Gen Wynne: US Pressure not to be accepted

[VCheng]

........
just a reminder and a knock on the consciousness.

.....................
but a very good reason to show it a mirror to shut it up when it brings up the human rights issues in Pakistan but turns a blind eye where its interests outweigh its concerns for human rights.

Showing a mirror alone will never suffice to shut anyone up, let alone a superpower, and neither will it do Pakistan or its policies any good. On the other hand, putting up the same old, tired and failed "reminders" merely reinforces the perceptions that the mindset of the military leaders continues to be tied up by the mental straitjackets of old, indicating that the flexibility to deal with the new environments will continue to be lacking.

National interests reign supreme. It is best to align them if at all possible. A blunt, but simple truth.

 

[notorious_eagle]

National interests reign supreme. It is best to align them if at all possible. A blunt, but simple truth.

No doubt, i agree with you 100%. This is why i believe Pakistan has to completely revamp and reassess her relationship with the US as the relationship is not equitable and is highly skewed towards the US. Pakistan's policy should be setup considering Pakistan's interests supreme and not of the US.

 

[VCheng]

No doubt, i agree with you 100%. This is why i believe Pakistan has to completely revamp and reassess her relationship with the US as the relationship is not equitable and is highly skewed towards the US. Pakistan's policy should be setup considering Pakistan's interests supreme and not of the US.

Absolutely correct Sir. However, sudden changes deliver shocks that the national backbone must be able to withstand. Either Pakistan changes slowly and comfortably, or have the strength needed to survive the jolt. I would prefer, and advocate, the former choice.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

US pressure not to be accepted, says Gen Wynne | DAWN.COM

Diplomatic sources in the United States now blame Pakistan for blocking the Nato supply route deal by raising afresh the apology issue, claiming that all issues had been settled during and after the Chicago summit.

What happened here was a case of the US trying to be 'too clever for its own good' and seeking to gain a propaganda win when it appeared that all the 'technical issues' (minus apology) had been settled and the NATO transit lines would be reopened.

The US, through Panetta, decided to go on a bash Pakistan spree (ridiculing Pakistan in India and making the 'out of patience' comments in Afghanistan), and therefore attempted to make it look like Pakistan was 'pressured' into opening the supply lines, rather than the US having to negotiate the reopening and compromise with Pakistan on the issue. It was Panetta's ridcule of Pakistan and attacks against it that brought the apology demand back on the table front and center, and resulted in the COAS snubbing the visiting US official.

I don't think anyone would disagree that the 'media spin' that the US Establishment would have put on a reopening of the supply lines after Panetta's comments of 'we are running out of patience with Pakistan', would have been that Pakistan was pressured to do so and did so without an apology.

No one is to blame here for a 'supply line deal falling through' (if there was one that was imminent) other than the US and its loud mouth Defence Secretary Panetta.

National interests reign supreme. It is best to align them if at all possible. A blunt, but simple truth.

In that case, advising the Obama adminstration to stop putting 'personal political interests' before 'US national interests in maintaining a positive relationship with Pakistan (by apologizing to Pakistan), as alluded to by Senators Fienstein and McCain, would be in order.

 

[VCheng]

.................

In that case, advising the Obama adminstration to stop putting 'personal political interests' before 'US national interests in maintaining a positive relationship with Pakistan (by apologizing to Pakistan), as alluded to by Senators Fienstein and McCain, would be in order.

I think that everyone in the corridors of power realizes that it is important to remain engaged with, and on the good side of, Pakistan, as much as is possible. After all, Senators Feinstein and McCain said that very publicly after getting appropriate input from their support staff, did they not? There is much that happens behind the scenes to ensure that the national policy takes into account all possible angles.

It is equally important to ensure that Pakistan also represents a coherent policy, and have consistent representations by its delegates both in private and in public, so that business can move forward.

 

[BATMAN]

when it comes to India, well a watchdog is needed for China

What is Indian doing to be watchdog? nothing!
India has better its relations with China, since US occupied Afghanistan.

IMO US need India to keep Pakistan in check.

I hope you have not forgotten, how US had helped Indian army to establish it self in Afghanistan and even feeding Indian army, with subsidized petrol from Pakistan.

I would also like to make corrections to rest of your post but it is off topic.

On topic... Dawn News is a US paid news paper and what ever it prints is part of a larger propaganda policy, and clearly context to Wayeen's remark is missing.
Thread starter is an Indian and it is clear he just is helping spread mis-undersatnding.

 

[RazorMC]

No doubt, i agree with you 100%. This is why i believe Pakistan has to completely revamp and reassess her relationship with the US as the relationship is not equitable and is highly skewed towards the US. Pakistan's policy should be setup considering Pakistan's interests supreme and not of the US.

But here's the problem: How can Pakistan deal with the US on an equal basis?

We are too reliant on their financial assistance. Every US official is given importance regardless of rank and position. We have failed to improve our economic situation in any significant way. We are either dependent on one country or another most of the time. We expect the US to just grant us a free-trade agreement without first trying to make our exports more competetive.

 

[fd24]

But here's the problem: How can Pakistan deal with the US on an equal basis?

We are too reliant on their financial assistance. Every US official is given importance regardless of rank and position. We have failed to improve our economic situation in any significant way. We are either dependent on one country or another most of the time. We expect the US to just grant us a free-trade agreement without first trying to make our exports more competetive.

I hear what you are saying. First thing one has to look at is its a bit of a myth that the USA give us plenty of aid - they dont. There are funds forwarded to Pakistan of which i believe 85% never gets into the nations coffers - its milked off by our corrupt leaders and they line their own pockets. These leeches have sold the sovereignty and respect of our land down the river - hence the breaking of ties would have little effect on the average person in Pakistan.
Secondly when in the 90s things got tough for our nation and we had no aid from the USA due to sanctions our economy did a lot better - because we actually pulled our finger out!
Our relationship with the US has always been imbalanced and we have had to bow to their demands which have always favoured them. Pakistan must for once put themselves first and if that means suffering till we see the daylight - so be it. We cannot allow the systematic bullying and constant disrespect of our nations name to keep the Amreekans happy. Lets make ourself happy first and give our nation priority...

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I think that everyone in the corridors of power realizes that it is important to remain engaged with, and on the good side of, Pakistan, as much as is possible.

If that is indeed the case, then why have 'personal political interests', in not offering an apology, taken precedence over 'doing the right thing and advancing US National Interests' simultaneously, through a high level US apology to Pakistan?

 

[VCheng]

If that is indeed the case, then why have 'personal political interests', in not offering an apology, taken precedence over 'doing the right thing and advancing US National Interests' simultaneously, through a high level US apology to Pakistan?

They have not. While an apology at the Presidential level has always been unlikely, given the sensitivities of an election year, a suitably worded statement, coming from a high military level, that will satisfy Pakistan's need for an apology, is clearly still possible - but only if Pakistan plays its cards right.

........... First thing one has to look at is its a bit of a myth that the USA give us plenty of aid - they dont. There are funds forwarded to Pakistan of which i believe 85% never gets into the nations coffers - its milked off by our corrupt leaders and they line their own pockets. ...................

Hang on a minute!

How can aid be a "myth" when USA "forwards the funds to Pakistan"? If the Pakistani corrupt leaders milk it off, how does that deny the fact that USA does indeed provide huge sums of money to Pakistan?

 

[fd24]

Hang on a minute!

How can aid be a "myth" when USA "forwards the funds to Pakistan"? If the Pakistani corrupt leaders milk it off, how does that deny the fact that USA does indeed provide huge sums of money to Pakistan?

There are 2 issues VC. Firstly we have elected a bunch of morons that are susceptible to accept bribes and betraying their nation and secondly what the USA constitute aid. I do not accept the giving of bribes to the likes of Zardari as aid. VC I wish this "aid" was not given and defined as aid. My nation doesnt benefit from it. To blackmail and make our leaders conform to the request of the Americans .
Our nation has to reconstitute and redefine the relationship it has and wants in the future with the USA. - without strings attached or "crocodile aid" clouding the decisions that have to be made. No more blackmailing please. Let us be free from the stigma and free to decide whats in OUR interests....

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

They have not ...

Indeed they have, as you yourself point out immediately after that comment:

While an apology at the Presidential level has always been unlikely, given the sensitivities of an election year...

 

[VCheng]

Indeed they have, as you yourself point out immediately after that comment:

No Sir, for a Presidential election is waaaaaay bigger than just one person, so it is not just "personal political interests" as you described them.

There are 2 issues VC. Firstly we have elected a bunch of morons that are susceptible to accept bribes and betraying their nation and secondly what the USA constitute aid. I do not accept the giving of bribes to the likes of Zardari as aid. VC I wish this "aid" was not given and defined as aid. My nation doesnt benefit from it. To blackmail and make our leaders conform to the request of the Americans .
Our nation has to reconstitute and redefine the relationship it has and wants in the future with the USA. - without strings attached or "crocodile aid" clouding the decisions that have to be made. No more blackmailing please. Let us be free from the stigma and free to decide whats in OUR interests....

If Pakistanis elect "morons" who betray their nation, then it is a problem for Pakistanis to solve. The funds transferred as aid are all accounted for and audited according to US laws, so there are no bribes to Zardari or anyone else. The funds are transferred into national accounts, but what happens after the transfer is up to the Pakistani government to audit, follow, spend and police.

 

[notorious_eagle]

If Pakistanis elect "morons" who betray their nation, then it is a problem for Pakistanis to solve. The funds transferred as aid are all accounted for and audited according to US laws, so there are no bribes to Zardari or anyone else. The funds are transferred into national accounts, but what happens after the transfer is up to the Pakistani government to audit, follow, spend and police.

Than why dole out aid which they know will end up in the pockets of cronies? Euphemisms wont change the reality, aid is a subtle word for bribe when it comes to Pakistan. Pretty much all the funds that are transferred to Pakistan in disguise of aid is used to buy up the loyalties of our leaders. $50 million for development of media in aid?? Give me a break. We all know what that $50 million is for. Try to be analytical about things and don't just take them at face value, a friendly advice .

As far as Pakistan electing leaders, well this is a very complex issue which might look simple at face value but is not. Lots of factors are in play in Pakistan's politics : despotism, favouritism, bradri system, feudal system, badmashi system etc etc etc.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Than why dole out aid which they know will end up in the pockets of cronies? Euphemisms wont change the reality, aid is a subtle word for bribe when it comes to Pakistan. Pretty much all the funds that are transferred to Pakistan in disguise of aid is used to buy up the loyalties of our leaders. $50 million for development of media in aid?? Give me a break. We all know what that $50 million is for. Try to be analytical about things and don't just take them at face value, a friendly advice .

this so called funding and aid practice is not Pakistan specific. Americans use their diplomats and even Ambassadors as an extended arm of CIA, refer to Hillary Clinton's memo which was instructing them to shadow the people in the UN, their eating habits, their credit card numbers, their personal phone numbers, emails etc. to extract as much information as possible. bribing the media and other opinion makers in a country is just another tactic to have enough pro-American voice in an apparently Anti-American country.

and if the things dont work as plan then use people like Raymond Davis and then lie to the teeth about his diplomatic immunity. in Peshawar, these "diplomats" are being stopped and caught many times loitering in the areas where they have no business as a diplomat and are found to be carrying weapons that go well beyond self defense and are sufficient to launch a raid on any military installation.

CIA has already waged an undercover war against Pakistan. And all the bomb blasts are not the handiwork of TTP, but we are striking back too. thats as much as I can say and normally when you see Panetta yapping with constipation pain you can bet that their CIA operatives have met an unnatural end.