Another foreign policy blunder for the Yanks
US announces $2bn military aid package for Pakistan
The US has announced a $2bn (£1.3bn) package of military and security aid to Pakistan on the final day of the latest Washington-Islamabad strategic talks.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton unveiled the five-year deal, which is subject to Congressional approval. But the Obama administration will make clear it expects Islamabad to do more in the fight against Islamic militants.
The US has given Pakistan more than $1bn of military aid a year since 2005; last fiscal year, it gave nearly $2bn. US officials said Pakistan needed further, specific assistance for the fight against militants and needed to know it could rely on the US in the long term. So unlike previous military aid approved on a yearly basis, this is a five-year package. The aid will pay for equipment needed in counter-insurgency and counter-terror operations, among other things.
Vali Nasr, a senior adviser on Pakistan and Afghanistan at the state department, told the BBC that the battle against Pakistani militants had expanded over the last year, but the summer's monsoon floods had undone a lot of the Pakistani army's efforts.
"We believe that we have made a great deal of progress and we believe that that progress has reduced the threat to our homeland, while not eliminating it," Richard Holbrooke, the US special representative on Afghanistan and Pakistan, said this week.
But officials in Washington have also been frustrated at the limits of Pakistan's desire and ability to help.
A White House report sent to Congress earlier this month lamented the Pakistani army's inability to hold territory it had seized from insurgents, a failure that means gains are likely to be short-lived.
"The Pakistan military continued to avoid military engagements that would put it in direct conflict with Afghan Taliban or al-Qaeda's forces in North Waziristan," the report said, referring to the region in north-western Pakistan seen as a Taliban and al-Qaeda haven.
"This is as much a political choice as it is a reflection of an under-resourced military prioritising its targets."
The report also said the civilian leadership did not have the trust of the people and faced "broad-based" challenges that had "the potential to impact the stability of the government".
Mr Nasr said the solution was not to withdraw US investment from Pakistan, but rather to help the Pakistani government and military strengthen the country's institutions. The Pakistani government is in fact crucial to that strategy, and this can make Washington vulnerable.
A crisis in ties between the two countries last month has highlighted the fine line the Obama administration must walk as it cajoles and pressures its ally.
After at least two Pakistani troops were killed in a Nato cross-border attack in September, a furious Islamabad blocked the main transit route for military supplies to Afghanistan until it received a formal apology.
During the row, dozens of lorries laden with fuel and supplies were destroyed by militants in Pakistan while en route to the frontier.
The US-Pakistan strategic dialogue, which started last year, is designed to build trust and keep the conversation going between the two countries, not just about security, but about a wide range of issues from healthcare to education and water projects.
The five-year package announced on Friday is meant to complement a $7.5bn package of civilian aid over five years that was approved by the US in 2009.
It is all designed to reduce Islamic militants' allure and to win Pakistanis' hearts.
"We want to expand the security relationship that Pakistan and the US had in the past under the Bush period to be much broader," Mr Nasr said, "to involve things that also matter to Pakistanis and impacts their daily lives.
"A relationship means that we don't focus only on things that are important to us, but also things that are important to Pakistanis.
"Average Pakistanis have to see value in their engagement with the US before they subscribe to that relationship."
But some question the Obama administration's approach, saying there are too many carrots and not enough sticks, and not enough conditions attached to the carrots.
In a piece published in the New York Times this week, the former ambassador to Afghanistan, Zalmay Khalilzad, urged Washington to "offer Islamabad a stark choice between positive incentives and negative consequences".
It's hard to imagine the Obama administration being foolish to fund a wild card like Pakistan, especially with the current economic crises. They should get out of Afghanistan and leave Pakistan to implode. Seal their borders and not accept immigration from either country.
I predict this is going to come back to bite them in the arse. What say you?
a tactical move but a stupid one that will come back to bite them in their arse.
Expat: more than a blunder, I would call it a tactic. The armaments lobby needs to sell their weapons and who would they sell through? Obviously, the govt.
Recently, they seem to have adopted this tactic of selling billions worth of weapons to both sides of the border. Cant really blame them . Indo-Pak rivalry is not exactly a secret. So why not make truckloads of money out of it?
Yanks will definitely cut a sorry face, the day when the same arms sold to the Pak army gets used against them or the Indians by some terrorist group or the other. But then again, it wont be the first time.
About pak being a rogue nation, US will anyday stop a millimetre short of calling it that coz its regional agendas. But featuring in the list of top 10 failed states consistently should definetly mean something.
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/06/21/2010_failed_states_index_interactive_map_and_rankings
Can't agree on a it being a Rogue State as defined below:
* A state that conducts its policy in a dangerously unpredictable way, disregarding international law or diplomacy
* A state that does not respect other states in its international actions
* A state considered threatening to the world's peace.
* A state or nation acting outside of the accepted national or international norms and policies
I would describe the Pakistani state as corrupt, ineffective, amateurish and on the brink of failure.
However a large section of Pakistan does have a Rogue Populace.
I think it would be in Pakistan's interests to let some western provinces and the NWFP secede; offer anyone who wants to leave these new 'states' citizenship in Pakistan and then build a bloody giant wall around them.
If these people want to be left alone then let them live alone with no help or contact from the outside world. A kind of Medieval enclave.
After all Pakistan let go of East Pakistan. Pakistan would do better without these people and can finally become the sort of country Mohammad Ali Jinnah originally envisaged.
Best of Luck
btw, coming to ur post, in my opinion US doesn't have any other choice except Pakistan and thats the reason they will continue giving add to them till they pull out all their invading forces from Afghanistan.
;)
But I would limit immigration and access to come in and out for everyone.
xxxpatI wish if all these 9 years could derailed.
btw
i'll add a little more
Cut all relations among Muslims and Western World, but I know its not possible, unlike ur desires, b/c of mutual interests.
Hello again :) What a surprise! Thank you for showing your true colours again SK. I knew you hadn't changed - and that's exactly why you'll never see my face, no matter how many times you tell me you are waiting for my date to join you at Byriani Hut. I seem to remember this morning your words being: 'my topic, if you don't like it there are plenty of other topics to comment on'. You are really a sad little soul, insulting intelligent users who know what they are discussing... hmmm?
Moving on: I agree that it might be dangerous for the US. They do have to 'trust' that the Pakistani leaders will make sure that none of it is used for terrorism. The US don't need to send men out to Pakistan though, leaving Pakistani army to deal with the fight against terrorism. What else can be said, except that we hope that the weapons are all used for the right cause?
I just think the best thing for all is to leave Afghanistan altogether and let them live whatever way they choose, as long as their borders are secure so no nutters get out. Of course it goes without saying we need to cut off all visas and asylum requests. ;)
this will add another blunder to their account :P
b/w, have U gone through this news
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/10/22/taliban-afghanistan.html
what the use of 9 years war???
glad to see them for categorizing good and bad among Taliban's ;)
We'd have so many perfect countries, including my own. lol
failure will make U perfect ;)
Neither I
from our mistakes, what is the point?
I won't cry if you call it that.
xxxpat
priorities always change with passage of time, i do remember when Russians pulled out their forces from Afghan land, US stopped funding terrorism (Yes, i'll call it terrorism) in that region with Pressler Amendment to Pakistan.
"Irrespective of what recent US administrations have said in the recent past, some American political thinkers under the influence of Indian lobby consider Pakistan a rogue state. The manner in which Pakistan was left to engage with the Taliban (creation of CIA and ISI to challenge USSR in Afghanistan), is generally ignored by the US media however many political scientists admit the US folly of leaving Pakistan alone to face the mess that Russian pullout had created in Afghanistan with a huge pilferage in Pakistan. Moreover, US falied to realize the fall out of their Tora Bora bombings where Afghani Talibans were sent hiding in the Western tribal areas of Pakistan."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogue_state
At least it is not a "pariah state" like Myanmar or Somalia ;)
and you will be taken to "Pakistan rogue state" and find all kinds of links showing precedence. Get over your foolish pride children. You can call my nation a floundering empire and I won't whinge.
Just a flawed Anglican.
But I am not the first or last to call Pakistan a rogue nation. Look at their history.
WK
u must be reasonable with these two kids, calling rogue an entire nation of 160 million people doesn't make him saint.
I also don't look at their motives as pure, but I see a history of Foreign Policy blunders in that part of the world that have bitten them on the arse and destabelised a lot of people's lives in the long run.
oh ..fight again ?? :(
for creating an account and posting here. From what I have heard on good authority said poster is a young boy still living at home with mummy. In that context, I just view him as a gnat.
the US lending all that money and not being fully aware of the consequences desired and/or otherwise. As much as many people would love to believe these yanks ain't dumb. Neither are they acting out of charitable intentions alone. They obviously have a plan or two and I doubt they are going to have much regrets if any.At the end of it all my prayers are with the innocents..if this will result in an end to terrorism and tribulations then more power to them!
I think they are throwing away good money after a bad investment. The payout will never be worth it and in fact, could be even more damaging. I don't trust Islamabad's government in what they CAN control. Much less what they have proven they CANNOT.
Oh please saeedkan you obviously can't debate on anything even with your life at stake so cut out these cheap personal insults. Atleast think of some decent insults if that's all you gonna do..
There is nothing wrong with the post or the comments thereafter, learn a thing or two from britexpat about how to be civil and yet disagree at the same time.
What crap...
The yanks seem to be bankrolling the very guys who are back stabbing them. We suppose the yanks know whats going on behind their backs and are trying to manage, minimize and limit the damage of the the mess they have got themselves into in places like Afghanistan and Pakistan or is the two billion part of the kick backs for the drone attacks which has killed innocent people
But I think that they are risking the safety and security of many people by funding that government.
Its like they are investing in the war from the both sides. I don't see how it helps US but still, if they think that the money would be used for the right purpose, what can we say. It's their money after all.
US is blamed for everything anyways whether they DO or NOT DO anything.
roulette with their money and the security of their own troops, as well as that of neighbouring countries.
If the money is used for what it is supposed to be used for, then its good. I very much doubt though that it would be so.
US is just doing what it needs for its continued influence in the region. US as well as its allies are fully aware that the money can be totally misused.
I couldn't care less what you do with my comments. Only an insecure kid would keep posting foolish one liners and have nothing of intelligence to add to the discussion.
Believe me. NEVER. :P
some children came into the thread and got their knickers in a twist ;)
Anyway, back to the discussion. What do you think about this American decision?
Man please don't come. thank you very much. please don't visit.
What happened SK? No impulse control? Lots of kids have problems with that :)
So childish to call names in a language you think the person doesn't understand.
For some reason you have no life other than to be on qatarliving 24/7 and try to tell everyone what to think. That is, when you aren't crying to the mods.
Grow up lad!
Can we not have sensible debate please rather than nonsense name calling?
Believe me I have no interest in meeting most of the blokes on qatarliving. Apparently, I am not alone :)
But I do need to correct myself about one thing. I might be interested in traveling to India as a tourist some day. Just NEVER Pakistan.
ex ex, you are not lucky enough to meet and have Biryani.
I have no interest nor would I accept an invitation. And your point is...?
But I think they are still holding onto their dream to be able to get out of Afghanistan gracefully and they think this will help. Whereas I think it will blow up in their faces like their response to Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. I think their foreign policy is very short sighted and they don't benefit from hindsight. I would say the same of my own country to some degree too.
saeedkan
U must not be personal on main forum, let him speak out, i don't see anything offensive in his posts, usually this happen when someone didn't get his weekly drink on weekend ;)
ex ex, if you are not visiting Pakistan or India it is your wish, did anyone invite you or send you letter?
you make me laugh. you are here just for argument?
when someone will invite you just say NO. ha ha ha
I see your "new leaf" didn't last. Now you understand why people don't want to meet you at Biryani Hut ?
I've heard of a "rube", but not "a rubish". Is that some urdu curse?
you don't deserve to Visit there.
expat, don't you think the US doesn't know that...they know it for sure. but, US have to serve some bigger interests to keep them happy..
Did I hurt your feelings, mate? Hope you won't be running to the mods trying to have the thread deleted. hmm.
hmm. Believe me you won't ever have to kick me out as I would never go to Pakistan and don't have plans to visit India either :D hmm.
He is just a rubish
but I do not. I also don't think they are stable and this "aid" could easily go the way that funding the mujahideen did against the Soviets.
US is actually in a balancing act to keep pakistan appeased whenever they voice some displeasure..
recently, there have been some drone attacks on pakistan soil and apparantly some pak civilians were killed.
they have their own reasons to keep pakistan in good humour which is based on their foreign policies. US also know that money what they need to keep the country as their ally.
to me, its not a blunder...its a calculated balancing act.
:D
Thanks God you are not Pakistani. ex ex expat.
is just as dangerous and giving cash.
I think it is a backward country with corrupt politicians and extremist religious leaders.
And I am aware that considering your Pakistani roots you have a bias, too. We'll have to agree to disagree on this one mate ;)
Pushkin you were even not Surprise because your country was sold, you have learned lesson in Afghanistan. did not you? I know you can never be surprise
I could say that you give an impression that you have a bias against Pakistan :o)
I agree that the Pakistan government is corrupt. However, the USA authorities are aware of this and have changed the mechanism for this deal. I have worked with the US FMS (Federal Military Sales) teams in Saudi Arabia. This is an aid package where money does not actually change hands. Equipment , to the value of US$ 2 billion will be transfered to Pakistan military. In fact, pakistan will probably pay out of it's owm pocket for the long term upgrade and maintenance of the heavier equipment.
I am so grateful to neither be Pakistani or Indian, mate ;)
can not digest? more jeliously? biting your heart? Pakistan Zinda bad
why am at no surprise ? this is perfect normal you scratch my back i scratch yours
without pakistan more imperialists will die in afghanistan
america help friends with printed dollars and weapons everywhere
Is untrustworthy and a rogue nation. Islamabad doesn't even have control over Quetta, Karachi and the NWFP. I am not here to kiss everybody's arse and make nicey nice like some people, SK.
benefit financially britexpat but you should know as well as anybody that they are an extremely unstable nation full of corruption. Giving them money on this scale can easily fall into the wrong hands, or as TLC pointed out be used for their purposes which are counter to the US interests.
IMO I don't see anyone getting anything out of a "mutually beneficial relationship" with Pakistan. In fact, I don't think there is such a thing.
No, he's representing mentality of white company ;)
ex.ex.expat is an Indian teaboy??? LOL! Thanks for the laugh.
And if you want to start your Pakistani vs Indian bashing sessions, I suggest you create a new topic and expect it to be deleted.
Sanamjee, No one is talking about India. We are talking about Pakistan. Our tea boys are more educated and intelligent than your 'educated' ones.
Why no one is talking about drones?
i don't see the point of mouthing off, if we read back the history, imperialist never did a charity work, and i'm sure that in the region they can't find a cheaper ally like Pakistan, who will make hell of their own country for the so called war on terrorist.
Its simply a deal of Given and Take.
i don't see the point of mouthing off, if we read back the history, imperialist never did a charity work, and i'm sure that in the region they can't find a cheaper ally like Pakistan, who will make hell of their own country for the so called war on terrorist.
Its simply a deal of Given and Take.
ex ex expat, you are ashaimed to tell that you are indian? why Indian are worry about Pakistan? india have enough problem there 60% population living in 1 dollar US dollar, Pakistan is a proud country live proudly and die proudly, I don't know the people who are mostly tea boy can dare to utter a name of Pakistan. Pakistan is always there for Tit for Tat for India
Maybe they will outsource war in Afghanistan.
Sorry not the same amount.. They have made deals worth 10 Billion in recent months and several billions worth weapons are still in the pipeline
Interestingly they are negotiating an arms deal with India for around the same amount so it will be just taking money from one neighbour and giving it to the other ;)
This is a US$2 billion aid package to buy arms, ammunition and supplies from the USA itself. So the DOD and congress will have full oversight over the deal. This is different from actually giving money.
Pakistan money, you never know where it will end up. You would think they would have learned something from their role in giving rise to the Taliban. :(
Now I have a strong feeling that America is the one who is giving Pakistan money for sending terrorist to India...
The USA needs Pakistan as much as Pakistan needs the USA.
The USA does not make arbitrary decisions when oit comes to foreign policy. The relationship is mutually beneficial. I am at a loss to understand how it can bite them in the arse ?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11606431
Check out the video with the Pakistani advisor in the State Department. Am I the only one who thinks he looks as corrupt as Zardari and Musharref?