provides up to $961.4 million for assistance programs in that country amid transition and reduction in American footprint.

    While approving allocation for Pakistan, the committee recognises Malala Yousafzai’s courageous advocacy for girls’ education. The Appropriation Act provides $3,000,000, in addition to funds otherwise available for such purposes, to increase the number of scholarships under the Merit and Needs-Based Scholarship Program. “Not less than 50 percent of the scholarships should be awarded to Pakistani women,” it says.

    The bill increases funding for polio prevention programs to $59 million, including $7.5 million in Afghanistan and Pakistan and to support a multilateral campaign to eliminate the disease, which is $9 million above US President Obama’s request.

    http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2014...-for-pakistan/

  18. #18
    Senior Member manuu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    3,711
    Thanks
    1626
    Pakistan Ireland

    Pak-US joint chiefs quietly meet to smooth relations

    First chairman-to-chairman engagement since 2007 reviews intelligence issues, however it is unclear if any of those conversations centered around a recent drone strike that took place in northern Pakistan Wednesday

    WASHINGTON


    With the world’s attention diverted to the hot spots of Iraq, Ukraine and Syria, top Pakistani military commanders slipped into the Pentagon this week as part of a quiet effort to smooth military relations between the two countries.

    A senior US military official on Friday confirmed to The Washington Times that US Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen Martin Dempsey and Pakistan’s Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee (JCSC) Chairman Gen Rashad Mahmood have spent time together within the halls of the Pentagon and other US government facilities while working towards rebuilding the relationship between their respective countries.

    This is the first chairman-to-chairman engagement since 2007, according to the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity due to sensitivities surrounding ties between the two nations.

    The Pentagon officials have been eager to rebuild their relationship with Pakistan’s military elite ever since late 2013 when the political climate in Pakistan shifted to accommodate a new prime minister.

    Not long after Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif was elected, former chief of army staff Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani and former JCSC chairman Gen Khalid Shameem Wynne retired.

    To date, Pentagon officials have only rubbed shoulders with Sharif and Gen Mahmood, according to the official.

    Although this week’s military-to-military engagement was significant, the Pentagon specifically has its eye set on facilitating a meeting between Gen Dempsey and Pakistan’s Chief of Army Staff Gen Raheel Sharif, the official said.

    “One of the challenges with the political environment in Pakistan is that, traditionally, the Chief of Army Staff has really been the more powerful of the two,” the official said.

    “So this is like one of the first steps in building, like, a chairman’s position to something similar to ours, but it will take a period of time.”

    Although Gen Dempsey and Gen Mahmood discussed intelligence issues during his visit, it is unclear if any of those conversations centered around a recent drone strike that took place in northern Pakistan Wednesday.

    Six suspected militants were killed when the drone fired missiles at the ground, striking a house and a pick-up truck, according to CNN. For Pakistan, it was the third drone strike within recent weeks after a six-month lull in air-to-ground operations.

    Michael Kugelman, senior program associate for south and Southeast Asia at The Wilson Center, a Washington based think tank, said the US-Pakistan partnership has improved but remains dysfunctional following a string of milestone political mishaps that “really spun the relationship into a terrible state.

    Kugelman pointed to January 2011 as a marker for when the rift between the two countries began to deepen. That year, a former contractor for the CIA killed two men in Lahore and another Pakistani died when the vehicle driven by a person headed to assist that contractor hit and ran over him.

    Four months later, in May 2011, a team of US Navy SEALs launched a raid from Afghanistan on a compound in Pakistan that was home to Osama bin Laden, who is believed to have plotted the September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center buildings and the Pentagon.

    That, Kugelman said, is when the relationship between the US and Pakistan “hit rock bottom.” The issue of USD drone strikes against suspected terror targets inside Pakistani borders further strained relations over the years, though those incursions have waned.

    Even before the most recent fallout, the US has never enjoyed an ideal relationship with Pakistan due to mutual distrust and divergent interests, but when compared to the past few years, communication improvements have certainly been made, according to Kugelman.

    But that does not mean that the political and military ties between the two countries will remain intact, he said. “Things are going quite well now, but all it takes is another crisis for the relationship to suffer again,” he said.

    http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2014...oth-relations/

  19. #19
    Senior Member manuu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    3,711
    Thanks
    1626
    Pakistan Ireland

    US will cooperate with Islamabad against terrorism: State Department

    WASHINGTON- United States State Department spokeswoman Mary Harf has said that the US would extend full cooperation to Pakistan against terrorism and in other sectors.

    In a press briefing, Mary Harf said that it was the decision of Pakistan to launch a military offensive in North Waziristan tribal region. She added that United States would cooperate with Pakistan in education, trade and other sectors. The spokeswoman added that US would help Pakistan in solving the problems of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) as well.

    http://www.nation.com.pk/national/28...ate-department

  20. #20
    Member Ahsan Bin Tufail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Lahore
    Posts
    143
    Thanks
    76
    Pakistan Pakistan

    Re: Pakistan US relations

    USA safeguards its interests and nothing else. It will continue the same policy in the future. Pakistan should safeguard its interests and shouldn't worry to stand against the US policies if the need arise. I respect and strongly acknowledge the support that we got from US but it is better to not to rely on US alone just like Indians.
    The Following User Says Thank You to Ahsan Bin Tufail For This Useful Post: Wattan


Page 1 of 6 123456 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Pakistan Turkish relations
    By Superkaif in forum Foreign Affairs
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 3rd August 2013, 19:00
  2. Q&A: US-Pakistan relations
    By Mirza44 in forum U.S. Affairs
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 8th July 2013, 20:33

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Join us on twitter Follow us on twitter