US suspends military aid to Pakistan. Military says it doesn't need it.

[Machoman]

This is sad part, why US don't understand the importance of Pakistan in war of terror? More public and more countries will go against US which is not good. Just for a small gain they are losing a lot by suspending aid.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

It is excellent to hear that the military has stopped dictating foreign policy. Have they really?

At the moment they have no perceived 'interest' (military aid from the US) to continue supporting US foreign policy in the region, do they?

So it would be reasonable to argue that continuity in the current Pakistani foreign policy towards the US would be the result of the civilian government, which has not lost out on US aid so far, choosing to do so, which in turn suggests that foreign policy is not controlled by the Military.

So either large political party will continue to undermine the military at US's behest? That would be a strong argument to temporarily suspend the political process to protect Pakistan, similar to several previous instances, no?

No - Pakistanis need to make that decision at the polls, good or bad.

The results of the elections are always up to the people in Pakistan, but may be some suitable "encouragement" to protect the greater national interests will help.

That is what the Pakistani media and the statements from the military should be used for - clarify the positions of each institution on these issues.

I don't understand this point, given that above you also indicate that both PPP and PML(N) are likely to pursue policies that are not favorable to the military. Diverting more funds to line the politician's pockets will, in your own words above, " .....and therefore they will have little incentive to change Pakistan's foreign policy" so i am not how the military's rhetoric to encourage such diversion will help. Unless, you mean between the lines that is is only "rhetoric" meant for public consumption and nothing substantive.

My point was that the military is, so far at least, indicating that it is washing its hands off US Aid, which means that it has no financial benefit in supporting US foreign policy. It is also suggesting that it prefers aid be put into the civilian side, trying to win the support of the common Pakistani by portraying a perception of a 'military that cares about the state of the average Pakistani citizen'. Whether the civilian institutions actually utilize that aid properly or not is their responsibility, not the military's.

I think I will request another explanation of what you mean by "If handled properly...". Who, the US or Pakistan handling the suspension properly? What would that mean in terms of concrete steps by one, or the other, or both sides?

Handled properly by the Pakistani military. A 'resumption in US Aid' should not come on the heels of a Pakistani military operation in NW, and if aid is resumed, it should be in conjunction with an official and transparent military and intelligence cooperation agreement between the US and Pakistan, that is ratified by Pakistan's parliament.

If aid is resumed by the US, the military should clearly indicate that it is going to shift it towards the civilian government - of course that is harder to do when the 'aid' is in the form of services and material, such as 'trainers, COIN equipment' etc. but the military could argue that the US provide the equivalent funds to the GoP.

 

[RoYaL~GuJJaR]

Good News for pakistan.

 

[laiqs@mi]

Yeah we are happy, but the happiness being showed by us and by the Indian govt are two different things.

Indians are happy as the aid was for military purposes, and India dislikes whatever military wise we get.


We are happy as we will not have to depend on the US aid and it will show the true nature of the US yet again to the Pakistani masses and especially its military which is already very anti-US.

If US thinks by stopping the aid it will pressurize us, it will have long term effects on the relationship and that is what we want.

A complete and balance answer !!!!
very very good

 

[Solomon2]

Whether the US gives aid or not, the underlying issues of poor governance, weak institutions and apathy from the electorate during the elections, will continue.Better to cut the artificial 'safety net' of 'revenues from aid', and let Pakistanis figure out what they need to do to fix the structural problems in the country.

Possibly. By "starving the beast" of funds the gov't may be persuaded to go to the people to beg - yes, beg - for funds. The subsequent bargaining and accountability may - may - result in increased democracy and better governance.

Not just military but also civilian aid would have to halt for this unpleasant but hopeful scenario. If the GoP can simply draw on the IMF or China then hope disappears.

if ending US aid results in an end to US influence over Pakistan's foreign policy, and increased support for the military, then I believe that strengthens the hands of the Military in both fighting against internal threats and external threats.

If the gov't is starved for funds the military will be clamoring for money, too. Guns, or butter? That isn't a formula for increased support for the military.

 

[PakShah]

Pakistan should just quit the war on terrorism.
The war on terrorism has only slowed down Pakistan's economic growth.

 

[Tinu]

For the first time both Pakistanis and Indians are happy for different reasons. Pakistanis for standing up to America and India for expressing subservience to America by supporting their move.

India welcomes suspension of US military aid to Pakistan
India welcomed the US decision to suspend $800 million military aid to Pakistan, saying a heavy presence of arms would have disturbed the equilibrium in the region.

"With reference to the special circumstances between India and Pakistan and how India has consistently taken the view that it is not desirable that this region had to be heavily armed by the US which will upset the equilibrium in the region itself. To that extent India welcomes this step," External Affairs Minister SM Krishna told reporters.

Krishna was reacting to the US' decision to cut military aid to Pakistan.

The suspended aid, which is about one-third of the $2 billion in annual American security assistance to Pakistan, includes about $300 million to reimburse Pakistan for some of the costs of deploying more than 100,000 soldiers along the Afghan border to combat terrorism.

Link: India welcomes suspension of US military aid to Pakistan - Indian Express

 

[mirage 5000]

This is sad part, why US don't understand the importance of Pakistan in war of terror? More public and more countries will go against US which is not good. Just for a small gain they are losing a lot by suspending aid.

US work for there intreast eather its 1950 or 2050 we always been used as a tool .problem is we do it again and again and never learn from our past.

 

[Awesome]

Pakistan: Military spokesman says army doesn't need US aid to fight militants - Adnkronos Security

Islamabad, 11 July (AKI) - Pakistan's army on Monday brushed off the United States' suspension of $800 million in military aid saying it doesn't need American help to combat insurgents.

“The army in the past as well as at present has conducted successful military operations using its own resources without any external support whatsoever,” military spokesman Major General Athar Abbas told the AFP news agency.

The US said it would withhold about one-third of the $2.7 billion in annual military aid it provides to Pakistan.

The relationship between Washington and Islamabad has long been mutually suspicious but took a dramatic turn for the worse in early May when US commandos secretly flew into Pakistan from Afghanistan to kill Osama Bin Laden.

Relations were already strained after an American CIA contract worker was released from a Lahore prison, where he was being held after shooting dead two people in an act the assailant described as self defence.

White House chief of Staff William Daley on Sunday speaking on the American Sunday morning political chat show circuit confirmed a New York Times report about the military aid.

The suspended funds includes $300 million to pay back Pakistan for the expense of sending more than 100,000 troops to fight insurgents along the border with Afghanistan.

The move came following Pakistan's demand that the US slash the number of military personnel in Pakistan.

 

[Awesome]

First welcome sign from our leaders... Unfortunately its again still the military saying these things whereas Zardari/Gillani should have stepped up.

 

[mirage 5000]

First welcome sign from our leaders... Unfortunately its again still the military saying these things whereas Zardari/Gillani should have stepped up.

sir Zardari/Gillani are worry abut there pocket more then any thing else.

 

[Awesome]

Pakistan defiant as US halts $800 mn in military aid | Radio Netherlands Worldwide

The Pakistani military was defiant on Monday after Washington said it would suspend $800 million worth of security aid, saying it was capable of fighting Islamists without US assistance.

"The army in the past as well as at present has conducted successful military operations using its own resources without any external support whatsoever," military spokesman Major General Athar Abbas told AFP.

Abbas said the military had not been officially informed of the decision to suspend aid.

US President Barack Obama's chief of staff, William Daley, confirmed in a television interview on Sunday that the United States has decided to withhold almost a third of its annual $2.7 billion security assistance to Islamabad.

Relations between the key allies in the war on Al-Qaeda drastically worsened after US commandos killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan in May, humiliating the Pakistani military and opening it to allegations of complicity or incompetence.

Abbas referred AFP to an extraordinary statement issued by army chief of staff General Ashfaq Kayani on June 9 as part of the bin Laden fallout which recommended that US military aid be redirected towards civilians.

The US move was welcomed by Pakistan's neighbour and rival India.

"It is not desirable that this region had to be heavily armed by the US," External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna said, according to the PTI news agency, adding that the spending would upset the regional power balance.

The suspended aid includes about $300 million to reimburse Pakistan for some of the costs of deploying more than 100,000 soldiers along the Afghan border, according to The New York Times.

Pakistan says it has 140,000 soldiers in the northwest, more than the 99,000 American troops in Afghanistan, fighting a local Taliban insurgency.

The United States has long called on Pakistan to do more to crack down on militants, such as the Al-Qaeda-linked Haqqani network, who use its soil to attack within Afghanistan, but the army says its troops are too over-stretched.

The United States also depends on Pakistan as a sea port and land corridor to truck about 50 percent of its military supplies into Afghanistan, although Taliban and other Islamist militants routinely attack the convoys.

Ties between the US and Pakistan are now at their lowest point since Islamabad officially broke with the Taliban and sided with Washington after the 9/11 attacks, analysts said.

One Western security official in Islamabad told AFP that bin Laden's killing had hardened America's approach to Pakistan, but the underlying difference was that the so-called allies cannot agree who or what the enemy really is.

"The problem is that the United States and Pakistan are allies, but they don't have the same enemy and so relations will only continue along this chaotic path," the official said.

Analyst Rasul Baksh Raees noted the deep antipathy to America that is prevalent in Pakistan, but added: "I think Pakistan and the United States will come to some kind of understanding soon to sort out irritants."

On the ground Monday, a driver and his assistant were killed in on an attack on a NATO truck in southwestern Baluchistan province.

Gunmen on motorcycles opened fire on a supply vehicle in Darakshan, about 30 kilometres (18 miles) east of Quetta, the capital of Baluchistan.

"A driver and his helper were killed when unknown gunmen fired at a NATO truck returning from Afghanistan after delivering supplies," local police official Manzoor Tareen told AFP.

The assailants then set the truck on fire, he said. The driver died in his cab, and his body was burned, while the helper leapt out but died on the way to hospital, Tareen said.

There was no immediate claim of responsibility, but the Taliban has carried out similar assaults in the past to disrupt supplies to the 150,000 international troops fighting in Afghanistan.

 

[TARIQ BN ZIYAAD]

Assalam alaikum

Allah karay yeh relations juld tootain aisay k phir na kabhi banain. their money just helped our corrupt officers and politician to do more corruption
Thansk U.S.A

TARIQ

 

[Kompromat]

This is our victory Gentlemen , we will survive !

 

[mirage 5000]

please guys dont show that we are happy otherwise US will cancel the plan they can not see us happy lolz.please USA we are sad .