NATO Summit: Pakistan Offers No Quarter

[Windjammer]

Who was this someone if you would please.

No one of Indian origin, hence your interest is complete. !

 

[lem34]

If it was upto democracy these trucks would never have stopped. Please stop giving ridiculous high fives to zardari. The DCC cleared his trip with specific instructions. The statements coming out of gilani and hina were pretty clear what this government wants to do but somehow cannot.

Electrol suicide??

 

[Safriz]

He is starting to wisen up

Now he is turning into one of those democratic leaders who become eyesore for Amreeka regardless of their commitment to "democracy". Time for another US based dictator in Pakistan??

For this courage alone, I have started to respect Zardari..it is not easy to be cornered by 40 nations and still able to speak up firmly!


GEO Zardari!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I though Obama refused to meet zardari??

part of it was courage but part of it was because he didnt get the money he asked for..if USA had issued the money..we would be hearing a different statement from zardari...apology or not USA could have bought tbeir way through pakistan......

 

[Guest01]

No one of Indian origin, hence your interest is complete. !

LoL since that is what you canbring up then I must say it is truly Pakistani textbook stuff bro. I sympathize my man Has to be true without question. What concern is the origin then!
Lions led bylambs it is then. LoL it was earlier the favorite marde monin reference to Pakistani army officers and generals someone tells me.

 

[Guest01]

Pakistan holds the trump card in the end game in Afghanistan, and the outcome of the current dispute depends on how well Pakistani leaders play their cards.

Pakistan has the longest border with Afghanistan and wields more influence there than any other country. It also provides the nearest seaport to Kabul. That is the fundamental reason why the U.S. has provided more than $20 billion to the country over the past decade, much of it to ensure supply logistics to US troops. “If we want to be successful in Afghanistan,” as General James L. Jones Jr., former National Security Advisor to President Barack Obama, said in recent congressional testimony, “the roads to that success have a lot to do with Pakistan.” Given these ground realities, the sooner the US apologizes to Pakistan for the Nov 26 incident to try and restore ties, the better it will be to achieve an end to the longest war in US history.

Haq's Musings: Vulnerability of US Supplies in Afghanistan

LoL, it really does not seem that Pakistan is holding any trump cards. I rather think that it is holding the limp cards. All respect to the old member s here, but considering that Pakistan is being royally shunned by one and all at the summit, I cannot comprehend what is coming up trumps!!!! No money, not funny!!!!

 

[Guest01]

part of it was courage but part of it was because he didnt get the money he asked for..if USA had issued the money..we would be hearing a different statement from zardari...apology or not USA could have bought tbeir way through pakistan......

I agree, most of it is about money in contemporary Pakistan. Whether it be commisson funds or the army coalition support funds. Paisa kisey nahin accha lagta hai bhai. Be nice please

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

For a fistful of dollars, America and Pakistan wrangle

By Sanjeev Miglani MAY 22, 2012


AFGHANISTAN | ASIF ALI ZARDARI | BARACK OBAMA | NATO


Pakistan’s relationship with the United States can’t get more transactional than the prolonged negotiations over restoration of the Pakistani supply route for NATO troops in Afghanistan.

Pakistan, according to leaked accounts of so-called private negotiations, is demanding $5000 as transit fee for allowing trucks to use the two most obvious routes into landlocked Afghanistan, blocked since November when two dozen Pakistani soldiers were killed in an U.S. air strike from Afghanistan. The United States which apparently paid about $250 for each vehicle carrying everything from fuel to bottled water all these years is ready to double that, but nowhere near the price Pakistan is demanding for its support of the war. It also wants an apology for the deaths of the soldiers but America has stopped short of that, offering regret instead.

The two countries will likely reach a compromise, probably sooner than later. But the whole image of so-called allied nations involved in grubby negotiations about trucking fees while there is a disastrous war going on – and leaking details of those talks – tells you how destructive the relationship has become. You would think Pakistan and the United States would try and figure how to prevent incidents such as the air strike near the Afghan-Pakistan that led to the closure of the supply route in the first place. Imagine another strike of that kind and the impact it would have on an already inflamed nation, weak as it may be. Instead negotiations went down to the wire ahead of the NATO summit in Chicago over how many more dollars Pakistan can make as a conduit for a war that has turned it into a battlefield itself.

And America, playing just as hardball, is refusing to give any quarter even though it is paying quite a high price to transport the supplies by a combination of air and land through a northern route into Afghanistan, bypassing Pakistan. In any case, higher trucking fees in the closing stages of the war, can only be a drop in the vast amount America spends on its military – more than the next four countries put together.

Like a marriage gone sour, it seems to draw the worst in each country. Pakistan got a last minute invite to the NATO summit in Chicago, even though it has been a key player in its war in Afghanistan but its presence seemed to only highlight its isolation. President Barack Obama wouldn’t hold talks with President Asif Ali Zardari, who arguably is just as important to his path out of Afghanistan as Afghan President Hamid Karzai whom he met. Worse, Obama thanked all the countries that had helped NATO in its war in Afghanistan including the Central Asian nations through which supplies are being routed at the moment, but not Pakistan through which the bulk of supplies were transported all these years, save for the current six-month halt.

For a proud nation of 180 million people, the image of its president bounding across the hall to shake hands with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton while Karzai, the head of a nation long considered a poor cousin, confers with Obama, must rankle further. Some people back home may argue, in retrospect, that Pakistan might have been better off staying away from the meeting. The worry is Zardari, still the consummate survivor, may have given the hardliners another weapon as he heads back from Chicago with little to show for.

For a fistful of dollars, America and Pakistan wrangle | Pakistan: Now or Never?

 

[illusion8]

^^^ could be a biased take - the author being probablyof Indian origin, But Pakistan has stood its stand so not all that bad.

 

[Guest01]

For a fistful of dollars, America and Pakistan wrangle

By Sanjeev Miglani MAY 22, 2012


AFGHANISTAN | ASIF ALI ZARDARI | BARACK OBAMA | NATO


Pakistan’s relationship with the United States can’t get more transactional than the prolonged negotiations over restoration of the Pakistani supply route for NATO troops in Afghanistan.

Pakistan, according to leaked accounts of so-called private negotiations, is demanding $5000 as transit fee for allowing trucks to use the two most obvious routes into landlocked Afghanistan, blocked since November when two dozen Pakistani soldiers were killed in an U.S. air strike from Afghanistan. The United States which apparently paid about $250 for each vehicle carrying everything from fuel to bottled water all these years is ready to double that, but nowhere near the price Pakistan is demanding for its support of the war. It also wants an apology for the deaths of the soldiers but America has stopped short of that, offering regret instead.

The two countries will likely reach a compromise, probably sooner than later. But the whole image of so-called allied nations involved in grubby negotiations about trucking fees while there is a disastrous war going on – and leaking details of those talks – tells you how destructive the relationship has become. You would think Pakistan and the United States would try and figure how to prevent incidents such as the air strike near the Afghan-Pakistan that led to the closure of the supply route in the first place. Imagine another strike of that kind and the impact it would have on an already inflamed nation, weak as it may be. Instead negotiations went down to the wire ahead of the NATO summit in Chicago over how many more dollars Pakistan can make as a conduit for a war that has turned it into a battlefield itself.

And America, playing just as hardball, is refusing to give any quarter even though it is paying quite a high price to transport the supplies by a combination of air and land through a northern route into Afghanistan, bypassing Pakistan. In any case, higher trucking fees in the closing stages of the war, can only be a drop in the vast amount America spends on its military – more than the next four countries put together.

Like a marriage gone sour, it seems to draw the worst in each country. Pakistan got a last minute invite to the NATO summit in Chicago, even though it has been a key player in its war in Afghanistan but its presence seemed to only highlight its isolation. President Barack Obama wouldn’t hold talks with President Asif Ali Zardari, who arguably is just as important to his path out of Afghanistan as Afghan President Hamid Karzai whom he met. Worse, Obama thanked all the countries that had helped NATO in its war in Afghanistan including the Central Asian nations through which supplies are being routed at the moment, but not Pakistan through which the bulk of supplies were transported all these years, save for the current six-month halt.

For a proud nation of 180 million people, the image of its president bounding across the hall to shake hands with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton while Karzai, the head of a nation long considered a poor cousin, confers with Obama, must rankle further. Some people back home may argue, in retrospect, that Pakistan might have been better off staying away from the meeting. The worry is Zardari, still the consummate survivor, may have given the hardliners another weapon as he heads back from Chicago with little to show for.

For a fistful of dollars, America and Pakistan wrangle | Pakistan: Now or Never?

The sad part is the intrepretation "fistful of dollars" that the whole thing is reduced to. Or rather it was the motivation of Pakistan always "a fistful of dollars". Afterall one covets what is in the nature and the highest need else how dare would the perception of the relationship reduce down to money??

^^^ could be a biased take - the author being probablyof Indian origin, But Pakistan has stood its stand so not all that bad.

LoL, with that name, the author is certainly of Indian origin. But that apart, what other take could there possibly be to the situation!!????

 

[Rafael]

Why are you so desperate to look for something I did not say. Trying to go off topic. We can talk about GHQ another day on another thread. Lets just appreciate how Americans your adopted country has been outmanoeuvred in diplomacy by your country of origin (Pakistan in case you forget).

Aryan,

Its too early to conclude anything. I fear what looks likes Pakistan's diplomatic victory, may turn out to be completely opposite of it. Therefore we must not start celebrating yet. Let the smoke disappear and then we shall see who comes out as a winner.

Even if Pakistan manages to get all its demands accepted by NATO and US, let me assure you that they will come back harder in one way or the other.

 

[Guest01]

Aryan,

Its too early to conclude anything. I fear what looks likes Pakistan's diplomatic victory, may turn out to be completely opposite of it. Therefore we must not start celebrating yet. Let the smoke disappear and then we shall see who comes out as a winner.

Even if Pakistan manages to get all its demands accepted by NATO and US, let me assure you that they will come back harder in one way or the other.

Bro you write sense. But what you really forget is that the victory even if diplomatic is of GHQ and the loss, even if military like salala is of the civilian government. So how can anyone or anything hurt currentday Pakistan??

 

[Safriz]

Aryan,

Its too early to conclude anything. I fear what looks likes Pakistan's diplomatic victory, may turn out to be completely opposite of it. Therefore we must not start celebrating yet. Let the smoke disappear and then we shall see who comes out as a winner.

Even if Pakistan manages to get all its demands accepted by NATO and US, let me assure you that they will come back harder in one way or the other.

afraid?
arent you?
they are humans not gods..thats for sure...
they too lose some and win some..

 

[illusion8]

The sad part is the intrepretation "fistful of dollars" that the whole thing is reduced to. Or rather it was the motivation of Pakistan always "a fistful of dollars". Afterall one covets what is in the nature and the highest need else how dare would the perception of the relationship reduce down to money??


LoL, with that name, the author is certainly of Indian origin. But that apart, what other take could there possibly be to the situation!!????

The article went a bit overboard, could have been a Pakistani bias.

70% of the US public are against the war in Afghanistan, what I feel is the transit thru' Pakistan is required more to pull out of Afghanistan. After the withdrawal - there will be a drawdown of US engagement in that region. The US will be concentrating elsewhere and at home. US engagement post 2014 in Afghanistan will be minimal.

 

[lem34]

The article went a bit overboard, could have been a Pakistani bias.

70% of the US public are against the war in Afghanistan, what I feel is the transit thru' Pakistan is required more to pull out of Afghanistan. After the withdrawal - there will be a drawdown of US engagement in that region. The US will be concentrating elsewhere and at home. US engagement post 2014 in Afghanistan will be minimal.

I agree mate with you for once. By the way congrats on becoming a senior member. You can pm me lol

 

[Awesome]

If there was ever any doubt building from the official US comments, their own insider-aware media outlets like NYT, WP and LAT have all but confirmed that the supply route is deadly important to Nato, and the US.

This the US game plan, stare, glare, scare... See when we blink. Till 2014 they can afford to send it through the Northern Route, but to get out of Afghanistan, Pakistan based route is needed. They need to send 650 trucks a day. That's what? 6.5m per day? It's steep but the US can afford it - like 6.5x365 < 2.5 Bn per year through the northen route vs 1.25Bn through Pak in normal circumstances.

Now if they have to do the pullout, lets say it will cost 10 times that amount? Thats where they may begin to feel it - especially when its not just the US who has to pay it is all of them and they may say "Hey, it was you Americans who killed 24 Pakistanis so you lift the tab".