What's new

What's wrong if US is given bases in Pakistan? Najam Sethi (Spokesman of Nawaz Sharif)

What would the US offer Pakistan in return for the base? Pakistan can then make a decision based on what is seen to be in its national interest. An FTA or a hefty FDI inflow from the US would be a good trade off :cheers:
 
.
images (13) (1).jpeg

Ye kaisa offer hai ?

What would the US offer Pakistan in return for the base? Pakistan can then make a decision based on what is seen to be in its national interest. An FTA or a hefty FDI inflow from the US would be a good trade off :cheers:
Then india should give them a base , kyu ?
Trade to Unka Humse zyada hota hai Pakistan ke muqable
 
.
They can have bases but it would require funding a modernisation programme for Pakistan Army, no drone strikes on Pakistani soil, a payment of ten billion dollars per year, and a free trade agreement.

It will never happen though because it would counter to their anti-Pakistan policy and would hurt a lot of anti-Pakistani lobbyists in Washington, despite the fact that doing all this would be peanuts for the US from a budget of 4.5 trillion dollars.
 
.
Then india should give them a base , kyu ?
Trade to Unka Humse zyada hota hai Pakistan ke muqable
India is a bigger country. India's demands from the US would be much bigger than just an FTA.

For a hypothetical scenario, consider how history would have been different if Kennedy had time to oblige with Nehru's request during the 1962 war. Nehru wanted Kennedy to bring in 12,000 troops fully armed to fight India's war with China because otherwise he feared India would not exist. Chinese pulled back for reasons that include potential US involvement in full blown war at that time. Before Kennedy could respond, the war was over. So in an alternate history, US could have put its troops in India then and may well have kept them for a long time.

The choices we make are always based on the merits of the options available to us at any given time. India (or any other country) is not exempt from this reality.

PS: Do not want this thread to be about India. So if you want to talk about the hypothetical scenario that is cited as an example, it will have to be in a different thread. :cheers:
 
.
What would the US offer Pakistan in return for the base? Pakistan can then make a decision based on what is seen to be in its national interest. An FTA or a hefty FDI inflow from the US would be a good trade off :cheers:
Giving security bases to some foreign occupation power is not exactly a trade agreement, Indian Patwari
 
.
Giving security bases to some foreign occupation power is not exactly a trade agreement, Indian Patwari
Usko jhukna Kehte Hai Ji, india was firmly in Russian camp in cold war.
Even then we didn't allow permanent bases to soviet navy to access arabian sea , indian ocean etc
Though they had base in Vietnam

T
India is a bigger country. India's demands from the US would be much bigger than just an FTA.

For a hypothetical scenario, consider how history would have been different if Kennedy had time to oblige with Nehru's request during the 1962 war. Nehru wanted Kennedy to bring in 12,000 troops fully armed to fight India's war with China because otherwise he feared India would not exist. Chinese pulled back for reasons that include potential US involvement in full blown war at that time. Before Kennedy could respond, the war was over. So in an alternate history, US could have put its troops in India then and may well have kept them for a long time.

The choices we make are always based on the merits of the options available to us at any given time. India (or any other country) is not exempt from this reality.

PS: Do not want this thread to be about India. So if you want to talk about the hypothetical scenario that is cited as an example, it will have to be in a different thread.
 
.
Environmental costs as well as a security risk to the citizens are prime reasons for not allowing a foreign presence in the country.
PDM will provide bases. The govt, which includes JUIF, will OFFER bases it self.
 
Last edited:
. . . .
Giving security bases to some foreign occupation power is not exactly a trade agreement, Indian Patwari
Problem is that PTI followers frame US as a 'foreign occupation power'. But reality is that Pakistan and US are historic allies. Pakistan is a major non-NATO ally of the United States and is therefore privy to a preferential security relationship that no other country in the region can claim to have.

Under these conditions, FTA or FDI for a base in the country sounds like a mutually beneficial biparty arrangement. :cheers:
 
. .
Are you going to bomb it?
I am just saying the govt is offering bases - the point of refusal comes only when somebody asks. Over-here the govt is offering services and access for sale as in past. Thats it.
 
. .
Providing bases is a shortsighted and ultimately doomed strategy to CT, unless the actual goal is to keep Pakistan and Afghanistan in a constant state of instability. A better approach is one that creates stability in a mutually beneficial symbiotic relationship, similar to the GCC-West.

Any bases given will primarily be drone bases, and the whole world saw how in the aftermath of the attack that killed so many marines at Kabul airport last august, led to a drone strike that was supposedly based on intelligence but killed an aid worker and so many children. That one episode encapsulated the entire drone campaign in one event. And we have to remember that was when US forces were still in Afghanistan and still couldn’t positively ID the target, who’s to say an over the horizon effort based out of Shamsi will do any better?

To Quote the former station chief of Islamabad that oversaw US CT ops in Pakistan; John Kiriakou: (17:37) “The Drone program is an act of terrorism”

The US can walk away if they mistakenly kill innocents but Pakistan will face the blowback and the will endure years of instability, burdening the nation in a pointless quagmire and drawing attention away from economic growth as India gets built up the west to counter China, to the detriment of the strategic balance between India and Pakistan.


A better option, in my opinion is to build up the CT capabilities (helicopters, MRAPs, etc) of Pakistan (so Pakistan can better enforce the writ of the state within its border), help deal with Afghan and Iranian borders (seal them against the movement of miscreants), and create the kind of economic incentives to support Pakistan and Afghanistan to keep rogue actors in check by putting the potentially recruitable young men to work on projects that will economically benefit Pakistan and western companies like mining projects, security for pipelines, etc.

Failure to come up with a carrot and stick approach towards the Afghans and going for an all stick approach will just drive them fully in to the arms of the Chinese, with whom they already have a contract to mine some of the minerals. Why not try to get contracts to mine the rest, instead of ceding all the opportunities to the Chinese.

Btw, if their are joint ops between Pakistan and the US; this is the history of how they would really go down, as told by the guy that managed them:

(In another video he basically calls Pakistan and awful country, so what he’s saying not from a place of love for Pakistan)

To put it another way for an American audience to understand, roughing up or killing some African-Americans because they are suspected to be doing arms smuggling, only to later find out they had nothing to do with it is counter productive and will lead to a backlash. Working with the community is a better approach, while employing officers who know the neighborhoods and hopefully live in them is a better approach.

ABSOLUTELY NOT to Bases; they are not in the best long term interest of Pakistan and the US.
 
Last edited:
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom