US review of Afghan strategy and Pakistan
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Foreign office of Pakistan has communicated to the US that Pakistan should be taken on board while US reviews and formulates Afghan strategy afresh. By all logic, US ought to take Pakistan's point of view. However, there has been no response on the issue from the US government. Any increase or decrease in troops is going to have a direct bearing on Pakistan. Even other aspects of the strategy related to use of force or negotiations, or a combination thereof, too, will directly or indirectly affect Pakistan's efforts in the war on terror. Obama has repeatedly asked the planners to review the strategy from the beginning till end to include the time frame and methodology of withdrawal of troops from the region. This, too, is relevant to Pakistan as to how Pakistan should plan its strategy once US and NATO troops leave the region.
On one hand US considers Pakistan to be the front line state on the US and NATO allies' war on terror. US has also, in the recent past, grouped Pakistan with Afghanistan to fight its war against terror and calls it as its AF-Pak strategy. Isn't it then surprising that Pakistan is not being taken on board? There must be reasons for the same. Pakistan government needs to look into the matter seriously and take appropriate diplomatic and other measures. Learning from this, Pakistan should understand that, in the eyes of America, Pakistan's role has been and will remain reactive and not pro active despite the latter being so called non NATO ally of US.
Labels: US Invasion of Afghanistan, US Pakistan Relations, War on Terror
posted @ 8:10 PM,
,
Friends, not masters
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
The News International, Pakistan in its editorial of Wednesday, October 21, 2009 writes,
Senator John Kerry has described the meetings he held during a brief visit to Pakistan to 'clarify' the concerns raised over conditionalities attached to the $7.5 billion aid to be extended under the Kerry-Lugar Bill as 'positive'. It is significant that the US lawmaker focused the time he had available on meeting those who had most reservations about the bill – Mian Nawaz Sharif and General Ashfaq Pervaiz Kayani. But reading between the lines, it seems clear that Mr Kerry found the going tough. This is evident from the fact that he carefully declined to say if fears raised by the bill had been allayed and on several occasions looked quite visibly frustrated by the response to it. But the US lawmaker also made several things quite clear. For one, he stressed that the intentions behind the bill were good and that he for one ranked himself as a friend of Pakistan, eager to do what he could to help the country and to strengthen democracy within it. He also pointed out Pakistan was free to refuse the aid package. The plain talking from one of the most experienced US Senators should make us all think. The question is whether as a country strapped for cash, and trapped in a quagmire of problems made up by political instability, economic desperation, a militant threat and a devastating shortage of energy, we are in any position to choose. The country, quite simply, cannot do without assistance. Its people cannot do without the improved access to education and healthcare that the Kerry-Lugar Bill offers. This is the reality that we should be talking about.
Late President of Pakistan Field Marshall Ayub Khan said, " We need friends, not masters". But in the dictionary of international relations, the word friendship does not exist. Agreed, that we are strapped for cash. When have we not been? How many times have we got loans and aids in billions of dollars since independence, all in the name of alleviating poverty and educating the masses? Whither has it gone? Same is going to happen to this money. These loans and aids suit the government officials as it are they who benefit from it the most. So, I beg to differ with the conclusion of the editorial. Losing integrity, allowing other countries to interfere more and more in our internal affairs for any sum what to talk of a paltry sum of $ 1.5 bn which too is going to be eaten by officials in the name of masses isn't a good bargain at all. Let's learn to stand on our own feet.
Labels: Government, US Aid, US Pakistan Relations
posted @ 6:52 PM,
,
Mitigating Supremacy of Pakistani parliament?
Friday, October 16, 2009
The debate about the Kerry Luger bill passed by both houses of America has been on in National Assembly of Pakistan. The bill grants $ 1.5 bn per annum for five years but has certain conditions attached to it. These conditions have been rejected by the opposition parties, media and a wide cross section of Pakistani society. The pressure on the government has been so intense that ultimately some of its parliamentarians too opposed the conditions. The conditions relate to micromanagement of the aid money, American access to persons under the garb of pursuing nuclear proliferation network and involvement in the affairs of Pakistan army promotions and the use of military aid. But the most offensive condition relates to the language used while talking about Pakistan's handling of terrorism which presupposes Pakistan to be sponsoring terrorism and asks it to cease it.
However, the surprising thing has been the sudden flight back of Pakistan's foreign minister to Washington, while the debate in the national assembly is still on, to have an explanatory note added to the bill to mitigate the effects of the conditions laid down in the bill before the bill was signed by the American president. And, the latest is that the debate in the Pakistani parliament has been wound up without any vote on the subject or without any resolution. What's the use of such a debate? Where is the writ of the Pakistani parliament? Whither democracy?
Labels: Democracy, Governance, Parliament, US Aid, US Pakistan Relations
posted @ 7:45 PM,
,
Will the parliamentarians rise up to the occasion?
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Nasim Zehra writes in The News International of October 07, 2009,
The ball is now in the court of Pakistan's elected legislators. As they formulate a response they must recognise that if Pakistan faces a financial crunch, the United States faces a strategic one. For the US to walk away from Pakistan is a virtual impossibility at this juncture. It is far more unaffordable for them since Pakistan occupies more than 50 per cent of the space in their strategic calculation. Meanwhile $1.5 billion accounts for roughly three per cent of Pakistan's federal and provincial annual budgets.If Pakistan's legislators are able to rise to the occasion and craft a consensus response to the Kerry-Lugar bill, they will have proved their worth as men and women who are capable of promoting and protecting the interests and dignity of the citizens of the country. Otherwise, whether democracy or dictatorship, Pakistan's parliament is merely a rubber stamp which follows the will of a handful of individuals who exercise their authority overlooking constitutionally defined institutional mechanisms like the Cabinet, defence committee the parliament.
How right Nasim Zehra is. It's indeed a momentous occasion for the parliamentarians to rise up to the occasion setting aside their petty differences and speak out their conscious which may or may not be as per their party's policy. Security and integrity of Pakistan are far more important than $ 1.5 bn.
Labels: US Aid, US Pakistan Relations
posted @ 6:52 PM,
,
Is Baitullah Masud a US Agent?
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Haji Turkistan Betani, a former close aide of Baitullah Mahsud, has claimed that Baitullah Masud was American agent. The former during an interview with a local TV channel has sted that he was with Baitullah Masud once the latter sent his men to assassinate Benazir Bhutto. Betani stated that if Baitullah Masud was an not American agent he would have by now been targeted by US drones.
During the ongoing Swat operation, some of the weapons, equipment and munitions seized by Pakistan army have been found to be of American origin. How did these fall into the hands of Baitullah Masud?
During the ongoing Swat operation, some of the weapons, equipment and munitions seized by Pakistan army have been found to be of American origin. How did these fall into the hands of Baitullah Masud?
Labels: Baitullah Masud, Benazir Bhutto, US Pakistan Relations, War on Terror
posted @ 2:32 PM,
,
America Supports Pakistan's Stand on Kashmir
Friday, June 12, 2009
The recent statement by US Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs William Burns, after his meeting with Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is a welcome shift from America's earlier stance of indifference on Kashmir Issue. On a three days' visit to India, William Burns while addressing a press conference said, " It remains our view that a resolution of that (Kashmir) issue has to take into account wishes of the Kashmiri people".
It's an indication that America has come to realize as to how the resolution of Kashmir Issue is linked with war on terror and peace in the region. However, it's just the beginning and Pakistan should not lay high hopes as America will continue to change its stances as it suits it. This shift in American policy, a sort of reward to Pakistan, appears to be due to the serious resolve of Pakistan to wage war on terror as is evident from the ongoing military operation in Malaknd, Swat and Bannu.
It's an indication that America has come to realize as to how the resolution of Kashmir Issue is linked with war on terror and peace in the region. However, it's just the beginning and Pakistan should not lay high hopes as America will continue to change its stances as it suits it. This shift in American policy, a sort of reward to Pakistan, appears to be due to the serious resolve of Pakistan to wage war on terror as is evident from the ongoing military operation in Malaknd, Swat and Bannu.
Labels: India, IndoPak Relations, Kashmir Issue, US Pakistan Relations, War on Terror
posted @ 11:12 AM,
,
