What's new

U.S. bristles at stiff Pakistani NATO fees

it will never open if opened hope daily torched 50-60 trucks make them sick again :lol:

Are you aware that all trucks are probably insured by pakistan companies? You burn a truck and it is you who bears the loss. Nevertheless, the 'solution' you are suggesting of deliberately torching supplies is a very wicked and disgusting one at that.
 
You can laugh all you want; the payment is for safe delivery, so any losses are Pakistan's alone.

i hope all will be torched and have 0 payment and 0% delivery .its make me happy .and from now i have no problem if they start burn then from karachi port to torkham daily every corner of pakistan as long as none of them saved cross border and if any case they cross afghan taliban will take care rest .problem is USA pay milli0ons to afghan taliban for safe ways lolz :lol:

Are you aware that all trucks are probably insured by pakistan companies? You burn a truck and it is you who bears the loss. Nevertheless, the 'solution' you are suggesting of deliberately torching supplies is a very wicked and disgusting one at that.

if we torch 500 of them rest will never transport or refuse to work of supply problem solved .
 
Ask for the moon and settle for the stars.

That is what Pakistan is doing or atleast hoping to do.
Hey!!! I guess U mistaken ...We infact ask for the moon but settles for the Sun.....:smokin:

it will never open if opened hope daily torched 50-60 trucks make them sick again :lol:
I guess our pplz efficiency is not good they need to increase that number from 200-300 trucks at least everyday to bright the skies with their long flames.....:D

i hope all will be torched and have 0 payment and 0% delivery .its make me happy .and from now i have no problem if they start burn then from karachi port to torkham daily every corner of pakistan as long as none of them saved cross border and if any case they cross afghan taliban will take care rest .f we torch 500 of them rest will never transport or refuse to work of supply problem solved .
I guess thats the best solution for this problem...Thanks bro U made it so easy for us.......:D
 
The overall amount received by Pakistan will not rise by much. What Pakistan makes away with increased transit tariffs will likely cause reductions elsewhere. I think this called a "zero sum game" or something like that.

The difference will be one looks like aid the other will look like earned money. If they stop aid but Pakistan earns from transit fees better. Atleast they will not sanction that money.
 
BTW, pressure is mounting on Pakistan government from public (in this election year) to keep supply shut, so these price negotiations gona end up in dust bin.

Unfortunately, as your ruling politicians have now realised, the Pakistani economy might join up in the same dust bin. Scoffing at American money was a lot easier when it flowed easily, doing so now in the face of a dwindling tap has suddenly become more difficult. Anyone doubting that just needs to read articles that have started to appear in the media recently. Anyone & everyone is for a quick settlement of the issue. Pakistan's options are limited. You have already shown your cards. The Americans can still ratchet up the pressure by squeezing your economy even more. Unless Pakistan is ready to see its exports dwindle away to nothing, your choices are extremely limited.

Pakistan's problem was that you took a maximalist position & then made it an issue of "ghairat". The climbdown was always happening & the higher you climbed up, the more humiliating the climb down was going to be. Too bad you chaps climbed all the way to K2.
 
The difference will be one looks like aid the other will look like earned money. If they stop aid but Pakistan earns from transit fees better. Atleast they will not sanction that money.

As long as the overall amount remains substantially the same, Pakistan's economy remains in the doldrums. Like I said it before, call it whatever you want; even burn the trucks, as many as they can. The problem is that either of the cases are not good for Pakistan.
 
Unfortunately, as your ruling politicians have now realised, the Pakistani economy might join up in the same dust bin. Scoffing at American money was a lot easier when it flowed easily, doing so now in the face of a dwindling tap has suddenly become more difficult. Anyone doubting that just needs to read articles that have started to appear in the media recently. Anyone & everyone is for a quick settlement of the issue. Pakistan's options are limited. You have already shown your cards. The Americans can still ratchet up the pressure by squeezing your economy even more. Unless Pakistan is ready to see its exports dwindle away to nothing, your choices are extremely limited.

Pakistan's problem was that you took a maximalist position & then made it an issue of "ghairat". The climbdown was always happening & the higher you climbed up, the more humiliating the climb down was going to be. Too bad you chaps climbed all the way to K2.
What U talking about???....Its already in dustbin after joining with this USA's fake war on terror.....:smokin:
 
What U talking about???....Its already in dustbin after joining with this USA's fake war on terror.....:smokin:

Well...as your politicians have now realised, the new dustbin is a lot worse than the old one!
 
There is no deal as of yet:

========================

from: U.S., Pakistan fail to reach deal on supply routes ahead of NATO summit - CNN.com


U.S., Pakistan fail to reach deal on supply routes ahead of NATO summit

From Mike Mount and Elise Labott, CNN

Chicago (CNN) -- The United States and Pakistan will not reach a deal on opening NATO supply routes before coalition leaders meet on Sunday, two senior U.S. officials told CNN.

"There is no deal, and there won't be one until President (Asif Ali) Zardari returns" to Pakistan, one senior official said, "and even that is not assured."

The two sides had hoped to have a deal before Zardari arrived in Chicago this weekend to join NATO allies and other coalition partners for a meeting on Afghanistan.

"The main thing is to get a deal," one senior official said. "It's less important as to when."

With no deal, officials said U.S. President Barack Obama would not meet with Zardari. The two leaders were to possibly meet in a trilateral meeting with Afghan President Hamid Karzai on the issue of political reconciliation in Afghanistan. Pakistan's support in reaching a deal with the Taliban is seen as critical in ending the war in Afghanistan.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is expected to meet with Zardari in Chicago, the officials said.

Ahead of the NATO summit on Afghanistan's future, Pakistan was requesting $5,000 per truck as a condition to reopen the supply lines between the two South Asian countries, U.S. officials said. The officials said Saturday that the United States would not agree to pay the stiff fees.

The new cost is a sticking point in weeklong negotiations between Washington and Islamabad to open the roads, known as the ground lines of communication or GLOCs. U.S. officials say the fees are inflated.

"We're hopeful the GLOCs will be reopened soon, but we're not going to agree to unreasonable charges. The Pakistanis understand that," said a senior defense official
who is not authorized to speak publicly about the talks.

Previously, the United States had been paying just a "small fraction" of the requested fee, officials said.

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said the United States would refrain from such a deal due to budgetary restraints.

"Considering the financial challenges that we're facing, that's not likely," Panetta told the Tribune newspaper service earlier in the week.

Pakistan shut down the supply routes -- stretching from Afghanistan through the lawless western tribal regions of Pakistan and down to the southern port of Karachi -- last November after dozens of its troops were killed in a mistaken U.S. airstrike.

The routes offer a shorter and more direct route than the one NATO has been using since November that goes through Russia and other nations and avoids Pakistan altogether.

Pakistani Ambassador Sherry Rehman said Washington was paying more for the northern route.

"Perhaps, if you look at the end route where your trucks move through much longer, but I believe the double of that amount is paid," Rehman said.

But U.S. officials said the nations along the northern route do not receive "Coalition Support Funds," which should allow Pakistan to lower costs.

The supply route will take on more significance as NATO troops prepare to depart Afghanistan by 2014 and will have to move heavy equipment and supplies out of Afghanistan for shipment from Karachi.


The drawdown forms a big part of the agenda at the NATO summit in Chicago starting Sunday.

Pakistan did allow four trucks containing supplies destined for the U.S. Embassy in Kabul to cross its border Friday, the first in six months.

Rehman called it a first step.

"So this is a new beginning. And, obviously, I bring good tidings," Rehman said.

But U.S. officials were less optimistic. Besides the cost, said one official familiar with the talks, there remained "quite a few other issues" to be worked out. He did not specify what those were.
 
For all those who are connecting this to the Economy ! This discussion sheds some light on this !

P.S Its in Urdu and around 50 minutes long but an interesting listen !

 
Last edited by a moderator:
After giving up its demands on stopping drone attacks and an apology, it would be instructive to see how much Pakistan ends up getting from reopening the supply routes, the price being a direct measure of the strength of its bargaining position.
 
Unfortunately, as your ruling politicians have now realised, the Pakistani economy might join up in the same dust bin. Scoffing at American money was a lot easier when it flowed easily, doing so now in the face of a dwindling tap has suddenly become more difficult. Anyone doubting that just needs to read articles that have started to appear in the media recently. Anyone & everyone is for a quick settlement of the issue. Pakistan's options are limited. You have already shown your cards. The Americans can still ratchet up the pressure by squeezing your economy even more. Unless Pakistan is ready to see its exports dwindle away to nothing, your choices are extremely limited.

Pakistan's problem was that you took a maximalist position & then made it an issue of "ghairat". The climbdown was always happening & the higher you climbed up, the more humiliating the climb down was going to be. Too bad you chaps climbed all the way to K2.
Belive me , no one is happy with uncle sam!
Here is example, that evently US will be kicked out from the region soon!

Hillary Clinton to ask India to cut oil imports from Iran
*Hillary Clinton to ask India to cut oil imports from Iran - Indian Express

Agencies : Kolkata, Sun May 06 2012, 13:28 hrs



Pressing India to further reduce oil imports from sanctions-hit Iran tops the agenda of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who flew into Kolkata today at the start of a three-day visit to India.

The US has been urging India and other countries to slash oil imports from Iran aimed at stepping up pressure on Tehran to comply with international demands over its nuclear programme.

India, which imports 80% of its crude oil and relies on Tehran for 12% of those imports, has said it needed to continue to buy Iranian oil to meet its domestic requirements.

Though India has publicly not said it was aiming to cut back on oil imports from Iran, the country's top oil importers have been pushed to reduce Iranian oil imports by 15-20 per cent.

Crude imports from Iran fell to 18.5 million tons in 2010-11 from 21.2 million tons in 2009-10. Last fiscal (2011-12), Iranian oil imports dropped to less than 16 million tons. This year they may further come down to 14 million tons.

India's top importers - Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd (MRPL) and Essar Oil will both cut Iranian oil imports this fiscal. MRPL plans to reduce Iranian oil buy to less than 100,000 barrels per day from 142,000 bpd while Essar Oil plans a 15% cut to 85,000 bpd from 100,000 bpd.

The US State Department said in March that 12 countries, including India and China, were at risk of sanctions because of purchases of Iranian oil.

US officials, who declined to be named, told the press travelling with Clinton that Washington's assessment is that India was working satisfactorily in this direction. "But we really need to receive assurances that they are going to continue to make good progress," they said.

... contd.

You can, follow the link, & can see the bullish, pushing of india, no one will back them , for sure!
Iran is having, its own high alerts from US, china & russia we, all can kick out this bully forever?
Even in US at nato summit, hunderdS of protestersn are still , protesting NATO ,s unfair involvments in the , world affairs?
How can US , pass all this, just by sending old, gril to india & putting hafiz saeed,s name on the terrorsits list? Its all dam preasure tactics, nothing more, we all have to kick, them out & put a united front against this, bullieng rubbish?
Btw , iam looking forward,to the official vist of our INDIAN FM , this month, in islamabad!
We are cooking, some thing nasty, this month fr them!
Indian FM to visit Pakistan in July - thenews.com.pk
Times had chAnged, & nations have strted to learn from the past!
 
After giving up its demands on stopping drone attacks and an apology, it would be instructive to see how much Pakistan ends up getting from reopening the supply routes, the price being a direct measure of the strength of its bargaining position.

Wrong info mate,here is our official position!
Sherry pakistan,s ammbssdr to US is optimistic over Zardari’s Chicago*visit
Sherry optimistic over Zardari
Dawn.com | Anwar Iqbal | 16th May, 2012

The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) has sent an unconditional invitation to President Asif Ali Zardari and we are looking forward to this high level visit, says Pakistan’s ambassador to the US Sherry Rehman.
Ambssador Rehman, who attended two weeks of intense talks between the US and Pakistan in Islamabad before returning to Washington last week, said the Chicago summit meeting will be an important milestone in the search for stability in Afghanistan and now Pakistan can play its role in bringing peace and prosperity to its neighbourhood.
The two-day Chicago summit begins on May 20 and will bring 50 heads of states and governments to the US city to decide a future course of action for Afghanistan.
When asked to comment on Islamabad’s demand for an apology for the Nov 26 US air raid that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers, the ambassador said Pakistan will continue to press for an apology and the military will seek new ground rules with Nato and Isaf to prevent Salala like incidents.
Pakistan closed Nato supply routes over the incident and is still demanding an apology from the US but Ambassador Rehman noted that two sides were now close to resolving this dispute.
Here is her interview with Dawn.com:
Q: Is the Nato land route dispute over?
A: We are constructively engaged with the Americans to resolve this issue and I look forward to a positive outcome. However, let me make it clear that this was an issue that required long overdue political buy in as well as exhaustive negotiations.
Pakistan wants to lay the foundation of an engagement that is durable, yet protects our interests as well as addresses Nato and Afghanistan’s concerns.
Q: Is President Zardari attending the Nato summit in Chicago?
A: An unconditional invitation has been extended to President to participate in Chicago. We welcome the invitation and now that the DCC has endorsed, I look forward to this high level visit.
Q: Why is it important to attend the Chicago summit? What will be our contribution to the summit? What do we expect from Nato?
A: Chicago is an important milestone in the search for stability in Afghanistan and the region, as it will lay down a strategic and security framework which will be linked to Nato’s security transition from Afghanistan by 2014. A number of agreements will also be signed during the summit.
Given our high stakes in regional stability, Pakistan wants a peaceful and stable Afghanistan and to achieve that objective, we are hopeful of a regional dynamic in which Afghanistan leads the way.
Pakistan wants to be a responsible global player working for solutions in the region and we should have a seat at the table that makes important decisions that directly affect the lives of our people.
We hope that the Nato Summit would reach decisions which are pragmatic, practicable, and protect Pakistan’s interests as well as create a regional framework that is viable.
Q: It seems that there is a disconnect between the civilian and military leadership over the Ground line of Communication (GLOC) dispute, is this a correct impression?
A: Absolutely not. To the contrary, the civil and military leaderships have acted in complete lockstep on this matter, consulting with each other repeatedly on key issues.
Q: The Foreign Minister’s announcement that Pakistan is willing to settle the GLOC dispute surprised everyone, including the State Department. Were you ready for it or was it also a surprise for you?
A: I am aware that we were hoping for a productive outcome. This is consistent with the DCC’s view.
Q: What else are the two sides doing to improve US-Pakistan ties, where do we go from here?
A: The Pakistan-US relationship, despite its challenges, is a very important one. Let me be honest. This is a complex relationship which will profit from the sunlight of transparency, stability and realistic expectations on both sides.
I am confident that we can work on this relationship in a way that serves our mutual interests best.
Pakistan’s Parliament has just concluded an exhaustive review of the Pakistan-US relationship, which we believe is among the most important in the world and which, we on the Pakistan side, are very keen to maintain and strengthen.
At the same time, we want this relationship to be grounded in realistic expectations, respect for each other’s sovereignty, appreciation of each other’s legitimate security interests and understanding of each other’s redlines. Similarly, both sides need to be aware of each other’s limitations and constraints.
Q: The US Congress, in various appropriations bills, is attaching strict conditions to aid to Pakistan. Some lawmakers even suggested that Pakistan should only receive 10 per cent of the approved aid. How would you deal with it?
A: The Congress has its own internal dynamics, particularly in election year, but I hope that Pakistan’s friends in the Congress would demonstrate greater appreciation and understanding for Pakistan’s concerns. I will certainly do my utmost to draw attention to Pakistan’s role in securing the region, particularly on US/Nato partner that has done the most to hunt down al Qaeda.
Q: At one stage, the American seemed willing to offer an apology, why the delay then?
A: Pakistan will continue to press for an apology, and work for best outcomes for our nation. As the foreign minister said, Pakistan has made its point, and we will continue to do so.
The military will look to fresh border ground rules with Nato and Isaf so incidents like Salala don’t recur.
Q: Some media reports suggest that Pakistan is demanding higher rates for allowing the Americans to use the supply routes. Are we? Are we going to have a written agreement or will it be another oral understanding like Musharraf’s?
A: Pakistan’s infrastructure and roads have suffered enormously due to the heavy load and traffic of Nato containers. According to international obligations, it is Nato’s responsibility to bear the cost that Pakistan had incurred and could incur in future.
I see that the DCC has mandated our working group to negotiate new structures and hopefully we will find an outcome that is mutually acceptable.
We have made it clear over and over again that there will be no more oral agreements between Pakistan and the US. All agreements would need to be transparent.
Q: Will they release reimbursement funds that the US owes to Pakistan and when?
A: Our teams are working this matter also. As I said I remain hopeful and urge consistent engagement between all groups in our two countries.
 
The overall amount received by Pakistan will not rise by much. What Pakistan makes away with increased transit tariffs will likely cause reductions elsewhere. I think this called a "zero sum game" or something like that.
That happened long before Pakistan shut down the NATO supply routes, given that the US has refused to reimburse close to $3 billion in CSF funds since 2010.

This might in fact be a means to make the disbursement of funds on expenses incurred much more transparent, since it will be based on the recorded number of containers shipped through Pakistani territory, rather than Pakistan submitting expenses that the US disagrees with.
 
Back
Top Bottom