What's new

US refuses to fund Pakistan-American Enterprise Fund

z9-ec

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
1,345
Reaction score
0
Civilian aid dries up: US refuses to fund Pakistan-American Enterprise Fund


ISLAMABAD: After suspending military assistance, the United States has now refused to finance the $300 million Pakistan-American Enterprise Fund as tensions between Islamabad and Washington start taking their toll on civilian aid.

The revelation comes after President Obama signed an omnibus spending bill which linked disbursements of the $850 million Country Insurgency Fund with the requirement that any assistance to Pakistan be made conditional to the US Secretary of State and Secretary of Defence certifying that Islamabad is cooperating in the war on terror.

The approval of the Pakistan-American Enterprise Fund has been dropped despite the fact Pakistan had been assured by the US Deputy Secretary of State that the fund would be approved. The US Senate Foreign Relations Committee had earlier cleared the draft legislation and sent it to a conference committee of the United States Congress – a joint body comprising representatives from both houses of the US legislature – for final approval.

Sources in the finance ministry told The Express Tribune that the Obama administration did not put the fund up for a vote and took it out from the draft legislation at conference committee stage. The Pak-American Fund approval had earlier been clubbed with similar funds for three other countries. The US legislature approved such funds for other countries but left out the fund for Pakistan, they added.

The fund was to be financed under the Kerry-Lugar-Berman Act – enshrined into US law to give $7.5 billion over five years in civilian assistance to Pakistan. The implementation period of $300 million fund was five years, with a $60 million annual American investment in small and medium enterprises in Pakistan.

The fund was aimed at empowering Pakistan’s private sector by creating jobs and opportunities for increasing economic growth and stability in the country. The US had modelled the fund over its earlier successful post-Cold War funds established for the development of Eastern Europe.

Mark Stroh, the spokesman for the US Embassy in Islamabad, confirmed that “Congress did not legislate the Pakistan-American Enterprise Fund in the 2012 budget”. In fact the fund was not even tabled for the approval by Congress, he added.

Stroh said: “however, the [Obama] administration continues to pursue access to finance for small and medium businesses in Pakistan through its equity fund.” He said the US government was still looking for ways to give access to capital to small businesses in 2012 but nothing can be said with certainty at this stage.

Sources said that as Congress is currently in a deeply anti-Pakistan mood, the Obama administration was looking for alternative programmes and the Pakistan Equity Fund was one of the possibilities. They added establishing the equity fund would not require Congressional approval.
The denial of the enterprise fund comes as a blow to Finance Minister Abdul Hafeez Shaikh, who had been assured by the US Deputy Secretary of State in September 2011 that the US government would not suspend civilian assistance, despite the strains in the military ties between the two countries.

The Kerry-Lugar-Berman Act was approved by Congress in 2010 and was meant to provide $1.5 billion in assistance to Pakistan every year. Yet so far only the money for 2010 has been authorised, of which only $600 million has actually been disbursed. The US media, however, has a tendency to count announced aid, rather than disbursed aid.

In addition, the US has not paid Pakistan for any services it has rendered in the war on terror since January 2011. The outstanding payments, due to come out of the Coalition Support Fund, now range between $2.5 billion to $3.4 billion, depending whether Islamabad still counts the rejected bills in the outstanding amount.

---

:undecided:
 
What do you expect. Obama is President. He hates Pakistan. Even Bush was better for Pakistan than Obama.

I don't know what he has against Pakistan, maybe he had a bad personal experience in Karachi. He mentioned that he visited Karachi when he was younger.

I request all Pakistan-Americans to vote for anyone except Obama.
 
Isnt it obvious, we are blocking their supplies.......what do you expect. They are trying to arm twist you so that Pakistan opens the supply route.
We have two options here
1) We open their supply route and everything gets back to normal until next time they kill more of our soldiers
or
2) We continue blocking their supply route until they dry out and start taking Pakistan a bit more seriously and on equal terms.
There is no middle way to this period.
 
WTF do you expect them to do?Its only natural that they would block aid (rightfully so) because we are not bowing down to their dictates.So it is a good thing.Do you want Pakistan to be dependent on aid with strings?Pakistan is a nation of 180 million people.About time we develop self sustained economy.
 
The aid wasn't reaching to ordinary Pakistani anyways, rather the politicians' salaries were paid using this money. And our current PM doubled the salaries too :angry:
 
WTF do you expect them to do?Its only natural that they would block aid (rightfully so) because we are not bowing down to their dictates.So it is a good thing.Do you want Pakistan to be dependent on aid with strings?Pakistan is a nation of 180 million people.About time we develop self sustained economy.

I agree that overall Pakistan should seek self sustainable growth. Investment and no aid. However, the worrying question is, will the incumbent government able to cope up and replace lost aid with investment? probably not. Sincere efforts must be made ASAP to replace aid with investment. SMEs are pivotal for growth.
 
I agree that overall Pakistan should seek self sustainable growth. Investment and no aid. However, the worrying question is will the incumbent government able to cope up and replace lost aid with investment? probably not. Sincere efforts must be made ASAP to replace aid with investment. SMEs are pivotal for growth.
A direct political confrontation would be quite disasterous for both the countries. Pakistani policymakers have to play carefully here i.e. while ensuring that US gets out of the region, avoid direct confrontation with US.
 
You need money to make money and Pakistan needs to find the source ASAP.
 
What do you expect. Obama is President. He hates Pakistan. Even Bush was better for Pakistan than Obama.

I don't know what he has against Pakistan, maybe he had a bad personal experience in Karachi. He mentioned that he visited Karachi when he was younger.

I request all Pakistan-Americans to vote for anyone except Obama.

That is something NEW....
 
What do you think Pak-American enterprise fund would be doing? Any good for the people of Pakistan?? How much money in the past has done any good to the people of the land???
We need no aid ma friends.. no country in the world has prospered on donations, aids and stipends.. Also when something is coming from America, you got to be skeptical about its purpose because Americans are worse than enemies and if they are giving you meal, expect it will have some string, some dirty job which Pakistan would have to do in return.

I appreciate America that they are keeping their money to their country.. Americans are jobless, under-paid and unsatisfied. This American money must go to their betterment.
 
In addition, the US has not paid Pakistan for any services it has rendered in the war on terror since January 2011. The outstanding payments, due to come out of the Coalition Support Fund, now range between $2.5 billion to $3.4 billion, depending whether Islamabad still counts the rejected bills in the outstanding amount.
Next time I hope Pakistan insists on advance payment!

And why has the US of A put on hold funds for civilian projects? This has nothing to do with the WOT. Unless they want to spite Pakistan for America's failed strategy in Afghanistan and put the blame wholly on Pakistan for the mess the Americans have created.

A scape goat is what they want. American elections are round the corner!! So it's time to start bashing Pakistan for brownie points!
 
What do you expect. Obama is President. He hates Pakistan. Even Bush was better for Pakistan than Obama.

I don't know what he has against Pakistan, maybe he had a bad personal experience in Karachi. He mentioned that he visited Karachi when he was younger.

I request all Pakistan-Americans to vote for anyone except Obama.

lol , why are you getting so angry now , it was pakistanies i guess who were saying that they don't need american aid and can do better without american aid .
 
whatever happening is happening for gud of Pakistan..at least now they will try to make their economy self reliant.
as there is Chinese saying in english "TRADE not AID" :tup:
 
What do you think Pak-American enterprise fund would be doing? Any good for the people of Pakistan?? How much money in the past has done any good to the people of the land???
We need no aid ma friends.. no country in the world has prospered on donations, aids and stipends.. Also when something is coming from America, you got to be skeptical about its purpose because Americans are worse than enemies and if they are giving you meal, expect it will have some string, some dirty job which Pakistan would have to do in return.

I appreciate America that they are keeping their money to their country.. Americans are jobless, under-paid and unsatisfied. This American money must go to their betterment.
Its an altogather wrong to consider aid as a monster to be avoided at all costs. We have to understand why do we need aid and is aid (and external debt) something very bad? A simple growth theory (classic) assumes that for an economy to grow, it needs investment, for investment, it needs savings. Now savings can be of two type 1) Internal savings generated by the residents of the country itself 2) External savings of anyother country which has excess savings. Now why external debt is benificial for both lending and borrowing country? Now if the internal savings are not enough (as the case with developing countries e.g. Pakistan) this leads to untapped potential due to not enough investment generation. Now consider another country where the savings are excess but growth potential is not that much, that country can also benifit by lending its excess savings to the first country and can earn extra return on the savings than what it would have earned on its local employment of those savings, so theoratically it yields a win-win situation for both lender and the borrower. I am often amazed why do we consider aid and external debt as a "bad dog", its utilization is something which should be targeted i.e. the debt is utilized correctly rather than misapproperiated.
 
Back
Top Bottom