What's new

US promises to stay neutral in India’s conflict with other states

HAIDER

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
33,771
Reaction score
14
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
WASHINGTON: The US State Department has said that America’s close relationship with India does not mean that if Indians had an armed conflict with another country, Washington is automatically going to side with New Delhi.

“Wow. Okay, I don’t think I’d go that far,” said US State Department Spokesperson Heather Nauert when asked at a news briefing in Washington on Thursday afternoon that the next time India had a conflict Pakistan, New Delhi will get Washington’s full support.

US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said at a Washington think tank on Wednesday that the US was going to have dramatically deepened relationships with India, adding that the “security issues that concern India are concerns of the US too”. Mr Tillerson is scheduled to visit Islamabad and New Delhi this week for talks on the new US strategy in South Asia.

Responding to a question about the secretary’s remarks at the State Department news briefing, Ms Nauert said Mr Tiller was talking about “shared-interests”, as the two countries already cooperate in many key areas — from military exercises to intelligence gathering and counterterrorism.

The United States, she said, also appreciated how India was helping develop an infrastructure in Afghanistan and how it was playing a key role in strengthening the Afghan economy for which “we are very grateful to India”.

“So, I think, the Secretary was really trying to underscore the importance of that relationship with India and recognising that we have a lot of areas where we can have mutual cooperation,” said the US official while explaining Mr Tillerson’s remarks.

A journalist, however, reminded her that there were frequent exchanges of fires between India and Pakistan. “So, when it happens next time, does it mean that the US has to take sides?” the journalist asked.

“I think, we are always very cautious about addressing those issues, not wanting to contribute to any additional tensions,” Ms Nauert replied.

In his remarks at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, Washington, on Wednesday, Secretary Tillerson also highlighted US ties with Pakistan.

“Pakistan, too, is an important US partner in South Asia. Our relationships in the region stand on their own merits,” he said.

“We expect Pakistan to take decisive action against terrorist groups based within its own borders that threaten its own people and the broader region.”

Mr Tillerson said that by taking such actions Pakistan would “further stability and peace for itself and its neighbours and will improve its own international standing”.

He said President Trump’s new South Asia strategy was an effort to resolve the Afghan issue by promoting peace and stability in the entire South Asian region.

“You solve Afghanistan by addressing the regional challenges. And Pakistan is an important element of that,” he said. “India is an important element of how we achieve the ultimate objective, which is a stable

Afghanistan, which no longer serves as a platform for terrorist organisations.”

The new US strategy, he claimed, was “quite simple: we will deny terrorists the opportunity, the means, the location, the wherewithal, the financing, the ability to organise and carry out attacks against Americans at home and abroad, anywhere in the world”.

Mr Tillerson said that Afghanistan and Pakistan would be greatest beneficiaries if terrorism was eradicated from South Asia.

“And we think that is achievable and we can have a stable, peaceful Afghanistan. And when that happens, a big threat is removed from Pakistan’s future stability as well, which then creates a better condition for India-Pakistan relationships,” he said while explaining why he believed the new US strategy was good for all.

Mr Tillerson said the US wanted to work closely with India and with Pakistan to ease tensions along their border as well. “Pakistan has two very troubled borders and we’d like to help them take the tension down on both of those and secure a future stable Pakistan government which we think improves relations in the region as well,” he said.

Published in Dawn, October 21st, 2017
 
.
Good,that's what India has wanted for decades
 
.
For Last 70 years we've been independently fighting on our own for our motherland not on foreign aid like other small countries do.

We had no military backing of USA during 65 and 71. Even in the early stages of war against Soviets we didn't, USA came in later.

Whereas India had full military support of Soviets in 65 and 71.

Asking you Indians not to lie is a stupidity anyways so ...
 
.
OMG India must have cancelled his visit by now:lol: some one visiting InDia and don't say anything against Pakistan is considered anti India and is not a looked in India everything in India is Pakistan centric the only thing which unites india.
 
. . . .
This is bull crap.

By giving this statement, they are trying to give a message.
That unless we perform their wish, they would play the card and at some point in time not be neutral.

Like I said.
The war is much bigger, we are just pawns.
 
.
they will only keep their promise when breaking it costs them more.
 
.
India v Pakistan

BI LATERAL, ISSUE

No 3rd party will be allowed into OUR dispute

not USA
not China
not 3rd party proxy terror groups
 
.
OMG India must have cancelled his visit by now:lol: .
sorry the visit is still on :p:
don't say anything against Pakistan is considered anti India
India is a big country with many states equal to Pakistan and Mumbai alone having GDP more than Pakistan, therefore everyone visiting India may not be focussed entirely on Pakistan.

everything in India is Pakistan centric the only thing which unites india.

Btw Bollywood is hardly Pakistan centric. Most of our movies are not banned in Pakistan. Had Bollywood been Pakistan centric then the half of the world would have had a different view about your country .
 
.
sorry the visit is still on :p:

India is a big country with many states equal to Pakistan and Mumbai alone having GDP more than Pakistan, therefore everyone visiting India may not be focussed entirely on Pakistan.


Btw Bollywood is hardly Pakistan centric. Most of our movies are not banned in Pakistan. Had Bollywood been Pakistan centric then the half of the world would have had a different view about your country .
any source for it or just another thing your govt feeding your about Pakistan now a days. lol and about bollywood ask your hindu extremists why they have to make rallies against Pakistan Artist every now n then if its not Pakistan centric....anyways stick to the topic waiting for the source......and pls dont share indian sources some of which even can says Indian economy is twice then China.:enjoy:
 
.
India v Pakistan

BI LATERAL, ISSUE

No 3rd party will be allowed into OUR dispute

not USA
not China
not 3rd party proxy terror groups
And for 70 years both side have been so stupid and ignorant that they have managed to solve exactly what? You made the bold statement now give a solution
 
.
any source for it or just another thing your govt feeding your about Pakistan now a days.

The ( Pakistan) government has set a revenue collection target of Rs3,620.8bn for the year ending June 30, 2017.
(From your local source) : https://www.dawn.com/news/1324898


"The Mumbai zone has missed the target of Rs 2.79 trillion for fiscal 2017 by a wafer-thin margin," an official of the income tax department told
(From our Local source) : http://www.dnaindia.com/money/repor...rom-mumbai-falls-below-target-in-fy17-2390890

BTW 1 Trillion Indian Rupees is equal to 1600 Billion Pakistani Rupees

Mumbai Tax collection alone surpassed the whole of Pakistan's Tax collection
 
.
after hearing this news Modi's chest shrunk to 26 inches
 
.
Back
Top Bottom