Pak-US ties should not be viewed only through Afghan or Indian lens: FM Qureshi

[INDIAPOSITIVE]

Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi said on Saturday that the relations between the United States and Pakistan should not be seen only through the perspective of the Afghan issue or the ties with India.

Talking to media in Multan after returning from his 10-day visit to the US, Qureshi said he had tried to make his American counterparts realise that "it will not be appropriate to view our relations going as far back as seven decades from the Afghan perspective or the Indian lens".

Editorial: US should take up Pakistan's offer for help in Afghan dialogue instead of browbeating

He said regional situations evolve and requirements change, but Pakistan's contribution for peace and stability in the region should be acknowledged.

Qureshi, who met US Secretary of State Michael Pompeo and National Security Adviser John Bolton in Washington on Tuesday, said it would be wrong to expect that all differences between the US and Pakistan could be resolved in one day.

He said while it was not possible to cover the entire journey in one sitting, the Foreign Office will continue its efforts to represent the country effectively on international fora.

The foreign minister said he had neither gone to the US to seek aid nor was it part of any of the talks. He iterated that the funds for Pakistan cancelled by Washington earlier this year were "reimbursement, not aid".

He said foreign affairs is a component of government policy for which discussions should be held regardless of political differences, in the interest of the federation.

In response to a question regarding the arrest of PML-N president and opposition leader Shahbaz Sharif, Qureshi said the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) is an independent institution, which had taken the action after investigation.

He said it wasn't the PTI government that had instituted the case against Sharif, adding that "we have to respect the courts".


https://www.dawn.com/news/1437228/p...only-through-afghan-or-indian-lens-fm-qureshi

 

[maximuswarrior]

Reimbursement should be demanded. It is our money. If that US doesn't pay start charging them through supply routes.

As for the whole relationship thing, there ain't none.

To see how the US gets treated by its own lackeys just have a look at India. It defies every order and goes ahead with whatever is required. From S-400 deal to oil from Iran and the UN vote against Israel. This is the kind of disrespect the US gets from its own lackey. A lackey the US has pampered throughout the years.

 

[IceCold]

The foreign minister said he had neither gone to the US to seek aid nor was it part of any of the talks. He iterated that the funds for Pakistan cancelled by Washington earlier this year were "reimbursement, not aid".

@Jackdaws @maximuswarrior So jack the other day you and others kept jumping on doctored titles by the media over FM asking for aid and i kept saying there is no such thing said. What do you have to say now.

 

[Jackdaws]

@Jackdaws @maximuswarrior So jack the other day you and others kept jumping on doctored titles by the media over FM asking for aid and i kept saying there is no such thing said. What do you have to say now.

I have to say that considering that Minister had to come and specify - shows that the latest statement might be a face saving one.

 

[cloud4000]

I have to say that considering that Minister had to come and specify - shows that the latest statement might be a face saving one.

It's possible he's mixing "aid" with "reimbursement". Not the first time this has happened.

To see how the US gets treated by its own lackeys just have a look at India. It defies every order and goes ahead with whatever is required. From S-400 deal to oil from Iran and the UN vote against Israel. This is the kind of disrespect the US gets from its own lackey. A lackey the US has pampered throughout the years.

You are mistaking India for Pakistan. India was never anyone's lackey.

 

[IceCold]

I have to say that considering that Minister had to come and specify - shows that the latest statement might be a face saving one.

Face saving alright but for someone else it seems

 

[Jackdaws]

Face saving alright but for someone else it seems

Lol. I doubt anyone else is in the doldrums to need face saving.

 

[Rollno21]

Reimbursement should be demanded. It is our money. If that US doesn't pay start charging them through supply routes.
.

What reimbursement ?

 

[Ryuzaki]

What reimbursement ?

Pakistanis don't seem to realise that fighting terrorists/extremists/militants within the boundaries of a nation state is a core responsibility for the nation state.They want to be paid for this basic task.

 

[Vapnope]

Pakistanis don't seem to realise that fighting terrorists/extremists/militants within the boundaries of a nation state is a core responsibility for the nation state.They want to be paid for this basic task.

Tell me more about CSF.. I will wait.

 

[Dubious]

Pakistanis don't seem to realise that fighting terrorists/extremists/militants within the boundaries of a nation state is a core responsibility for the nation state.They want to be paid for this basic task.

When the fighting started it was America who asked our help and agreed to pay for it...Just a business deal that they are failing to honor

 

[thinkingcap81]

To see how the US gets treated by its own lackeys just have a look at India. It defies every order and goes ahead with whatever is required. From S-400 deal to oil from Iran and the UN vote against Israel. This is the kind of disrespect the US gets from its own lackey. A lackey the US has pampered throughout the years.

On one hand you say that we are a lackey while on the other hand you say that we successfully oppose US diktats. A true lackey cannot oppose important issues so strongly. Indo-US relationship is tilted towards the US, but we are much better than Pakistan which is relatively far more dependent on both China and US.

 

[Tom M]

When the fighting started it was America who asked our help and agreed to pay for it...Just a business deal that they are failing to honor

I think you guy's are interpreting it totally wrong.

Please read the definition CSF as per their law;

Coalition Support Funds (CSF) refers to money from the Defense Emergency Response Fund (DERF) that is eligible to be used to reimburse coalition partners for logistical and military support to U.S. military operations. Initially created by the Defense Appropriations Act for FY 2002, the law permitted DERF money to be available for payments to Pakistan and Jordan for logistical and military support provided to U.S. military operations related to Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan. These payments were authorized to be made in amounts determined as appropriate by the Secretary of Defense with documentation deemed adequate by the Secretary. Prior to any allocation of funds, the Defense Department was required to notify Congress at least 15 days in advance. At the onset of the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, President Bush also requested these funds be used to reimburse allied nations for support of operations in Iraq, authority that Congress granted in the Supplemental Appropriations Act for FY 2003. The FY2006 NDAA authorized reimbursements for any “key” coalition country offering support for the wars in Afghanistan or Iraq was eligible for CSF. These funds have been drawn from the Defense Operations and Management account. Finally, the law required the Secretary of Defense to consult with the Director of OMB, and receive concurrence from the Secretary of State before providing funds to allies. The FY2017 NDAA authorizes $1.1 billion to reimburse coalition partners for their contributions to U.S. operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria. Of the $900 million available for Pakistan, $400 million is contingent on Pakistan taking steps against the Haqqani network and Pakistan not using its military to persecute minority groups seeking political or religious freedom.

http://securityassistance.org/content/coalition support funds

So Pakistan taking action against terrorists within your country doesn't fall under this category, I guess. But I thing Pakistan is fully entitled to ask the money from them for using your roads and logistics that you provide their war efforts in Afghanistan. P.S: it is my personal opinion though, so please don't mind.

 

[IceCold]

Pakistanis don't seem to realise that fighting terrorists/extremists/militants within the boundaries of a nation state is a core responsibility for the nation state.They want to be paid for this basic task.

Stop being Mr. Knowitall and try to read a little before you lot embarrass yourself as usual. US owes the money because that was what was agreed upon. We provide support in logistics and many other areas and the cost incurred on that is reimbursed. Plain and simple. No US president before Trump actually called it aid because they knew CSF wasnt aid. It was only trump the fool who thought otherwise and he was reminded its not aid but the money that US owes to us for using our infrastructure and we will keep demanding it.
US can very well stop using Pakistani logistics and keep its payments but the US cannot have its cake and eat it too.