Obama, Islam Karimov discuss Afghan supply route

Discussion in 'Americas' started by President Camacho, Sep 30, 2011.

Share This Page

  1. President Camacho
    Offline

    President Camacho FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,685
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,415 / -0
    Obama, Uzbek leader discuss Afghan supply route


    President Barack Obama and Uzbekistan's President Islam Karimov discussed expanding U.S. use of the central Asian country as a route to supply troops in Afghanistan, a U.S. official said on Thursday, amid growing concern about the viability of Pakistan as a transit route.

    On a day when overtures to Uzbekistan seemed to stretch right across Washington, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met her Uzbek counterpart and said both sides want to deepen ties.

    And in Congress, changes in U.S. law were pending that would allow more military aid to Uzbekistan, despite its poor human rights record.

    Capitol Hill aides said the change was done partly at the urging of the Obama administration, which is shifting more military supply lines to the Central Asian country.

    Obama's outreach to Karimov, whose has faced U.S. criticism over his human rights record, came as the United States and Pakistan are locked in a diplomatic crisis over U.S. accusations linking Pakistan's chief intelligence agency to militant attacks on Americans in Afghanistan.

    CLINTON TALKS TO UZBEK; LAWMAKERS MAKE CHANGES

    "We value our relationship with Uzbekistan. They have been very helpful to us with respect to the Northern Distribution Network," Clinton said, referring to the supply route that goes through the Central Asian country to Afghanistan.

    She spoke after meeting Uzbek Foreign Minister Elyor Ganiyev. Their dialogue raised "our concerns about human rights and political freedoms," Clinton said, but added that there were "some signs" of progress on that front.

    The Senate Appropriations Committee last week approved a bill that would allow the United States to waive restrictions on aid to Uzbekistan if Clinton certifies this is needed to obtain access to and from Afghanistan.

    U.S. military aid to Uzbekistan has been restricted since 2004 because of its human rights record. House appropriators have dropped the restrictions from their bill funding foreign aid next year, an aide said, making it likely some version of the change will pass.

    An aide to Senator Patrick Leahy said the Obama administration had pushed for easing the restrictions on military aid to Uzbekistan due to concerns about potential limits to continuing cooperation from Pakistan with the U.S. war effort in Afghanistan.

    But rather than drop the longstanding restrictions, Leahy, who chairs the panel that funds foreign aid, added the waiver that requires the administration to assess Uzbekistan's progress on human rights, and a report on any diversion of U.S. aid for "corrupt" purposes, the aide said.

    Republican Senator Lindsey Graham told Reuters he had visited Uzbekistan and seen Karimov recently. "I expect a major breakthrough between us and the Uzbeks in terms of ground and air access," Graham said.

    "We're going to probably replace 50 percent of what we ship into Afghanistan from Pakistan, will go through the northern route, Uzbekistan," Graham, a member of the appropriations committee, said.

    One reason U.S. officials want to expand the Northern Distribution Network is to enable more movement on the network in both directions, a U.S. military spokeswoman said.

    She said the network had been seen primarily as a way of getting supplies into Afghanistan, but with the planned drawdown over the coming years, the United States wants agreements letting it haul materiel from Afghanistan as well.

    The United States also has been looking to expand overflight options throughout the region, she said.



    Rioters
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  2. BATMAN
    Offline

    BATMAN ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2007
    Messages:
    16,143
    Ratings:
    +6 / 8,839 / -8
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    First question.. who will pay the repair of ground in all transit ground routes transit?

    Indians shall also look for alternate transit route for themselves, instead of counting on Zardari for ever.
  3. President Camacho
    Offline

    President Camacho FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,685
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,415 / -0
    Perhaps you didn't read it well enough...
    If it is happening, then there's a pretty big reason behind that.
  4. BATMAN
    Offline

    BATMAN ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2007
    Messages:
    16,143
    Ratings:
    +6 / 8,839 / -8
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    Actually that's the key.... if it happens and in case of Pakistan the cost of road damge is in billions.. instead we have unpaid invoices, which is clear violation of similar agreement.
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  5. VelocuR
    Offline

    VelocuR SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2009
    Messages:
    5,303
    Ratings:
    +1 / 5,295 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Canada
    Then Clinton have to ask Kazakhstan and then Russia. More costs $$$ and less effectives and slow shipping. Not only this, Russia will monitor these supply routes.

    [​IMG]


    At least, the heavy burden on Pakistan is becoming less, give a try to Uzbekistan a new experienment. Lol.
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  6. President Camacho
    Offline

    President Camacho FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,685
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,415 / -0
    That's why I posted this article.

    Why do you think the US is taking so much pain? Why all this recent spat?

    The route through Pakistan costs fraction of what it costs through Central Asia.

    Do you think the US would spend all that extra money only to shout at Pakistan?
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  7. muse
    Offline

    muse PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2006
    Messages:
    13,038
    Ratings:
    +0 / 12,468 / -0
    You know this option was available to the US all along - how did that work out for them? I actually hope this does work out for the US, Karimov and IMU will give the Uzbeks cause to reconsider and Pakistan needs to be away from any US security paradigm.
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  8. President Camacho
    Offline

    President Camacho FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,685
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,415 / -0
    Well, Muse, the US never really deviated from its agenda.

    We are giving the upcoming supply costs more importance than they deserve. If the supply costs in the future were to be such a big concern, then Mullen and Panetta would have never minced those words, and would have rather waited with eyes closed to whatever they say happened. There have been numerous occasions in the past that provided more than mere excuses to use such harsh, or even harsher words, but they never came. And in the end, they came from the man always considered a close friend of Islamabad.

    But they chose this moment, so now must be the time to treat Pakistan not as an ally, but as just another interested party, equal to (or may be even less than) all others.

    The solution to Afghanistan may look close to the Americans, but they are not 100% sure either, that is why they are still interested in keeping the minimum line alive through Pakistan.

    I cannot comment much on Uzebkistan, because I have not read enough about the politics there to see how much the people may support the likes of the IMU against Karimov. But I know for sure, Karimov would be more than happy to have the sanctions lifted to get more and more military aid.

    The senators pushing for the newer supply route chair the most powerful ones of all the committees. Especially the Committe on Armed Services, before which Mullen gave his surprising revelations. It includes powerful anti-Pakistan senators like McCain and Levin. So it is not just any insignificant senator like Mark Kirk making hearsay allegations. Rather it is a sign of the seasons to come.

    Also, you must have noticed that there's been quite a quiet on the part of the TTP, the main host of the IMU. It is so related to all that is going on between Pakistan, US and Afghanistan, don't you think?

    Four months back the TTP was so powerful, it attacked PNS Mehran and managed (not really managed, more like achieved the target) to destroy a central part of the Navy's Radar system. Then last to last month I read how weakened they have become and how their row with the Haqqanis forced them to move out. (By the way, the slain terrorist at PNS Mehran did look pretty Uzbek to me).

    TTP does an attack or two in Quetta... slowly everything dies down. Next, we see a 15,000 strong Haqqanis attacking Americans right on their embassy. I mean 15,000? Seriously? They were barely 1,000 in late 2008. If it is really true, they should be made Presidents of Pakistan to induce similar growth in other sectors.

    Strangely, once Haqqani says he is in Afghanistan... next he says he is in Pakistan. All from a distant radio set, or something like that.

    Mullen says it is the ISI, next - Faisal Shahzad's fund transfer was known to ISI, next - a 2007 attack also linked to ISI, next - .... more to come I am sure.


    So you see Muse, the US never really deviated from its agenda. The supply lines were always there, incidents were too. Supply lines are still there, and incidents still happen. There's a very strong reason the US has decided to change the supply route now, and it is in no way related to the latest attack on the embassy.

    Earlier, the eyes were closed, ears blocked, mouths shut, only to go as far as it could with Pakistan. In the end, it will be a multi-pronged attack on Pakistan, but none a direct one. Greatest of the harms will be the economical ones. And yes, in the final outcome, the US will indeed get its passage through Pakistan, and everything will be much quieter than it is now.
  9. AZADPAKISTAN2009
    Online

    AZADPAKISTAN2009 ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2009
    Messages:
    10,861
    Ratings:
    +10 / 7,067 / -2
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    Russia will Veto Uzbak's moves just watch and see
  10. SpArK
    Offline

    SpArK PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST

    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    Messages:
    19,975
    Ratings:
    +8 / 27,858 / -1
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    LOL .. it is nt in UN.. These are between NATO and CAS..

    Maybe u can veto in assembly..what say?:what:
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  11. AZADPAKISTAN2009
    Online

    AZADPAKISTAN2009 ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2009
    Messages:
    10,861
    Ratings:
    +10 / 7,067 / -2
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    Russia will Smack Uzbaks , from behind and get them straightened out
  12. 53fd
    Offline

    53fd MEMBER

    New Recruit

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2010
    Messages:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 7,280 / -0
    The TTP gave refuge to certain Uzbek fighters in the FATA region, who wanted to participate in the Jihad in the AfPak region. But the IMU as a group does not have any presence in Pakistan; just as the Arab, Somali, Chechen fighters representing various groups. Because they are not operational as a group inside Pakistan, & have to be given protection & shelter by the local terrorists. Tajikistan/Uzbekistan, Northern Afghanistan is a different game altogether, especially with the ethnic divides in Afghanistan between Uzbeks & others, they are very much on 'home turf'. They speak the same language, know the geography well of the border regions of Northern Afghanistan with Tajikistan & Uzbekistan, which is why IMU as a group is operational & very active in the region.

    However, if you are familiar with Central Asia, you will see that IMU has a strong presence in Northern Afghanistan (Kunduz, Takhar, other provinces), Tajikistan & Uzbekistan. Their ideology is in line with the Al-Qaeda Salafi/Wahabi one, not with the Taliban's Deobandi one. They operate out of bases in Tajikistan & Taliban-controlled areas of northern Afghanistan (which have NOT been dismantled), & have even made raids into southern Kyrgyzstan in the past. They have a huge presence in the whole Central Asian region, & NATO supplies might suffer a worse fate than what they did through Pakistan, besides the extra logistical cost, transits, extra time etc. This will prove to be detrimental for the US efforts in Afghanistan.

    Haqqani said he no longer felt insecure in Afghanistan, so he moved to Afghanistan. Pakistan said the Haqqani group was not operating from Pakistan. There is no contradiction in those statements.
  13. President Camacho
    Offline

    President Camacho FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,685
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,415 / -0
    You are a little uninformed.

    Try looking for the statements made by Litvinenko on his deathbed. It may give you some interesting insights into this world of terrorism.

    ---------- Post added at 10:26 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:23 AM ----------

    Tahir Yuldashev, do you know how he died?
  14. 53fd
    Offline

    53fd MEMBER

    New Recruit

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2010
    Messages:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 7,280 / -0
    He died in a drone strike I believe, he got injured & passed away.

    The point is, yes, there were/are some Uzbek fighters in Pakistan's FATA region, but IMU as a group is not operational in Pakistan. These Uzbek fighters want to support their fellow Muslim brothers in 'Jihad' in the AfPak region, & have to be given refuge by the local terrorists, because neither do they know the local language or the culture, they do not know the terrain of the region, which is very important in warfare.
  15. President Camacho
    Offline

    President Camacho FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,685
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,415 / -0
    Do you see the contradiction?

    Of course you will never see any attack claimed by IMU. But it does not mean they haven't expended blood and sweat for it. It simply means that TTP will claim the credit for the shelter it provides.
    • Thanks Thanks x 2