What's new

Not waiting for phone call from Biden, says PM Imran

Zarvan

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
54,470
Reaction score
87
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Not waiting for phone call from Biden, says PM Imran

Dawn.comPublished August 12, 2021 - Updated about a minute ago

Prime Minister Imran Khan  foreign journalists at his home in Islamabad. — DawnNewsTV

Prime Minister Imran Khan foreign journalists at his home in Islamabad. — DawnNewsTV

Prime Minister Imran Khan, in a wide-ranging talk with foreign journalists at his residence on Wednesday night, said he was not really "waiting" for a phone call from US President Joe Biden.

"I keep hearing that President Biden hasn't called me. It's his business. It's not like I am waiting for any phone call," he said in response to a question from a Reuters journalist.


The prime minister's comments come days after National Security Adviser Moeed Yusuf stated that Pakistan has other options if Biden continues to ignore the country’s leadership.

“The president of the United States hasn’t spoken to the prime minister of such an important country who the US itself says is make-or-break in some cases, in some ways, in Afghanistan — we struggle to understand the signal, right?” Yusuf had told The Financial Times in an interview.

“We’ve been told every time that … [the phone call] will happen, it’s technical reasons or whatever. But frankly, people don’t believe it,” he had said. “If a phone call is a concession, if a security relationship is a concession, Pakistan has options,” he had added, refusing to elaborate.

During the interaction with the foreign media, the prime minister talked about the current situation in Afghanistan, its impact on Pakistan, and the withdrawal of US troops from the war-torn country.

"The hasty way in which the Americans left, if they wanted a political settlement then common sense dictates that [you negotiate] from a position of strength," he said, adding that the US was now blaming Pakistan when they no longer had any leverage.

"I think the Americans have decided that India is a strategic partner. Maybe that's why Pakistan is being treated differently. Pakistan is just considered to be useful only in the context of settling this mess."

The premier explained that Afghanistan was an ethnically diverse population so if the Taliban tried to take over and one ethnic group tried to impose itself over the others, it would lead to "constant unrest and that isn't what Pakistan wants".
He reiterated Pakistan would be affected by that unrest.

"We have a larger Pakhun population here in Pakistan than in Afghanistan and they're probably the most xenophobic people on earth. They fight each other normally but when it's an outside [force], they all get together."

Pakistan's entry in the US-led war on terror in 2001 led to a "civil war in the tribal areas", the prime minister said, explaining that as a result, the militant organisations formed to wage Jihad against the Soviet Union turned against Pakistan.

"Hence it's in Pakistan's interest that there is a political settlement and all factions come [together to form] a government that represents everyone."

'Strategic depth'
Responding to a question on the extent of Pakistani influence over the Taliban, the premier said that even back in 2001, when Pakistan had recognised the Taliban government and was "most influential", the group had still refused to hand over Osama bin Laden.

"So even then Pakistan's influence was not all-encompassing."

He said that anyone who thought Afghanistan could be controlled from outside "doesn't understand the character of the Afghan people", adding that the people could not be made "puppets".

"If I was a Pakistani policymaker in the 90s, I would not have encouraged this idea of strategic depth which was Pakistan's policy at the time.

"It is very understandable because India, seven times the size of Pakistan, was a hostile eastern neighbour and the Pakistani security setup was always worried about facing hostilities on two fronts so there was always an attempt to have a pro-Pakistan government in Afghanistan," he said.

Prime Minister Imran Khan emphasised that attempting to influence the Afghan government would not work since the Afghan population would not accept it and any perception of being controlled from outside would lead to a loss of credibility.
"Pakistan should work with any government that is selected by the people of Afghanistan."

Hence, the PTI government's policy was to engage with all Afghan factions, hold no favourites and have a readiness to work whichever government comes into power.

Attitude of Afghan govt
Prime Minister Imran Khan said he had tried to persuade the senior Taliban leadership during their visit to Pakistan earlier this year to come to a political settlement but they had refused to talk to President Ashraf Ghani.

He said he had suggested an interim government in 2019 before the Afghanistan presidential election but "the Afghan government was very critical about this remark [...] Once President Ghani got elected and the Taliban were excluded, it was always going to be a problem from then onwards since he insisted they talk to him while they didn't recognise him or the elections".

"Now the Afghan government is extremely critical about Pakistan [and] they think we have some magical powers that we will make the Taliban do whatever we want [them] to do," the premier said, adding that the Afghan government didn't realise that Pakistan's leverage was "minuscule and diminished" since the American withdrawal.

He said it became extremely difficult to persuade the Taliban once the US gave a date for withdrawal and the Afghan government was now blaming Pakistan for the situation in Afghanistan.

"They somehow think Pakistan has supernatural powers [and that] we are a superpower plus which has such power that the 60,000 to 70,000 Taliban can take on 300,00 Afghan government troops with aircraft and modern weapons and somehow we have the power to make them (Taliban) win."

The prime minister noted that the Afghan government's posturing was aimed at bringing the US back into Afghanistan.
"They want the Americans to intervene again but they've been here for 20 years so what will they do now which they didn't do in 20 years?" he questioned.

The prime minister reiterated that Pakistan had made it clear "our soil will not be used [for operations in Afghanistan] so that we again get embroiled in an Afghan civil war" and it did not want military bases in its territory.

"As far as I know after [August] 31, the Americans are going to stop all sorts of [operations], even air attacks in Afghanistan," he said.

Not waiting for phone call from Biden, says PM Imran - Pakistan - DAWN.COM
 
.
This iteration of "US not making calls" would rest our case that we were serious, while US hadn't iota of care for Afghanistan or for peace. The failure to take a key ally into confidence while withdrawing is epic level incompetency on behalf of US administration.
 
Last edited:
. . .
This iteration of US not making calls would rest pour case that we were serious, while US hadn't iota of care for Afghanistan or for peace. The failure to take a key ally into confidence while withdrawing is epic level incompetency on behalf of US administration.

The backchannels are still working quite well. We just need to be patient, that is all.
 
.
This iteration of US not making calls would rest pour case that we were serious, while US hadn't iota of care for Afghanistan or for peace. The failure to take a key ally into confidence while withdrawing is epic level incompetency on behalf of US administration.
I think you are not following up ..they are talking to relevant authorities ...US defense secretary has talked to COAS ...there foreign secretary already spoke to SMQ ..
 
.
Posturing. In all honesty, it would be great for us if we had good enough relations with the US administration.

There’s a reason our national security establishment has been on overdrive recently shoring up a “consensus” at home, briefing the government, opposition, and media separately. Meanwhile our top level security leadership and Moeed Yusuf are hard at work trying to secure a way forward in Washington.

IK has recently been in campaign mode, so I’d say this is definitely not worth taking seriously. It’s a statement meant for public consumption.
 
. . .
Posturing. In all honesty, it would be great for us if we had good enough relations with the US administration.

There’s a reason our national security establishment has been on overdrive recently shoring up a “consensus” at home, briefing the government, opposition, and media separately. Meanwhile our top level security leadership and Moeed Yusuf are hard at work trying to secure a way forward in Washington.

IK has recently been in campaign mode, so I’d say this is definitely not worth taking seriously. It’s a statement meant for public consumption.

Moe, Larry and Curly can only do so much. The effort here seems to demonize any and all perceived external factors to cover up the disastrously overplayed hand by Pakistan. That will fail.

However, having observed that, I am still sure that both countries will be able to find a workable way forward, simply because neither side has many alternative options that are as feasible.
 
.
i dont know ahy media is asking this question again and again from every pak official . first it was advisor not PM .
 
.
I think you are not following up ..they are talking to relevant authorities ...US defense secretary has talked to COAS ...there foreign secretary already spoke to SMQ ..
IK has recently been in campaign mode, so I’d say this is definitely not worth taking seriously. It’s a statement meant for public consumption.
I am all for settlement (backdoor or not) with US and in fact I dream that US can be part of CPEC. However, I think the seriousness of the matter requires head of states to talk or to be shown working with each other. Public perception matters here if not, then why to give 180 degree statements for consumption? It won't serve us.
 
Last edited:
.
i dont know ahy media is asking this question again and again from every pak official . first it was advisor not PM .

Media are paid to ask this question so they can get a response or not get a response and either way write a story suggesting that it's an issue. This creates doubt in the mind of feable minded folk, and that works to try and erode confidence in the govt position. The ultimate goal of their paymasters is to try and force a kneejerk reaction out of the govt and try to move the govt to provide support to US interests in Afghanistan.
I am all for settlement (backdoor or not) with US and in fact I dream that US can be part of CPEC. However, I think the seriousness of the matter requires head of states to talk or to be shown working with each other. Public perception matters here if not, then why to give 180 degree statements for consumption? It won't serve us.

These people are poison. They destroy everything they touch. We don't need US investment, we're better off poor.
 
.
Moe, Larry and Curly can only do so much. The effort here seems to demonize any and all perceived external factors to cover up the disastrously overplayed hand by Pakistan. That will fail.

However, having observed that, I am still sure that both countries will be able to find a workable way forward, simply because neither side has many alternative options that are as feasible.
Nice nicknames, lmao. But I wouldn’t be so confident as you. I’m not sure what the US needs from us if our leverage over the Taliban is not adequate enough to save Ghani. All it will take is their own face-saving, and some convenient opportunity for spite, and that will be us wrapped up for the foreseeable future.

Also, a more credible civilian leadership might have been able to better represent Pakistan’s position as a whole. This last minute consensus building is hasty and inadequate. Alas, at the risk of turning this into the usual bickering fest, I won’t say anything else on that final point. Biden knows us, which is why he doesn’t take IK up.
 
.
These people are poison. They destroy everything they touch. We don't need US investment, we're better off poor.
Public sector investment is good and key to safeguard Pakistan. The US government is not going to sabotage if Apple or Tesla or Amazon invest in Afghanistan through Pak for the Li and other rare earth materials. Plus it will check India, not to support insurgents to attack in Baluchistan.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom