What's new

Obama to triple Pakistan aid to cripple terror

Neo

RETIRED

New Recruit

Joined
Nov 1, 2005
Messages
18
Reaction score
0

15 Jan 2009

NEW DELHI: The Obama administration plans to triple non-military aid to Pakistan in exchange for commitments on fighting terror from the Pakistan
government.


The aim is to use the aid as leverage to get further commitments on terror from the Pakistan government and at the same time fortify the position of the civilian government. This was stated by secretary of state designate Hillary Rodham Clinton. She told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that the issue is not just about denying al-Qaeda and other extremist groups safe haven, but also to persuade Afghanistan and Pakistan that their security and their future is also at risk.

The Obama administration has indicated that it is planning a review of the Afghanistan policy which would have an impact on Pakistan.

Ms Clinton who was testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee was quoted as saying that the administration planned to separate military and non military aid to Pakistan.

“The tripling of the non-military aid is intended to provide resources that will both support the Pakistani people but also give some tools to the democratically-elected government to try to start producing results for the people of Pakistan,” she said. She added that the administration would look at whether it can ``condition some of that on the commitment for counter-terrorism missions also.’’ She said the new administration would support a legislation for increasing non military aid to Pakistan.

But even as the Obama administration looks at giving non-military aid to Pakistan, the country has a record of diverting funds away from schemes and programmes it is originally meant for. For example, the Musharraf government was accused of diverting money meant for the campaign against al-Qaeda and Taliban to buying weapons against India.

A number of reports had surfaced last year saying that the $5 billion that was given to Pakistan was diverted to bolster the Pakistani military and finance weapons systems targeted against India.
 
.
Neo you forget to highlight this also:

But even as the Obama administration looks at giving non-military aid to Pakistan, the country has a record of diverting funds away from schemes and programmes it is originally meant for. For example, the Musharraf government was accused of diverting money meant for the campaign against al-Qaeda and Taliban to buying weapons against India.

A number of reports had surfaced last year saying that the $5 billion that was given to Pakistan was diverted to bolster the Pakistani military and finance weapons systems targeted against India.
 
.
Neo you forget to highlight this also:

But even as the Obama administration looks at giving non-military aid to Pakistan, the country has a record of diverting funds away from schemes and programmes it is originally meant for. For example, the Musharraf government was accused of diverting money meant for the campaign against al-Qaeda and Taliban to buying weapons against India.

A number of reports had surfaced last year saying that the $5 billion that was given to Pakistan was diverted to bolster the Pakistani military and finance weapons systems targeted against India.
Maybe you should check source link :woot::devil:
 
.
Neo you forget to highlight this also:

But even as the Obama administration looks at giving non-military aid to Pakistan, the country has a record of diverting funds away from schemes and programmes it is originally meant for. For example, the Musharraf government was accused of diverting money meant for the campaign against al-Qaeda and Taliban to buying weapons against India.

A number of reports had surfaced last year saying that the $5 billion that was given to Pakistan was diverted to bolster the Pakistani military and finance weapons systems targeted against India.

I highlighted the part that actually matters, us aid coming to Pakistan, period!

The claim about diverting aid to buy weapons was made by Neo-cons but never proven right. Else I can only conclude that Obama is just another idiot wasting his money on Pakistan and we're way too smart to fool them again. :angel:
 
.
Neo you forget to highlight this also:

But even as the Obama administration looks at giving non-military aid to Pakistan, the country has a record of diverting funds away from schemes and programmes it is originally meant for. For example, the Musharraf government was accused of diverting money meant for the campaign against al-Qaeda and Taliban to buying weapons against India.

A number of reports had surfaced last year saying that the $5 billion that was given to Pakistan was diverted to bolster the Pakistani military and finance weapons systems targeted against India.

Musharaff is a military man, he served in the Pakistani army for a long long time.

Asif Ali Zardari is not a military man he never served in the Pakistani army. This new government is a democratic-elected government.
 
.
Neo you forget to highlight this also:

But even as the Obama administration looks at giving non-military aid to Pakistan, the country has a record of diverting funds away from schemes and programmes it is originally meant for. For example, the Musharraf government was accused of diverting money meant for the campaign against al-Qaeda and Taliban to buying weapons against India.

A number of reports had surfaced last year saying that the $5 billion that was given to Pakistan was diverted to bolster the Pakistani military and finance weapons systems targeted against India.

yes many reports but based on wat? rumors? or propagandas?
its becoming repetitive but i hope u know total cost which pak had to incur coz of this so called WoT was $34.5bn which is 7 times more than those 5bn u are talking about. i guess we have got enough money to atleast buy weapons for our forces to defend us against any indian agression. this american war started 8yrs back but we have been buyin weapons since 1947.
 
.
Well to be honest everything Hillary has to say about Pakistan needs to be taken with a whole lot dose of salt. We know the clinton family and they trends towards India and against Pakistan.
Seriously as Pakistani at least i have no hope with this regime of the US, all this is just another showoff and far from reality. Even the ex-president Musharraf said that US did not committed to its promises, certainly don't expect any from this one.
 
.
Maybe if the indians stopped threatening pakistan the funds would not be diverted

And also when your threatening neighbour is on a buying spree for the latest weapons.
what would u expect from GoP
 
Last edited by a moderator:
. .
I will like to be educated on the AID from Islamic point of view. Are AID and Zakat equivalent? If so, can Zakat/Aid be accepted from any sorce or there are some conditions? Does USA qualify to provide aid to Pakistan under Islamic laws?

RK
 
.

The bill that seeks to triple American aid to Pakistan, to make it $1.5 billion annually, is likely to become law after it is passed by the US Senate. The incoming chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senator John Kerry, said on Tuesday that he would push it “because Pakistan has a huge economic crisis. If anything winds up being one of the triggers for chaos in the country, it’s going to be the economic implosion, as much as anything else”.

The Pakistan aid bill that Senator Joseph Biden authored last year with Republican Senator Richard Lugar would give Pakistan non-military aid for five years, extendable for another five, making clear that the country’s real need was economic and not military. Mr Biden, who was recently in Pakistan and Afghanistan, will spearhead President Barack Obama’s foreign policy as a powerful vice president. The money will help improve schools, build clinics, drill wells and reform police services in Pakistan. Senator Obama too had signed the Pakistan bill before being elected as President of the United States.

Pakistan is in the grip of passions emphasising sovereignty and defiance but the logic of economic development has to dawn here sooner or later. There are two possible strands to the American “package”. The first is to be looked for in President-elect Obama’s statements in the past. The lowest point was when he thought he could allow attacks into Pakistan if Pakistan was unable to cope with Al Qaeda on its territory. He plans to reduce America’s troops in Iraq and bring more of them to Afghanistan to face up to Al Qaeda. However, after his visit to Afghanistan he has abstained from making categorical statements about attacking inside Pakistan.

The second strand is Mr Biden’s and that is the one more likely to be adopted by the realists in Washington. According to Pakistan’s leading economist Mr Shahid Javed Burki, Mr Biden has focused on the need “to economically stabilise the second largest Muslim country in the world”. The money will be spent in such a way as to take economic growth to the poorer segments of the population and poorer regions of the country. According to Burki: “Economic deprivation is a major reason for growing extremism in the Muslim world, and Pakistan is central to the problem of Islamic extremism, and Pakistan does not have resources of its own to get the country’s economy moving in the right direction”.

There will hopefully be little opposition in Pakistan to this approach to the problem of terrorism. In a moment of rage, most people tend to forget about the economy. They want radical changes of policy without making it clear how replacements for old dependencies can be found. It is known to everyone that the people and the industries in Pakistan are suffering because of the government’s inability to pay for power production. Pakistan has run from pillar to post asking for cash to bail out a clearly collapsing economy but has not found many donors even after going under an IMF programme for confidence-building.

It is easy to ordain in a fiery column that Pakistan should look for “other friends” but no one points out where to go to find someone willing to part with the kind of money America is willing to spend on Pakistan. The crux of the problem is our refusal to grasp the danger extremism and terrorism pose to us and the world. If the Biden-Lugar money is tainted in our minds because it will force us to “fight our own people”, let us not forget that the entire world including China supports America’s war against terrorism without the willingness to give us the money we need.

We will, of course, be brought under pressure on fighting terrorism and possibly on the AQ Khan issue, but that is not the problem we should worry about. We should start worrying about our ability to spend the money we get for development. The state is at the bottom of its capacity of service-delivery. The money we got during the Musharraf era — which gave us the biggest provincial development outlays in history — was not well spent. Education and health remained mired and, in the case of some projects, the funds had to be returned to the lending multilaterals.

Even if the attainment of national honour is the priority, it can’t be realised without economic development at rates that give us the extra cash to spend on the army. Islamabad is being angrily reprimanded by the TV channels for decorating US Assistant Secretary of State Richard Boucher and Vice President-elect Joseph Biden “while Gaza burns”, but the fact is that Pakistan has to survive economically in order to have the capacity to face up to any challenges, including the one in Gaza.
 
.
I will like to be educated on the AID from Islamic point of view. Are AID and Zakat equivalent? If so, can Zakat/Aid be accepted from any sorce or there are some conditions? Does USA qualify to provide aid to Pakistan under Islamic laws?

RK

Zakat is given and not paid back.......aid is the same as a loan,you gotta pay it back.
 
.
Zakat is given and not paid back.......aid is the same as a loan,you gotta pay it back.

I wonder how much interst will US charge on this aid.

So Zardari plans to put this paying back with interst aid on the shoulder of future Presidents of Pakistan :frown:
 
.
Neo you forget to highlight this also:

But even as the Obama administration looks at giving non-military aid to Pakistan, the country has a record of diverting funds away from schemes and programmes it is originally meant for. For example, the Musharraf government was accused of diverting money meant for the campaign against al-Qaeda and Taliban to buying weapons against India.

A number of reports had surfaced last year saying that the $5 billion that was given to Pakistan was diverted to bolster the Pakistani military and finance weapons systems targeted against India.

Wat is it to you jeypore ?? :crazy: and u speak as u know it first hand haha dude shall we make u inchargre of Pak's funds and how they should be handled stop itching your self and chill we know wat we are doing its not your boys that are dieing on the wot thankyou very much good day ! :disagree::disagree:
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom