The U.S. and Pakistan: Can This Marriage Be Saved?

[Edevelop]

There is no oil and gas in Pakistan. The water issue is becoming more pronounced. About 40 percent of population is living below the poverty line. Likewise, 40 percent of the population is uneducated. While some of our parliamentarians have fake degrees, the Chief Minister of Balochistan has remarked that a “degree is a degree, irrespective of its genuineness”. But, with so many setbacks, why is the US so interested in Pakistan?

At the time of independence in 1947, the world was ruled by two blocks: Western and Eastern. The Eastern Bloc comprised communist countries with unified command of armed forces maintained as Warsaw Pact. The Western consisted of capitalist countries with the unified command of Nato. Pakistan became part of the Western Bloc. Being a newly-born country, it became a source of attraction for the USA, who was in the lead in the power struggle against the Soviet Union that led the Eastern Bloc. The Americans set their goal to strengthen Pakistan so as to fight against the communists.

The Americans were sure that Pakistan being an Islamic country would get into battle with it, purely on the grounds of faith, believers vs. non-believers. Thus, Baghdad Pact - later known as Cento and Seato - was signed by Pakistan as Military Pact; for which it received military aid from the US. World War II vintage equipment was replaced and needs of the armed forces were modernised. The Kashmir dispute led to the Indo-Pak war in 1965 after which the Americans imposed sanctions on Pakistan for using these weapons in self-defence. They took the plea that the military aid was meant to be used against the Soviet Union and not India. This was the first setback in our relationship with the US. It made us look towards China, who replaced all equipment destroyed or damaged in 1965 war, free of cost. Pakistan did not learn from the experience and again fell into USA’s lap.
The US continued to gain ground in its relationship with India and supported it, when in 1971 India attacked East Pakistan in support of Mukti Bahini, thus dismembering Pakistan. In spite of being our allies, the US did not help us.

The Soviets attacked Afghanistan in 1979. In order to defend our borders Pakistan helped Afghanistan by raising a sizeable force of mujahideen. Finding advantage in it, the US again started to provide military aid to Pakistan. Thus, came in military equipment to the ISI, who was controlling the war. All supplies, including funds for the war in Afghanistan, were handed over to the ISI; a firm policy by General Zia! The US was not allowed to establish direct contact with the mujahideen.
When India exploded a nuclear device in 1974, Bhutto pledged to go nuclear. By the time the Soviets withdrew, Pakistan had become a nuclear power. Long live Dr A.Q. Khan and his team of scientists!

The crucial question is: Why did the US allow Pakistan to make the bomb? Possibly, because it did not expect that Pakistan could make it. When India exploded nuclear device on May 11 and 13, 1998, Mian Nawaz Sharif, in spite of immense international pressure, boldly went ahead and exploded nuclear device on May 28 and 30, 1998. Our atomic wizards pursued the missile programme and today, no target worth the name in India is out of their range. We have well defined and well defended nuclear assets. Our command system has ensured that they remain in safe hands.
To make India powerful to contain China, it wants to denuclearise Pakistan. And the only way to do it is to weaken our army and ISI. After remaining our ally for so long, the US is hitting us in the back. Our leadership must remain firm in guarding our interests. The 18 million people of Pakistan will firmly stand behind it.
The writer is a retired major general and managing director of Pakistan Education Network (A Project of Ministry of Education).

American interest in Pakistan and why? | The Nation

 

[sur]

Power corridors in America are all either directly controlled by -or- are slaves to zionists,,, There is nothing called "American Interest" Per Se ,,, end of story.

 

[kawaraj]

nice feed, if you look at the trend in a world where we believe in continuance, we can surely predict the American is push us to a FOE situation, or in other words, they are trying to make us out of enemy.

It's not our choice, when they decide in the recent years China is their ultimate enemy, they find they need reverse the playground in South Asia. Our strategists should work with the gov and army to find a solution to deal with a hard time.

 

[Zarvan]

The top U.S. military officer said Thursday that ties between the U.S. and Pakistan were on the "road to recovery" and that he hoped to resolve differences by mid-May to allow the reopening of supply lines for troops into neighboring Afghanistan.
Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, didn't say whether any agreements emerged from talks among the two nations' top commanders Wednesday in Islamabad.
The talks involved James Mattis, the senior U.S. military officer for the region, and John Allen, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan. The two met Pakistan army chief Ashfaq Parvez Kayani in the first such session since relations were ruptured when US helicopters accidentally killed 24 Pakistani soldiers in an air strike in November.
Mattis departed Pakistan on Thursday, the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad said in a statement that provided few details of the talks.
Dempsey said the start of the warm weather fighting season in Afghanistan and the planned withdrawal this year of 23,000 US troops, along with equipment, added to the urgency of reaching a deal to reopen overland supply routes through Pakistan.
Pakistan shut the routes after the November air strike, forcing the U.S. and its NATO allies to find alternative routes. Pakistan also suspended high-level civilian and diplomatic meetings with U.S. officials and ejected the U.S. from an air base it had used to launch drone strikes.
Click here to read more on this story from The Wall Street. Journal.


Read more: Top US Military Officer Says Ties Between US And Pakistan On 'road To Recovery' | Fox News

 

[Icewolf]

Glad that FOX news wrote this.

 

[Respect4Respect01]

the truth is that these ties will not recover unless usa stops drone attacks and stop sending Raymond Davis s to our country. One thing that bothers most to Pakistanis is that usa is backing up our corrupt politicians, and if you think carefully then Pakistanis are right to be against usa's policies.

 

[Respect4Respect01]

they want to control entire Asia through Pakistan.

 

[CENTCOM]

The answer to the question above is quite simple and does not require the help of conspiracy theories. We reiterate what President Obama and Prime Minister Gilani said to each other during their recent meeting in Seoul. President Obama said, “We are both interested in a stable and secure Afghanistan and a stable and secure region.” Prime Minister Gilani said, “We are committed to fighting against extremism. We want stability in Afghanistan and Pakistan. We want to work together with you.” It is interesting to note that the main focus of this article is to suggest hidden motives and personal gain behind the U.S. presence in the region. It is quite obvious that the article is focused on presenting conspiracy theories, and fails to highlight the facts in regards to our partnership. Is it not a fact that we have lost thousands of brave soldiers in fighting terrorism on both sides of the border? Is it not a fact that we have been able to kill or capture some of the top terrorist leaders through our combined efforts? Is it not a fact that the U.S donated graciously during the deadly earthquakes of 2005? Is it not a fact that the U.S. contributed heavily during the rescue efforts of the devastating floods of 2010? Does it not become obvious that our relationship is built upon shared commitment, and holds mutual respect? Do we not see that it’s our common stance against terrorism that binds us together? Therefore, we must remember that the conspiracy theorists will continue to present conspiracy theories in order to support their claims. We must not allow those theories to plague our minds and force us into drawing a false conclusion.

MAJ Nevers,
DET, United States Central Command
U.S. Central Command

 

[airmarshal]

The answer to the question above is quite simple and does not require the help of conspiracy theories. We reiterate what President Obama and Prime Minister Gilani said to each other during their recent meeting in Seoul. President Obama said, “We are both interested in a stable and secure Afghanistan and a stable and secure region.” Prime Minister Gilani said, “We are committed to fighting against extremism. We want stability in Afghanistan and Pakistan. We want to work together with you.” It is interesting to note that the main focus of this article is to suggest hidden motives and personal gain behind the U.S. presence in the region. It is quite obvious that the article is focused on presenting conspiracy theories, and fails to highlight the facts in regards to our partnership. Is it not a fact that we have lost thousands of brave soldiers in fighting terrorism on both sides of the border? Is it not a fact that we have been able to kill or capture some of the top terrorist leaders through our combined efforts? Is it not a fact that the U.S donated graciously during the deadly earthquakes of 2005? Is it not a fact that the U.S. contributed heavily during the rescue efforts of the devastating floods of 2010? Does it not become obvious that our relationship is built upon shared commitment, and holds mutual respect? Do we not see that it’s our common stance against terrorism that binds us together? Therefore, we must remember that the conspiracy theorists will continue to present conspiracy theories in order to support their claims. We must not allow those theories to plague our minds and force us into drawing a false conclusion.

MAJ Nevers,
DET, United States Central Command
U.S. Central Command

Very well said. The quoted article seems rubbish to me. Nations can only build their relationship based on mutual trust and understanding. The conspiracy theories gain credence when incidents like Salala checkpost, frequent drone strikes and spies in shape and form of diplomats are arrested while killing on a busy road.
US is admired and respected as a model of human development, intellectual and cultural advancement. Where you stumble is when you take actions that are not perceived as respecting and considering the sensibilities of other nations.
While people do criticize US for its actions, there are many implied questions that government in Pakistan has to answer before anyone form US involved.
I hope my response will taken positively.

 

[Meengla]

Power corridors in America are all either directly controlled by -or- are slaves to zionists,,, There is nothing called "American Interest" Per Se ,,, end of story.

I don't agree with this. Indeed, the Israel Lobby drives much of American policies when it can influence Israel's own regional interests and those policies are limited to north-east Africa, eastern Mediterranean, and of course the Middle East. Pakistan would have no conflict with the Israelis except the potential of Pakistan providing some kind of 'nuclear umbrella', the so-called 'Islamic Bomb' to other Muslim countries... United States is a global power. Israel couldn't care less of the US policies in most of Africa, Latin America, and Asia-Pacific.

As to what are the true American interests in Pakistan? I don't know. I have asked this several times in this forum as a 'million dollar question: Are the Americans in Afghanistan to contain terrorism or to contain China? Yes, I know, there could be shades of grey: Achieve both goals. I don't think I have found any convincing arguments to support or rubbish any of the two positions.

 

[airmarshal]

I don't agree with this. Indeed, the Israel Lobby drives much of American policies when it can influence Israel's own regional interests and those policies are limited to north-east Africa, eastern Mediterranean, and of course the Middle East. Pakistan would have no conflict with the Israelis except the potential of Pakistan providing some kind of 'nuclear umbrella', the so-called 'Islamic Bomb' to other Muslim countries... United States is a global power. Israel couldn't care less of the US policies in most of Africa, Latin America, and Asia-Pacific.

As to what are the true American interests in Pakistan? I don't know. I have asked this several times in this forum as a 'million dollar question: Are the Americans in Afghanistan to contain terrorism or to contain China? Yes, I know, there could be shades of grey: Achieve both goals. I don't think I have found any convincing arguments to support or rubbish any of the two positions.

Partially agree. You can very clearly see that American foreign policy in the Middle East is subservient to Israel's interests. It does not effect Israel what happens in Africa or somewhere else so you see US policies on their own. But you will have to agree that US is in effect underwriting Israeli occupation of Palestinian and Syrian lands. The two state solution is dead and buried and the status quo of occupation is only acceptable solution, forced upon people reluctant to accept occupation. This will create serious problems in Middle East and long term Israeli interests as well. Two state solution is only a lip service now. Potential adventure against Iran points to Israel's interest being paramount in US policy calculus.

 

[naughty boy]

There is no oil and gas in Pakistan. The water issue is becoming more pronounced. About 40 percent of population is living below the poverty line. Likewise, 40 percent of the population is uneducated. While some of our parliamentarians have fake degrees, the Chief Minister of Balochistan has remarked that a “degree is a degree, irrespective of its genuineness”. But, with so many setbacks, why is the US so interested in Pakistan?

At the time of independence in 1947, the world was ruled by two blocks: Western and Eastern. The Eastern Bloc comprised communist countries with unified command of armed forces maintained as Warsaw Pact. The Western consisted of capitalist countries with the unified command of Nato. Pakistan became part of the Western Bloc. Being a newly-born country, it became a source of attraction for the USA, who was in the lead in the power struggle against the Soviet Union that led the Eastern Bloc. The Americans set their goal to strengthen Pakistan so as to fight against the communists.

The Americans were sure that Pakistan being an Islamic country would get into battle with it, purely on the grounds of faith, believers vs. non-believers. Thus, Baghdad Pact - later known as Cento and Seato - was signed by Pakistan as Military Pact; for which it received military aid from the US. World War II vintage equipment was replaced and needs of the armed forces were modernised. The Kashmir dispute led to the Indo-Pak war in 1965 after which the Americans imposed sanctions on Pakistan for using these weapons in self-defence. They took the plea that the military aid was meant to be used against the Soviet Union and not India. This was the first setback in our relationship with the US. It made us look towards China, who replaced all equipment destroyed or damaged in 1965 war, free of cost. Pakistan did not learn from the experience and again fell into USA’s lap.
The US continued to gain ground in its relationship with India and supported it, when in 1971 India attacked East Pakistan in support of Mukti Bahini, thus dismembering Pakistan. In spite of being our allies, the US did not help us.

The Soviets attacked Afghanistan in 1979. In order to defend our borders Pakistan helped Afghanistan by raising a sizeable force of mujahideen. Finding advantage in it, the US again started to provide military aid to Pakistan. Thus, came in military equipment to the ISI, who was controlling the war. All supplies, including funds for the war in Afghanistan, were handed over to the ISI; a firm policy by General Zia! The US was not allowed to establish direct contact with the mujahideen.
When India exploded a nuclear device in 1974, Bhutto pledged to go nuclear. By the time the Soviets withdrew, Pakistan had become a nuclear power. Long live Dr A.Q. Khan and his team of scientists!

The crucial question is: Why did the US allow Pakistan to make the bomb? Possibly, because it did not expect that Pakistan could make it. When India exploded nuclear device on May 11 and 13, 1998, Mian Nawaz Sharif, in spite of immense international pressure, boldly went ahead and exploded nuclear device on May 28 and 30, 1998. Our atomic wizards pursued the missile programme and today, no target worth the name in India is out of their range. We have well defined and well defended nuclear assets. Our command system has ensured that they remain in safe hands.
To make India powerful to contain China, it wants to denuclearise Pakistan. And the only way to do it is to weaken our army and ISI. After remaining our ally for so long, the US is hitting us in the back. Our leadership must remain firm in guarding our interests. The 18 million people of Pakistan will firmly stand behind it.
The writer is a retired major general and managing director of Pakistan Education Network (A Project of Ministry of Education).

American interest in Pakistan and why? | The Nation

180 million

 

[Sania Saleem]

US Self-contradictory Approach towards Pakistan

While joint session of the Pakistani parliament has been reviewing its relationship with the United States, and after the positive meeting between the President Obama and Prime Minister Gilani in Soul.. Original Post...

 

[lem34]

Obvious why. For America to succeed in its designs in our neighbourhood it needs a compliant Pakistan. So on the one hand they want a compliant Pakistan on the other hand they are not prepared to look at Pakistan's concerns and sensibilities. Hence this confused approach which looks contradictory

 

[PERSIAN GOD KING]

They contradict themselves in everything they do! this is not a surprised lol