What's new

Congressional resolution seeks to freeze US aid to Pakistan

If the issue really escalates, it won't be limited to just aid. That is only the first step.

Pakistan may surely want to go the whole hog, it should think through the consequences.

As an example, I have read that just the textile exports to USA support two million jobs in Pakistan.
 
By the way , our losses in war against terrorism are much than the aid provided by US.
 
These bharatis don't even realize how important supply line is to US. These congressional may act like they know what they're doing but US military knows otherwise. There's a reason why after all this time, there's still no attempts to move supply line elsewhere. Because doing that will cost US several times as much, and their debt and deficit will mount, and they'll break up into 50 pieces. Start a war with Pakistan and that debt and deficit will mount even faster.

What they need to do is to end the war in Afghanistan and end their aid. We don't need the aid if there's no war.
 
These bharatis don't even realize how important supply line is to US. These congressional may act like they know what they're doing but US military knows otherwise. There's a reason why after all this time, there's still no attempts to move supply line elsewhere. Because doing that will cost US several times as much, and their debt and deficit will mount, and they'll break up into 50 pieces. Start a war with Pakistan and that debt and deficit will mount even faster.

What they need to do is to end the war in Afghanistan and end their aid. We don't need the aid if there's no war.

:woot:

Wow someone thinks that US constitution mandates that the US Army SHOULD be in Afghanistan. Ever heard of the hen that lays the golden eggs.......? I can see it viz-a-viz US, Pakistan.
 
I never suggested that, and I don't see how that's relevant.
 
Last time when US supply line was cuted after attack on Pakistani post , the super power apologies from Pakistan and then they were able to get oil.
 
Last time when US supply line was cuted after attack on Pakistani post , the super power apologies from Pakistan and then they were able to get oil.
:lol::lol::lol::lol:

Read that and do some critical thinking, bharatis (ones posting on this thread). A superpower apologized to weak and poor Pakistan.
 
We dont need even a single penni of aid. Our loses in war against terrorism are many times more than the aid. Curse on that so called aid.
 
Help the US, to go back home, to take it's troops and it's Aid program and go back to help their own country --- but as the policy advice paper makes clear, US will inflict decades of war as policy, such policy consitute the national security of the US, is it any wonder she finds herself up a creep without a paddle?


March 12, 2011
A Shooting in Pakistan Reveals Fraying Alliance
By MARK MAZZETTI

WASHINGTON — Inside a dark jail cell on the outskirts of Lahore, Pakistan, a brawny 36-year-old American from the mountains of southwest Virginia has sat for weeks as Pakistan began proceedings against him on murder charges and his own government made frantic attempts to secure his release.

Late in January, Raymond A. Davis — a covert security officer for the Central Intelligence Agency and onetime Green Beret — unloaded a Glock pistol into two armed Pakistanis on a crowded street in Lahore, according to a Pakistani police report. His case was to move forward in court as early as this week.The shooting complicated American attempts to portray Mr. Davis as a paper-shuffling diplomat who stamped visas as a day job; generated an extraordinary swirl of recriminations and for many Pakistanis confirmed suspicions that America has deployed a secret army of spies and contractors inside the country.

It has also called unwelcome attention to a bigger, more dangerous game in which Mr. Davis appears to have played just a supporting role.

The C.I.A. team Mr. Davis worked with, according to American officials, had among its assignments the task of secretly gathering intelligence about Lashkar-e-Taiba, the militant “Army of the Pure.” Pakistan’s security establishment has nurtured Lashkar for years as a proxy force to attack targets and enemies in India and in the Indian-controlled part of Kashmir. These and other American officials, all of whom spoke only on condition of anonymity, are now convinced that Lashkar is no longer satisfied being the shadowy foot soldiers in Pakistan’s simmering border conflict with India. It goals have broadened, these officials say, and Lashkar is committed to a campaign of jihad against the United States and Europe, and against American troops in Afghanistan.

During a visit to Islamabad last July, Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, declared Lashkar a “global threat,” a statement that no doubt rankled his Pakistani hosts.

And so a group that Pakistan has seen for years as an essential component of its own national security, and that American counterterrorism officials could once dismiss as a regional problem, has emerged as a threat that Washington feels it can no longer ignore.

Given such a fundamental collision of interests, it was perhaps inevitable that Lashkar would one day provoke tensions between Pakistani and American security officials, and the collision itself would come into full public view. Rather than being a cause of the problem, Mr. Davis was merely an all-too-visible symptom.

As Mr. Davis discovered, the regularly accepted rules of the spy game don’t apply here. There was little chance of quickly brokering a quiet deal, allowing Mr. Davis to be spirited out of Pakistan without anyone making a fuss. Because Lashkar has long been nurtured by Pakistan’s spy agency, the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI, American espionage operations against the group are freighted with grave risks, and are not viewed kindly by Pakistani spies.

C. Christine Fair, a Pakistan expert and Georgetown University professor who closely studies Lashkar’s operations, said that the group was founded by Pakistan’s government in the 1980s to fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, a war that that ISI fought in close alliance with the C.I.A. As that war wound down, Professor Fair said, then President Mohammad Zia ul-Haq of Pakistan began redeploying Lashkar fighters to Kashmir because he feared that Kashmiri independence groups might create a separate state in the mountainous region now controlled by India, rather than weld it to Pakistan. The ISI continued to nurture Lashkar, along with others, as a counterweight to the separatist groups.

Officially, Lashkar was banned by President Pervez Musharraf’s government in 2002, and declared a terrorist organization three years later by the United Nations. But it hardly operates like a group in hiding.

Hafiz Muhammad Saeed, Lashkar’s charismatic leader, gives regular sermons in Lahore on Fridays, denouncing what he calls the imperialism of the United States, Israel and India while flanked by guards. A stocky man with a wild beard, Mr. Saeed has been placed under house arrest at various times in the past 10 years, but in 2009 the Lahore High Court quashed all charges against him and set him free.

That same court has now been assigned to determine Mr. Davis’s fate.

Lashkar’s sprawling headquarters in Muridke, a Lahore suburb situated along the famed Grand Trunk Road, contains not only a radical madrassa and housing for the school’s faculty members, but also a market, a hospital and a fish farm.

Terrorism experts said that the compound was built with donations from benefactors in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere in the Arab world. Lashkar also runs successful fund-raising campaigns inside Pakistan through its allied political organization, Jamat-ud-Dawah, a group that also operates schools, medical clinics and blood banks throughout the country.

Lashkar has long employed the language of global jihad in its propaganda, denouncing the United States and Israel, and vowing that the group would “plant a flag” in Washington and Tel Aviv.

Despite such global goals, Lashkar for most of its history has limited its attacks to India and Kashmir — the targets that would serve the interests of its ISI benefactors
.

Professor Fair, the Georgetown expert on Lashkar, said the group has set up sophisticated networks throughout Asia to train dozens of sleeper operatives for attacks in India.

In Thailand, for instance, Muslim recruits arriving from India are handed fake Pakistani passports for travel to Pakistan, where they go for several weeks of training, according to Professor Fair. After the training, the operatives go back to Thailand, reclaim their Indian passports and return to India.

But experts on Lashkar say that in recent years the group has expanded the focus of its operations, perhaps because it has felt restricted by the ISI, or perhaps a sign that it was splitting into factions with competing agendas.

Whatever the reason, American intelligence officials believe that hundreds of Lashkar operatives now operate inside Afghanistan, and have teamed with other militant groups to attack American troops. In February 2010, a Lashkar assault on a cluster of guesthouses in Kabul killed 18 people, including a number of Indian doctors and other foreigners.

Lashkar has also bolstered fund-raising networks throughout Europe, especially in Germany and Britain, and European counterterrorism officials believe Lashkar is considering attacks in Western capitals similar to the devastating raids by the group in Mumbai, India, in November 2008.


Seth G. Jones, a senior political scientist at the RAND Corporation who until last month worked on Afghanistan and Pakistan issues for United States Special Operations Command, compared the expansion of Lashkar’s operations with the broadening ambitions of the Pakistani Taliban, a group that had focused exclusively on attacks inside Pakistan until it dispatched Faisal Shazad in a failed mission last May to set off a van full of explosives in Times Square.

Mr. Jones said a Lashkar attack on the West could have more far-reaching consequences than one by the Taliban because Washington would no doubt lay blame for the attack on the ISI’s doorstep.

“There is a recognition that because of Lashkar’s associations, an attack on the United States could wind up causing the Pakistani government extreme pain,” said Mr. Jones, implying the possibility of using military force deep within Pakistan.

For years, the ISI has quietly assented to the C.I.A.’s campaign to batter Pakistan’s tribal areas with drone strikes, because the strikes have largely focused on operatives from Al Qaeda and the Pakistani Taliban — groups that Islamabad also considers to be mortal enemies.

But an American intelligence review late last year found that it was becoming harder to compartmentalize the distinct militant groups in Pakistan, because their membership and operations were blending into a murky stew; that was making it increasingly difficult to determine whether Pakistani support for groups like Lashkar might also be aiding Al Qaeda.

In addition, the Obama administration’s signals that it would like to get out of Afghanistan as soon as possible have led Pakistan’s military and intelligence officers to believe they should keep groups like Lashkar and the Haqqani network under their wing for future operations in Afghanistan and India.


In Washington, there seems to be little enthusiasm for sending yet another delegation to Islamabad to press Pakistani officials to cut their ties to militants. It hasn’t worked so far, and Obama administration officials know that Pakistan believes too much is at stake to walk away from the groups it might need once the Americans leave Afghanistan.

But even with such seemingly irreconcilable differences, and even as both American and Pakistani officials muse in private about how long the beleaguered alliance can survive, both appear to realize that — for now — it simply must.

As much as senior Pakistani officials resent the billions of dollars in aid they accept from Washington, they believe that they can’t turn away the money and hope to keep pace with their rival, India. And Wendy Chamberlin, the former American ambassador in Islamabad, said that America’s relationship with Pakistan remains essential for security in the region, even if some lawmakers in Washington might see cutting aid to the country as a way to distance the United States from the headaches of the relationship.

There are many reasons for continuing the relationship with such a large and strategically important country, she said. At the very least, Ms. Chamberlin said, the appetite of the Afghan war makes ending the relationship impossible, because there are no better routes over which to transport all the military supplies that currently are shipped through Pakistan.

“Like it or not,” she said, “Pakistan is our lifeline.
”
 
Well I'm guessing that the stoppage of aid would also include stopping the CSF. The logistics support cost us big time, and we depend upon the CSF to keep that route open. In all practicality that route would close as the money dries up automatically.

Plus all Pakistanis would be asking themselves that why are we helping them, like physically helping them and making ourselves a target in the process and not getting anything out of it. Surely no one believes the Americans to be our "Maamay day putar".

The primary reason all Pakistanis hate the US aid is so that we can call an end to US dictation on the War efforts. We don't just simply hate free money obviously.

unfortunately the world does not see such realities.

perception is reality, and if we give americans the fuel to turn on us then they will.... big time.

right now the RD affair is at a deadlock (so it seems) - and its the US who are reacting by cutting aid - this is win win - they can no longer point to their non-existent aid, they are making the first move and we can wean ourselves off their so called "aid" - for now this is enough - this is not about "beating" the US, its about protecting pakistans future.

we dont need to piss off the americans to the extent that they pull another false flag, or some other drama, we need to curtail their black operations in pakistan and we need to make this a vocal demand - that way we are in no way "wrong", we are just protecting ourselves.


what i really fear is some big drama happens in pakistan all with the aim to divert pakistan awam's attention from blackwater types and for pak army to be arm twisted into a war against its own.
 
Help the US, to go back home, to take it's troops and it's Aid program and go back to help their own country --- but as the policy advice paper makes clear, US will inflict decades of war as policy, such policy consitute the national security of the US, is it any wonder she finds herself up a creep without a paddle?


March 12, 2011
A Shooting in Pakistan Reveals Fraying Alliance
By MARK MAZZETTI

WASHINGTON — Inside a dark jail cell on the outskirts of Lahore, Pakistan, a brawny 36-year-old American from the mountains of southwest Virginia has sat for weeks as Pakistan began proceedings against him on murder charges and his own government made frantic attempts to secure his release.




[.[/COLOR][/B]
”




this is so predictable.

the us are in a pickle, he is a CIA agent, a highly valued one and he has been caught with his pants down, no denying it.

next best step is to legitimize his actions saying it was in pursuit of some grander cause, when really no one has a clue except davis, his handlers.......and now the pak authorities, lol.
 
You will NOT be the biggest fish in the pond. I think the US will still maintain a base level contingent to make sure their influence remains even if the majority of the troops have gone.

And dont you guys always discriminate between the good and the bad taliban ? The good Taliban may be occupied with Afghanistan but the bad Taliban will once again remain in Pakistan. And what if the US still carries out airstrikes through its drones ?? What can Pakistan do ??

And I dont want to mention the economy part where the real pain will be felt. Does Pakistan have a very dedicated finance minister who can turn around the situation without any external help. If you guys want to make the US an enemy so openly, well what can I say ? Your country, your destiny.

You have to stick to one story... I mean we had already reached the part where US starts to move out because Pakistan denies it logistical support? And now it somehow is managing to maintain "a base level contingent". You're making too many complicated scenarios and forgetting the plot in itself. The underlying thing you're fundamentally saying "Oh it just can't happen". "No one can defy the US".

It is quite unheard of, I'd give you that. But if tomorrow the nation's leaders man up to do that, the nation would support it. Pakistanis believe the US is bluffing and even if it goes ahead and cancels the aid, thats what most Pakistanis want to see happening. We'll start from scratch if we have to, you can't do a wrong thing more efficiently and hope to get better results. You'll just be wronger!
 
So its the pressler amendments all over again.I just so wish that the US pulls the plug on the aid... if its because of davis let the US gov go down this road much to expose the CIA's black ops and its contacts with those orgs which even the US listed as terrorist orgs.The pro American Pakistani government has no role to play in the Davis's cold blooded murder of innocent Pakistanis and events that followed.
 
perception is reality, and if we give americans the fuel to turn on us then they will.... big time.


I think it's not a question of giving the US fuel, US does not need fuel, she has lost it --

r
ight now the RD affair is at a deadlock (so it seems) - and its the US who are reacting by cutting aid - this is win win - they can no longer point to their non-existent aid, they are making the first move and we can wean ourselves off their so called "aid"
-

Indeed and as Asim makes the point, this whole BS about aid, no ordinary will benefit from this "aid" --- some argue that we may not have access to US military equipment - and what would be so wrong with that??

this is not about "beating" the US, its about protecting pakistans future
.


They may be the same thing, either way, the US not for Pakistani interests, but for her own, needs to withdraw from Asia and Middle East - see, this is inevitable, the people will not tolerate the US manufacturing crisis to justify it's forward bases.


we dont need to piss off the americans to the extent that they pull another false flag, or some other drama, we need to curtail their black operations in pakistan and we need to make this a vocal demand - that way we are in no way "wrong", we are just protecting ourselves.


Lets not imagine that all initiative is with the US - it's really too late to salvage any of this -- I mean they have this poor Davis person back, and it will become extremely dangerous to be an American official, not just in Pakistan.

The best way to deal with this is to show the US the door, insist that their personnel be reduced , make it clear that military training and staff college exchanges will have to end (yes, they have great schools, but our schools are not bad) - basically, let me tell you, if Pakistan care about the relationship with the US, they must tell the US the truth and that means being extremely clear about what Pakistan will and will not tolerate.

I am persuaded that the US/Pakistan relationship is a net loss for Pakistan and for the US, it will not improve and if Pakistan do not show the US the door, the relationship will be poisoned for a very long time to come and, to me, I think there is a possibility that the two armed forces will be firing at each other.

what i really fear is some big drama happens in pakistan all with the aim to divert pakistan awam's attention from blackwater types and for pak army to be arm twisted into a war against its own.
 

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom