India caucus behind tough terms in Pak aid bill

[Panditji]

The US has never thought of India as an ally in the true sense of the word. At the risk of going a bit OT (and playing to the gallery just a wee bit) I think the USA has no permanent allies other than Israel (Applause, guys!) I mean this sincerely, and after observing the USA for a long time. Everywhere other than Israel, it is the US interests that reign supreme (How does Israel turn the US into plain dumb suckers is still beyond me, but it has to do with their internal politics a bit, is my guess).

Considering this, I see that the Kerry-Lugar bill has nothing to do with India, and India has no locus-standii on the matter. Even otherwise, India's lobbying skills suck, and it has a lot to learn from Pakistan in this department.

The motivation for Kerry Lugar Bill is simple - The US was throwing money in a black hole, with nothing to show for it, and on top of it, they are facing reversals in Afghanistan, because Pakistan is not seen as a willing help. What Kerry Lugar Bill says is simple - we will give you money, but at least give us details of what you spent it for. Also don't spend on useless stuff like (list follows).

Where is India in this? Why drag it in?

Only reason I can think is - You love India so much that you want it in everything connected to Pakistan... Like my little kid, who, when given sweets, drags his elder brother along!

Wotsay?

 

[Developereo]

You are either ignorant or doing some word-play. India has always sought to draw global attention towards Pakistan's use of Islamist militants.

India is selective about third party involvement. It opposes international involvement on Kashmir, but tried desperately to portray Mumbai as its 9/11 and threw ineffectual temper tantrums to put international pressure on Pakistan. Sabotaging this bill is India's latest attempt.

Where is India in this? Why drag it in?

Please read the objectionable clauses in the bill and you will see exactly where India fits in.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/strate...bill-attempt-further-pressurize-pakistan.html

 

[navtrek]

Hi guys don't see my post as one written by an Indian, For a second stop being Nationalistic and think this bill does some wonderful things.

1.Pakistan gets the aid.
2.It strengthens the civilian government v/s the military.
3.Gives more chance for a democratic Pakistan without the military takeover
4.Regulates your spending on military hardware which is bought on aid money to fight India.
5.Now the money will be used to bring back the smiles on those millions of Pakistanis displaced from there home.


Regulation of so much of aid money is required coz it should not be used in the wrong direction.Hope u guys agree.

 

[Panditji]

Please read the objectionable clauses in the bill and you will see exactly where India fits in.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/strate...bill-attempt-further-pressurize-pakistan.html

What I see is a description of behaviour by any sane and responsible country. In fact there should not be any inducement to behave as one should, but Pakistan gets a lollipop of $1.5b/a for being what it should ideally be anyways.

I can only observe that the better behaved boys in the classroom don't get any praise for being in line, but the truant kid always gets a pat on back for even being manageable.

 

[Developereo]

I can only observe that the better behaved boys in the classroom don't get any praise for being in line, but the truant kid always gets a pat on back for even being manageable.

There is no good guy or bad guy.

Indians will disagree, but it is Pakistan's contention that India is involved in similar operations in Balochistan and FATA, but gets a pass because the West is propping it up as a counter to China.

Regardless, since our politicians are pathetically inept and corrupt, and would rather beg from the West and IMF instead of making Pakistan self-sufficient by enacting economic reforms, we will be held hostage to the West's whims.

 

[rajeev]

Most Pakistanis don't object to the auditing/oversight clauses. We know our politicians all too well and welcome anything that keeps their paws off the money.

The objection is to clauses that prohibit Pakistan to engage in activities detrimental to "neighboring countries". We all know which neighboring country is being referred to. (Hint: it ain't Afghanistan.)

I dont know why you guys are objecting when you get free money. Pakistan already received $11 billion in US aid. Now with this bill, another $7.5 billion = $18 billion. Compare that to Pakistan's GDP of 167 billion ie. roughly 12% of GDP funded by an external source.

Pakistan's defence budget is only $4 billion ie. an external entity is paying for Pakistan's entire defence budget for 4.5 years. How can you call that bad deal?

There are other perks which you are ignoring like loan from IMF for $11.3 billion, delivery of F16, more attack helicopters, ...

If some one is going to give free money, wont they expect something in return. For Obama, supporting civilian govt was deemed important.

What were Pakistan's other options? Turn down the aid bill and Uncle Sam will do nothing ?

 

[Developereo]

I dont know why you guys are objecting when you get free money. Pakistan already received $11 billion in US aid. Now with this bill, another $7.5 billion = $18 billion. Compare that to Pakistan's GDP of 167 billion ie. roughly 12% of GDP funded by an external source.

I am not quite sure of your math comparing $167b annual GDP to the $11b over 8 years (partial payment for services rendered in the GWOT) or the $7.5b over 5 years.

If some one is going to give free money, wont they expect something in return.

The proverbial pound of flesh.

What were Pakistan's other options?

Collect tax from feudals.
Tax holiday for feudal lords | Pakistan | News | Newspaper | Daily | English | Online

The current share of agriculture in GDP stands at 20.9 percent but its share in taxes is only 1.2 percent. Compared to it the share of the manufacturing sector in GDP is 18.9 percent while its contribution to taxes is 50.8 percent

Collect tax from everybody.
Economy of Pakistan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Out of a total population of 170 million people, fewer than 1.7 million pay taxes. This means only 1% of the total population pay taxes. To make matters worse, since Pakistan first gained independence in 1947, not a single person has ever been sent to prison for tax evasion

Issue bonds and other incentives for investors
DAWN.COM | Business | Remittances rise to $800 million per month: Tarin

 

[third eye]

Most Pakistanis don't object to the auditing/oversight clauses. We know our politicians all too well and welcome anything that keeps their paws off the money.

The objection is to clauses that prohibit Pakistan to engage in activities detrimental to "neighboring countries". We all know which neighboring country is being referred to. (Hint: it ain't Afghanistan.)

Though I too am not privy to the entire deal, I presume it has to do with the fact that the aid Pk get is for Af & Af related issues. In short for its Western borders not for its Eastern ones as it always has thus far by diverting them.

If a guy pays you , he has a right to know it you are actually spending it for what he gave you.

 

[rajeev]

Thanks Developero.

I am not quite sure of your math comparing $167b annual GDP to the $11b over 8 years (partial payment for services rendered in the GWOT) or the $7.5b over 5 years.

The Pakistanis govt claims 5b$ of free money and 6b$ of reimbursement. The additional 7.5b$ is another set of free money. US congress debated about 6b$ that Pakistan govt claimed and they found Pakistan had overcharged for every single line item even including fuel price that was used for delivery.

Then again, I ask you why should a foreign entity pay for Pakistan to fight jihadi groups fighting in its soil against its own government?

This bring to another question. If America wont have existed, what would have Pakistan done? Nothing, let Taliban roam freely, implement Sharia law and ignore attacks on Mariott, Lahore, GHQ. I know you might say it wont have existed without America. But, isnt this aggressors living its soil launching this? If not America, wont they wait for some other catalyst?

When I asked for Pakistan's options - I did not mean economically. You mentioned taxing will help save woes. My real question which country in the world can challenge America. America gets what it wants - no wonder it is called Hyper power.

For less serious reasons, Iran is getting manhandled by America. Pakistan has lot of issues like nuclear proliferation, changing Harpoons design, to just name a few.

 

[oceanx]

I am truly at a loss for words.

Why does this come as a surprise? Are Pakistanis living in a cave that they do not know the growing influence of the Indian lobby in Washington? How do they think India managed to get the nuclear deal and the recent military hardware offers? Have they missed the relentless parroting by American media of every little anti-Pakistan trash published in Indian media?

It is not because the Indians are smart or overly resourceful, but the fact that the entrenched and enormously powerful Zionist and neocon lobbies' agendas favor India at this point. There is a confluence of interests between the West and India to counter China's rise and, in that bigger picture, Pakistan is only a minor impediment -- to be neutralized early. It is unfortunate that China hasn't engaged fully in this battle to help shore up Pakistan against the US/Indian alliance.

Events suggest that methods of engagement vary. That's what "multi-polarity" is all about ... But the importance of Pakistan registers profoundly - even to the Russians.

Though the Zionist brigade and the neocons share a deep homology, their interests and scopes are not identical. In fact the difference there can even be "exploited" by the astute agent (cue the "Putinists", "Kemalists", and even the CCP to a limited extent).

These days, I increasingly ask myself the question - Who is worse for China and the region? The CCP internally or the neocons externally?

The Saffron brigade's Achilles's hill is its pride. And on that it is not terribly different from some of the other players (including those on the "Chinese" side), except that their psychology is a little more twisted than usual. And I should hasten to add that it still appears to me that they represent a minority among overseas Indians - many of whom are in fact more sensible and grounded than some members of the so-called "Chinese diaspora".

Back to the brigade, what baffles me slightly is that of all people, you'd think they would understand that now is the wrong time to "gang" up on Pakistan - but no, they just couldn't resist it.

Let the "Brahmanists" conjugate with the Neocons - the "tighter" and the more obvious the better.

 

[oceanx]

I can only observe that the better behaved boys in the classroom don't get any praise for being in line, but the truant kid always gets a pat on back for even being manageable.

That I concur. However, among nations, "truancy" is not so easy to define. Nor is it obvious when the "teacher" herself fakes it right from the "top" ...

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Though I too am not privy to the entire deal, I presume it has to do with the fact that the aid Pk get is for Af & Af related issues. In short for its Western borders not for its Eastern ones as it always has thus far by diverting them.

If a guy pays you , he has a right to know it you are actually spending it for what he gave you.

You presume wrong - the protests have primarily been over clauses understood as interfering in Pakistan's domestic affairs - military promotions, monitoring of defence budget, terms like 'cease terror' etc.

There has been little to no objection, in all of the op-eds I have read, to the conditions on accountability of how money is spent.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I dont know why you guys are objecting when you get free money. Pakistan already received $11 billion in US aid. Now with this bill, another $7.5 billion = $18 billion. Compare that to Pakistan's GDP of 167 billion ie. roughly 12% of GDP funded by an external source.

As Developereo already explained, a large chunk of the money Pakistan has already received is reimbursements for expenses, including logistical support for US troops in Afghanistan. See this thread for details: http://www.defence.pk/forums/strate...-where-did-10-billion-us-aid-pakistan-go.html

In addition, Pakistan has suffered an estimated $30 billion in losses since the insurgency expanded in Pakistan - a direct result of the US invasion of Afghanistan.

There are other perks which you are ignoring like loan from IMF for $11.3 billion, delivery of F16, more attack helicopters, ...

How is a loan from the IMF a perk? The IMF is a global financial entity designed to lend money to states that adhere to its economic conditions is it not? That money is paid back with interest, and often has harsh conditions associated with it - its no perk.

The F-16's were paid for by Pakistan, so no 'perk' in their delivery either. The US is merely fulfilling a contractual obligation, though I understand that their past record indicates they have a hard time doing so.

Attack helis have primarily come out of the aid provided - agreed, but they have also been extensively used in anti-insurgent ops and have a lot of wear and tear. More new ones are uncertain at this point.

If some one is going to give free money, wont they expect something in return. For Obama, supporting civilian govt was deemed important.

The money is intended for COIN, schools and other social sector programs, and accountability that that money is being used for the purposes intended is what the bill should have focused on - not on the nuke program, not on military promotions etc.

What were Pakistan's other options? Turn down the aid bill and Uncle Sam will do nothing ?

I say we reject the conditions (except for the accountability ones) in parliament and take the money .

Real Chanikya like.

The US can then complain later and cut the funds when it feels like, which is what most Pakistanis expect it to do anyway, regardless of whether the conditions are met or not.

IMO, whether funds get cut or not will depend primarily on what policies Obama decides to pursue in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

 

[Goodperson]

Do not forget. Its American Aid not Indian.
Can India interfere and stop American Aid ? No.

Does India is know or has enough reasons to believe American Aid was used against it. Yes.

Should India make the congressmen and Senator aware of the ground realities. Yes.

Does Pakistan have caucus in US. Yes

Does Yes have caucus in US. Yes

So one should not blame their failures on others.

 

[Hellfire]

IMO I think none can deny that a nation has the duty to subvert the potential boost to its adversary's capabilities. In the context, I think India has done a commendable job.
Over the years there have been issues raised pertaining to the diverting of funds and aid (be it military or fund related) meant for bolstering Pakistani capability to effectively tackle the scourge of terror towards ensuring a conventional parity/superiority vis-vis India. This fact was usually doing rounds uptil now within the academic/think tank circles of US as also off the record observations by the policy makers. But over the past few months, there has been a vocalisation of the same, signalling a major shift in US policy towards Pakistan, which no longer sees Pakistan as only a part of solution but also a part of the problem. The issue was given a further boost by the good Gen. Musharraf when he admitted to this trend during his own rule.
I am sure in times to come, we shall see more and more pressure being applied on Pakistan this way. The ultimate aim of GoI will be to ensure that the funds are used for what they are sent and that it shall be incumbent on GoP to generate resources from within for any major upgradation in terms of conventional war fighting ability.
My fellow posters from Pakistan may contend that its the price Pakistan has to pay for helping US in its WoT but that may not be the case as there was no question of Pakistan not getting sucked into the quagmire of its own creation. Even if Pakistan had tried to stay aloof, it would have had a fallout in terms of radicals trying to run the country in their way (as seen in run up to Swat) as there can never be any compromise with the more tolerant and forward thinking society of Pakistan which was getting "corrupted". It was just a matter of time. The wisest thing was that Pakistan came in on its own with support to it from others, otherwise the situation would have seen Pakistan isolated and still fighting.