What's new

Gerneral Kiani will have strategic talks with US

AZADPAKISTAN2009

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
37,669
Reaction score
68
Country
Pakistan
Location
Canada
Pakistan Army Chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani is set to become the first army chief to participate in Pak-US strategic talks on March 24.

US Defence Secretary Robert Gates and National Security Adviser Gen James Jones are also expected to participate in the talks.

Pakistan's Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi will lead his team, while ISI chief Lt. Gen Ahmed Shuja Pasha will represent the country's security interests

Reference:
http://sify.com/news/top-pakistani-...-dialogue-news-international-kdppueajiib.html
 
.
Pakistan Army Chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani is set to become the first army chief to participate in Pak-US strategic talks on March 24.

US Defence Secretary Robert Gates and National Security Adviser Gen James Jones are also expected to participate in the talks.

Pakistan's Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi will lead his team, while ISI chief Lt. Gen Ahmed Shuja Pasha will represent the country's security interests

Reference:
Top Pakistani defence officials to participate in Pak-US strategic dialogue

Just underscores the positive change in the US-Pak dynamic over the last year or so. There was a flurry of news articles over the last two days praising the Pakistan Army and stressing long term cooperation across multiple areas, including economic, military and strategic regional interests. Good signs, these.
 
.
This one is actually positive we will be

"GETTING" some stuff in this one :blink:

Obama wants to finish off taliban so likely he needs Pakistan forces to take a decisie push into Afghanistan and take over the region so war could end and Afghanistan can join pakistan as next province

This will protect Afghans and also safe guard US interest against russian intentions in region

We could finally get something 80 Helicopters or economic aid for miliatry and support we need to end this war

This is big becasue the level of talks that will be done

"NO .... other general has ever been involved in such discussions before from other country" - expect some major decisions


Text taken from the source
The Obama administration is keen to show some achievements in the war against militants before the mid-term elections in November.

The overwhelming feeling in Washington is that the Pakistani military can play a key role in achieving this target. (ANI)
 
.
^we can read whatever angle we want - one thing is pretty clear - Pakistan's security / defence affairs are now the 'purview' of the military - the GoP has no other choice but to 'toe-the-line'. now is this good or bad? - well i'm sure we will have 'divergent' views on this.

the floor in open!
 
.
^^i think its ok for now. you cannt simply ignore military which ruled pakistan for half the time. let them be part of the system in one way or the other. and with the passage of time when democracy gains some strength then we can slowly change the dynamics of this internal power game.
 
.
^^i think its ok for now. you cannt simply ignore military which ruled pakistan for half the time. let them be part of the system in one way or the other. and with the passage of time when democracy gains some strength then we can slowly change the dynamics of this internal power game.

With due respect sir, what do we mean by democracy? is it wht we have got now is it called democracy? then we are better off with dictatorship.

A slap on the face of civilian goverment that a military chief is participating in strategic talk, where is the presedent, PM n leader of the nation? bcoz untill we dont have competent, educated people and the system to support them. we will never b able to withstand democratic goverment. and powers like ISI, military and establishments wont just bow to so called leader,until they r tamed by reasoning. none of the leader have got it.

and on the side note: excpet imran khan i think i prefer General kayani to run the show. civilians are useless.

no vision at all. :no:
 
. .
With due respect sir, what do we mean by democracy? is it wht we have got now is it called democracy? then we are better off with dictatorship.

A slap on the face of civilian goverment that a military chief is participating in strategic talk, where is the presedent, PM n leader of the nation? bcoz untill we dont have competent, educated people and the system to support them. we will never b able to withstand democratic goverment. and powers like ISI, military and establishments wont just bow to so called leader,until they r tamed by reasoning. none of the leader have got it.

and on the side note: excpet imran khan i think i prefer General kayani to run the show. civilians are useless.

no vision at all. :no:

Unfortunately as much as I would like our civilian government to spearhead these discussions, both Zardari and the PM are clueless and are incapable of communicating Pakistan's interests properly. In other words, in this company, both are simply out of their depth. You can attribute this to their lack of education and a very limited understanding of what goes on around Pakistan's neighbourhood because both of these gents are more suitable for the lota politics of Pakistan.

Leaving the military to run point on these discussions also has its downsides because the Army will always look at things very conservatively and suspiciously. You want the right kind of balance. However I am not sure if the civilians feel up to it and on the other hand I am also not sure if the Army is in the mood to relinquish some of this control over to them after the many about turns that the GoP has taken starting with the ill-thought out decision to send DG-ISI to India, then moving the ISI under the MoI, then talking about no-first use etc. All these things have undermined the image of the GoP in the eyes of the military and this is one reason that Army would not want to relinquish the control of the security and strategy discussions over to the politicians. Its all unfortunate but such is the ground reality.
 
.
This is a military to military talk they are working together

Strategic talks with US Defence Secretary Robert Gates should always be led by civilians politicians from our side. As is patently clear, our Minister of Defence, Ch. Mukhtar is missing from the picture because he is a donkey when it comes to defence affairs. Essentially a political appointee who can't tell the head apart from its *** when it comes to national security and defence matters.

This should have been a meeting led by the Pakistani Defence Minister with appropriate officers from the Armed Forces assisting in discussions including the DG-ISI. The fact that the CoAS is running point means that our civilian leadership is lacking in two things...ability to assert control, and secondly for being out of their depth in these discussions. When was the last time we heard our PM or the DM being able to wax eloquent while postulating Pakistan's security challenges? Never!

Its a sorry state of affairs when in Pakistan ministers are chosen not for their capabilities and skills, rather to fulfill past promises of placement in key ministries as a reward for helping out in the lota politics.
 
Last edited:
.
Well Strategic talks are for Military operation , the gov already approved operations in Afghanistan time for operation

This is not PCB cricket borad that the senate has to create a adhoc comittee , once the military has ok to engage Talibans now they are discussing operation vs Taliban elimination


Its logical to provide long term stability in region

Gov officials should focus on the prices in Pakistan for food and other items , they got 5 billion for economy what are they doing with that
 
.
^we can read whatever angle we want - one thing is pretty clear - Pakistan's security / defence affairs are now the 'purview' of the military - the GoP has no other choice but to 'toe-the-line'. now is this good or bad? - well i'm sure we will have 'divergent' views on this.

the floor in open!

Couple of things - so long as civilian governments continue to mismanage domestic affairs - economy, law and order and infrastructure specifically - they will continue to remain on the back foot with respect to a much more disciplined and popular institution.

We see this dynamic today with respect to both GoP vs Judiciary and GoP vs Military.

Second, so long as civilian governments continue to appoint politicians without a lick of understanding of complex defence and foreign affairs to these important ministries, they will (obviously) lack the ability and respect to take charge of policy making in these departments.

The provision in the constitution to mandate that cabinet ministers must be part of the elected legislature is a huge problem.

The cabinet should ideally be staffed with technocrats with experience and expertise in their field, and at the very least any MNA or Senator wishing to be part of the cabinet should given up their elected seat. It is a great disservice to the constituency of the MNA/MPA who becomes a cabinet minster since his/her time will be primarily used up in running the ministry assigned to him/her - nor is it fair on the individual to expect him/her to do two jobs.

The executive should be allowed to nominate a cabinet of his/her choice to parliament which approves the nominations through a full vote or committee vote.
 
.
WASHINGTON: Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani will be the first army chief to participate in the US-Pakistan strategic dialogue to be held here on March 24.

Also for the first time, the Americans are expected to include their defence secretary Robert Gates and national security adviser Gen James Jones.

ISI chief Gen Ahmed Shuja Pasha, who got one-year extension last week, will represent Pakistan’s security interests.

Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani, who chaired a preparatory meeting in Islamabad on Saturday, noted that the dialogue had already been enhanced from the official to the ministerial level.

This means that Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will lead their teams in the talks
.

Although, as the prime minister said, the dialogue would be broad-based, the inclusion of such senior defence and security officials indicates that military and security issues would dominate.

But equally important is the need for reviving the Pakistani economy and Islamabad is expected to send a number of proposals on how it believes the United States can help achieve this target.

The Americans have indicated that they are willing to help, particularly in the energy sector where they are prepared to finance some major projects, which can be recognised as symbols of US support for Pakistan, like the Tarbela dam.

Pakistan, however, will have a major disadvantage in these talks as the country does not have a finance minister who would have been the second most important person in their team after the army chief.

As the prime minister said in Islamabad on Saturday, the Americans also had indicated that the talks would be very broad-based, covering economic, defence, security and social sectors.

But the issue that concerns the Americans most is the situation in Afghanistan and Fata. The Obama administration is keen to show some achievements in the war against militants before the mid-term elections in November when all 435 congressmen and 34 senators seek re-election.

If the ruling Democratic Party wants to maintain its control over the US Senate and the House, it needs to show progress in Afghanistan and Fata. Failing to do so can cause them to lose the elections and also endanger President Barack Obama’s re-election in 2012.

The overwhelming feeling in Washington is that the Pakistani military can play a key role in achieving this target and diplomatic observers believe that one of the objectives of the strategic dialogue is to give Pakistan a chance to air its views on this issue.

The observers say that each side will use the dialogue to hear and convey its concerns and expectations to the other.

“This marks a good effort by the two sides to bridge the trust deficit, but the risk is that it becomes so broad-ranging that it loses focus,” warned one such observer.

The observers stressed the need for Pakistan to prioritise its objectives so that the dialogue could lead to concrete results.

They also urged Pakistan to ensure that substantial progress is also made on issues other than the war on terror, particularly on the economic front.

“The Pakistanis should not go back with the feeling that all the Americans wanted to do was to seek greater cooperation in the war against militants and the rest was window-dressing,” warned another observer.

The observers recalled that the US and Pakistan have been holding strategic talks for at least two decades now, without much progress.

http://http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/front-page/19-senior-military-officials-to-attend-washington-talks-530-hh-01
 
.
Couple of things - so long as civilian governments continue to mismanage domestic affairs - economy, law and order and infrastructure specifically - they will continue to remain on the back foot with respect to a much more disciplined and popular institution.

We see this dynamic today with respect to both GoP vs Judiciary and GoP vs Military.

Second, so long as civilian governments continue to appoint politicians without a lick of understanding of complex defence and foreign affairs to these important ministries, they will (obviously) lack the ability and respect to take charge of policy making in these departments.

The provision in the constitution to mandate that cabinet ministers must be part of the elected legislature is a huge problem.

The cabinet should ideally be staffed with technocrats with experience and expertise in their field, and at the very least any MNA or Senator wishing to be part of the cabinet should given up their elected seat. It is a great disservice to the constituency of the MNA/MPA who becomes a cabinet minster since his/her time will be primarily used up in running the ministry assigned to him/her - nor is it fair on the individual to expect him/her to do two jobs.

The executive should be allowed to nominate a cabinet of his/her choice to parliament which approves the nominations through a full vote or committee vote.

i dont disagree but that is the american system - i'm not sure but our country follows the UK system of governence (at least on paper) where the ministers do not give up their parliamentry seats while serving on a cabinet. same in India.
 
.
every nation has its own limitation of interests ,Military talks are not the big thing unless we follow our route of interest not of the other party .
 
.
Well as long as we can discuss a scenario where we can send in 30-40 thousand troops into Afghanistan and take over opeartioons and just simply blockade terrorist in Afghanistan by operations (joint operation) , and a financial package for our army and economy I think it would be great ...

We need to stop terrorism coming in from Afghanistan trying to escape into Pakistan from Afghanistan borders
 
Last edited:
.
Back
Top Bottom