US withdraws negotiators from Pakistan, no supply deal

[mjnaushad]

99% Pakistanis here don't like VChengs view but please dont start personal attacks because you disagree with his opinion. I find his posts very interesting and worth discussing.

Keep it up vcheng.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

And then people like Asim say that Army does not shoot down drones because the govt hasnt ordered it to... Mighty funny that the army in Pakistan can chose when to go by the govt policy and when not.. Classical case of hogging the glory and dodging the blame..

it's actually not very un-usual to do that.....after the Americans held the Parliament in contempt even the civvies ''patience'' (since patience is a big thing these days) is also thin.

it's normal and understandable what Gen. Kayani did; and quite frankly, the guy visiting on behalf of Pentagon was some mediocre level nobody.

 

[VCheng]

I posted this elsewhere, but that thread was closed unfortunately.

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

A good article for discussion:

from: Quick Study: Peter Tomsen on war in Afghanistan: How to hop out of a cauldron | The Economist

Quick Study: Peter Tomsen on war in Afghanistan
How to hop out of a cauldron
Jun 1st 2012, 10:18 by A.B.


Peter Tomsen was George H.W. Bush’s special envoy to the Afghan resistance, with the rank of ambassador from 1989 to 1992. As such, he met many Afghan tribal leaders, commanders and ulema who remain active today. Tomsen entered America’s foreign service in 1967 and was posted to Vietnam’s Mekong delta as a civilian military advisor in 1969. He has served in India, China, Moscow and (as ambassador) Armenia. He is the author of “The Wars of Afghanistan” (2011).

What is the West going to do about Afghanistan?

There are two main challenges in the way ahead. They can be met if we understand how we got to this position in the Afghan war. The first is Pakistan’s double game. The second is to pass responsibility to the Afghans as quickly as possible and draw down our forces. In this structure the Afghans would become the supported side and the coalition would become the supporting side. It’s pretty much the framework we had in the anti-Soviet war. We provided the wherewithal for the mujahideen to defeat the Soviet army and they did the fighting. Afghans need to have custody over their own country, a point that President Obama underscored during his May 1st visit to Afghanistan. We should not attempt to displace them as we have done over the past nine years and make it into a coalition war against the Taliban. We’re on the right track—since 2009 the coalition has shifted to a training and mentoring role, equipping the Afghans to take on the insurgents. We should have done this at the beginning in 2002 as recommended by the Pentagon.

Why didn’t we?

The Bush administration decided the Afghan war had been won when it had not been won. The Taliban simply returned to the old sanctuaries in Pakistan, regrouped and were sent back into Afghanistan in 2005 in their thousands. There wasn’t any military force to resist them because the Bush administration had made the strategic decision to shift our military resources to fight in Iraq. When the Taliban made their comeback there was no Afghan army to resist them, only warlords paid by the CIA. So the Taliban had an easy time and we responded by sending more and more Western troops to Afghanistan because there was no Afghan army to resist this new invasion from the Pakistani sanctuaries. The officials involved in Afghanistan don’t seem to understand the cultural and societal context of the country.

Why not? Why don’t they read up?

It’s such a complex environment. You have the mosaic of hundreds of tribes and six major ethnic groups. Then, across the border in Pakistan, you have Pushtun tribes connected to the Afghan Pushtun and you have a history of inter-tribal and inter-ethnic rivalry that goes back hundreds of years. When the British invaded Afghanistan in the 19th century they didn’t face a conventional army and couldn’t attack the nerve centre of the enemy. They faced thousands of these little tribal communities that would rise up in ambush in their local area. Eventually, and this is what happened in the Soviet war as well, you had about 130,000 insurgents fighting in different parts of the country and chipping away at the Soviet army in small-unit engagements.

So what do we do?

We are going in the right direction now, arming, training and mentoring the Afghan security forces and passing more responsibility to civilian officials, but the war will not end as long as sanctuaries in Pakistan continue to churn out extremist jihadists. Pakistan is sponsoring a terrorist infrastructure that inflicts terror on the region, but also globally. Our policy has been contradictory and duplicitous—on the one hand accepting Pakistan’s claims that it is an ally, and on the other hand indulging and tolerating Pakistan’s continuing fostering of terrorism.

So the West has to get tough on Pakistan?

If these sanctuaries are not closed down this is going to get worse in the future. We need to worry about the Arab Spring. There are radical jihadist groups embedded in the groups emerging to replace the long-time military dictators in the region. They are connected to extremists on the Pakistani frontier and, indirectly, to Pakistani military intelligence. The army has fostered these networks and uses them as proxies in Pakistani foreign policy. We need a policy shift that will have a strategic effect on the Afghan war and addresses the global terrorism emanating from Pakistan.

The November 2nd, 2011 Istanbul international conference and its concluding statement called for all outside powers to exercise mutual restraint in Afghanistan. No outside power would attempt to gain a strategic foothold to use against other outside powers. This is the structure of agreement that the British colonial empire and the Russian empire worked out in the 1890s. The Afghan buffer between rival great powers kept the peace for almost a century, up to the Afghan Communist coup and the 1979 Soviet invasion. In June 2012 there will be another conference at which Afghanistan’s neighbours must agree to honour Afghanistan’s sovereignty and integrity, but this means convincing Pakistan that its extremist networks are more a liability than an asset.

Are you optimistic?

I’m optimistic in the long run. Pakistan must change its jihadist approach if this long-term policy is to be successful and peace is going to return to Afghanistan.

Another important prong of the coalition’s policy is to encourage reconciliation among the warring powers in Afghanistan, the government, the Taliban and others. We have to be careful that we don’t end up like the Soviets and the 19th century British in the Afghan political cauldron, attempting to arrange inter-Afghan negotiations. Outsiders, including Pakistan and Afghanistan’s other neighbors, should stand back and let the Afghans work out their own way ahead.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

We have the levers just can't pull them. Just now the U.S. military are not allowed to bomb in towns and villages so the Taliban can easily hide in there and wait. This is not total war back in the days of WW2 or previously. Since the introduction of tv it can have an impact on how war is being implemented.

hi,

NATO accidentally bombed a village last week and 18 civilians were killed....now obviously it wasnt intentional but the same way you cant defy gravity -- you cant defy the backlash that incidents like these cause

so dont blame us for the radicalization of Afghans that are up in arms against your forces

 

[Jango]

Let me ask you Cheng, why does the US not operate in Kunar, and 50% of A-Stan is under Taliban control? Why?

Pakistan at the moment is in no position to launch another offensive in an area like NW.

 

[K-Xeroid]

That is NOT a likely scenario at all. A policy of steady engagement, coupled with suitable incentives (and pressures - mostly economic), is far more likely to yield the required results, and thus would continue to be the preferred option.

Okey! Explain it bit more, How're we gon'na do that? U.S is pretty clever in such engagements too..

 

[Mercenary]

Like it was said, this is more about respecting sovereignty than money. However, Panetta is having a hard time digesting this. Pakistan should stick to it's guns.

And what Sovereignty is that?

Where every god damn terrorist on the planet can come to Pakistan, live there and plan terrorist attacks from there and openly fight the Pakistani Army?

that sovereignty?

Pakistan abdicated its sovereignty.

Look at Sri Lanka, who fought a bloody civil war and re-captured its territory from Tamil terrorists.

Or Mexico fighting a bloody drug war, or Jordan during Black September, or Colombia against FARC, or the United States defeated the Confederate Armies during the civil war, etc.

The difference is that those countries didn't see the opposing groups as some sort of strategic ally.

They cared more for their countries to destroy these internal threats.

Learn the difference.

 

[prabhakar]

And what Sovereignty is that?

Where every god damn terrorist on the planet can come to Pakistan, live there and plan terrorist attacks from there and openly fight the Pakistani Army?

that sovereignty?

bull's eye............

 

[Mercenary]

go to hell USA we hate them from our hearts .better to stay isolated and poor then ally of USA and die .

Stay isolated and poor. I don't care.

But please keep those terrorists that you are breeding within Pakistan.

Look at it from "OUR" point of view:

Who wanted us to join WOT?
Who killed our soldiers in several occasions?
Who kills our people in FATA and dubs it as collateral damage?
Who accuses us of every BS happenin in A"stan?
Who vacates their posts when operations are being done in FATA n lets TTP escape?
Who lets hundreds of talib fighters cross into Pak and attack our posts?
Who has a discriminatory policy towards Pak?
Who doesnt apologize for martyring our soldiers?
Who kills Pakistanis in our own cities?
Who cares heavy weapons in fake number plated SUVs ?


Uncle sam can take a hike n smell the coffee... aid ... well they can shove it where the sun doesnt shine!

Who wanted us to join WOT? The entire World
Who killed our soldiers in several occasions? That would be the Taliban and Al Qaeda terrorists
Who kills our people in FATA and dubs it as collateral damage? That would be the Taliban and Al Qaeda terrorists
Who accuses us of every BS happenin in A"stan? USA and they have every right to since the entire Taliban leadership is in Pakistan. And OBL was found living in Pakistan.
Who vacates their posts when operations are being done in FATA n lets TTP escape? No proof of that. And no proof what os over of America supporting TTP. Total and utter nonsense.
Who lets hundreds of talib fighters cross into Pak and attack our posts? Arent they your supposed allies?
Who has a discriminatory policy towards Pak? I think the whole world does
Who doesnt apologize for martyring our soldiers? Friendly fire situations happen all over. In World War II, Americans shot down several of their own planes killing 700 soldiers.
Who kills Pakistanis in our own cities? That would be the Taliban Terrorists
Who cares heavy weapons in fake number plated SUVs ? Could be anyone. Corruption is rampant in Pakistan.

 

[ziaulislam]

reason why centuries in pakistan exist is USA. it hasnt been able to control cross movements

second reason it hasnt controlled the funding DRUG MONEY 95% opium grows in AFGN.

thrid routine attack sfrom centuris inside afghn occurs who is to blame for that

laslty what over 150,000 troops with half a trillion dollars couldnt acheive, is expecting us to do with peanuts..
they should seal/mine the boarder..justr like india did..10 years isnt enough for it..?

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Stay isolated and poor. I don't care.

But please keep those terrorists that you are breeding within Pakistan.




Who wanted us to join WOT? The entire World
Who killed our soldiers in several occasions? That would be the Taliban and Al Qaeda terrorists
Who kills our people in FATA and dubs it as collateral damage? That would be the Taliban and Al Qaeda terrorists
Who accuses us of every BS happenin in A"stan? USA and they have every right to since the entire Taliban leadership is in Pakistan. And OBL was found living in Pakistan.
Who vacates their posts when operations are being done in FATA n lets TTP escape? No proof of that. And no proof what os over of America supporting TTP. Total and utter nonsense.
Who lets hundreds of talib fighters cross into Pak and attack our posts? Arent they your supposed allies?
Who has a discriminatory policy towards Pak? I think the whole world does
Who doesnt apologize for martyring our soldiers? Friendly fire situations happen all over. In World War II, Americans shot down several of their own planes killing 700 soldiers.
Who kills Pakistanis in our own cities? That would be the Taliban Terrorists
Who cares heavy weapons in fake number plated SUVs ? Could be anyone. Corruption is rampant in Pakistan.

the insurgency stubbornly persists because the extremists/miscreants as well as the NATOS/goras are making the exact same mistakes......and the people suffering are the civilians in those affected areas

 

[Luftwaffe]

Stay isolated and poor. I don't care.

I have never understood what you are on about you certainly have no logic. IF I take you back to 1979 it will take all the Gas out of you what US had planned and how US was successful in introducing Jihad in this very Region, unfortunately I would blame zia for going extra length but the blame is still on US, they could have done better instead of ditching afghanistan and monsters US created. I am going to put you to shame IF i post those links what 80's 90's US Administration said and accepted and what hillary clinton said, so next time talk sense instead of wasting bandwith.

 

[Redbull]

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan’s civilian government should “bite the bullet” and re-open supply routes to Nato forces in Afghanistan in order to ease tensions with the United States, a senior US government official said on Tuesday.

The United States said on Monday it was withdrawing its team of negotiators from Pakistan without securing a long-sought deal on supply routes for the war in neighbouring Afghanistan, publicly exposing a diplomatic stalemate and deeply strained relations that appear at risk of deteriorating further.

“If the civilian government in Islamabad would bite the bullet and make the political decision to open the ground lines of communication, that would deflect some of the negativity right now,” the official told Reuters.

“It wouldn’t automatically turn things around, but that would be an important step.”

Although the US official suggested Pakistan would have to take several steps to repair heavily damaged ties, he said the strategic allies could not afford a rupture.

“We have longer-term interests that we must keep in mind. The interests are nuclear, it is counter-terrorism and it is also reconciliation in Afghanistan for a relatively peaceful and stable region,” said the US official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

“So you know, the heightened sentiments in Washington will eventually have to come to a point where people say hold on, we have bigger interests here.”

Pakistan, for its part, is demanding an apology from the United States over the Nato strike, but it is unlikely to get one.

The Nato strike fanned national anger over everything from covert CIA drone strikes to the US incursion into Pakistan last year to kill al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, and the supply routes evolved into a lightning-rod issue.

Relations with Pakistan had been poor for the past six months, said the US official.

He said both the Raymond Davis case – in which a CIA contractor shot and killed two Pakistanis he suspected of trying to rob him – and the raid on bin Laden’s compound had strained ties, but the final straw was the deaths of the 24 Pakistani soldiers.

“Salala broke the camel’s back,” said the US official, referring to the location where the Nato strike occurred.
After six weeks of negotiations that at least once appeared close to a deal, the Pentagon acknowledged on Monday that the U.S. team had failed to clinch an accord and was coming home.

With the Pakistan routes unavailable, Nato has turned to countries to the north of Afghanistan for more expensive, longer land routes.

Resupplying troops in Afghanistan through the northern route is about 2-1/2 times more expensive than shipping items through Pakistan, a US defence official told Reuters, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Pakistan should

 

[KRAIT]

I am strongly in favour of apology from US since they killed your soldiers...BUT we should consider following facts:

1. Formal apology means a lot and comes with many clauses. If they make one with Pakistan then in future they may face the same situation with other country and that country can go Pakistan's way. So this would be diplomatic disaster.

2. US can already have northern route to get their supplies and they can and if have to, will air lift each and every f'ing thing.

3. Stalling US for so many months, non-responsive to their demands of action on: (ALLEGEDLY) terrorist camps in Pakistan, Haqqani network and its relations with ISI. , will eventually change the long term foreign policy of US regarding Pakistan. Sanctions after pullout by 2014 is a possibility. You don't want to be on bad side of US right now.

4. No matter what you feel about US, your economy is related to US in direct and indirect way. Even China (Sinopec) is reducing oil import from Iran due to sanctions to be applied from June 28. Having bad relations at THIS juncture of time where economy is not in good shape, global economy is facing slowdown, sectarian violence and terrorist activities are high, industrial output is shrinking, will make things worse.

Again I am not preaching, just want to point out few things. Your emotions towards martyr soldiers are commendable, you blocked NATO supplies for six months where people were thinking it won't last a week. May be its time to think logically and for betterment of Pakistan.

P.S.- Feel free to disagree, but don't debate me on being Indian and the facts i pointed out.

 

[Safriz]

Such rude comments from USA wont help...
They are no more the omnipotenrt power they used to be until recently and its time for them to step down from their high chair and treat people with respect...
They couldnt do anything over the last 6 months and wont be able to do much if Pakistan keeps the supply line shut...