Pakistan threatens to withdraw troops from Pak-Afghan border

[muse]

And now for something completely different (not really when Pakistan are involved) Though I applaud this move:


No need for US aid to fight terrorists: ISPR

* Spokesman says Pak Army has conducted successful military operations using its own resources

* State Dept says Washington not prepared to continue providing aid at pace it was providing unless it sees certain steps taken

ISLAMABAD/WASHINGTON: The Pakistan military said on Monday that it was capable of fighting without American assistance while the US administration responded that its “uneasy ally” needed to make a greater effort in the fight against terrorists.

“The army in the past as well as at present, has conducted successful military operations using its own resources without any external support whatsoever,” Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) Director General, Major General Athar Abbas, said.

A top US diplomat had, in a televised interview on Sunday, confirmed that “the United States has decided to withhold almost a third of its annual $2.7 billion security assistance to Islamabad”.

Abbas wrote to a foreign news agency that the Pakistan defence forces had not been informed officially of a US decision to suspend $800 million worth of aid. “We have not received any official intimation or correspondence on the matter.”

He also referred AFP to an extraordinary statement from Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani on June 9 recommending that the US military aid be redirected towards civilians.

Soon after the ISPR director general’s statement, the US administration, while defending its decision to suspend $800 million of military aid to Pakistan, said its “uneasy ally” needed to make a greater effort in the fight against terrorists.

“When it comes to our military assistance, we’re not prepared to continue providing that at the pace that we were providing it unless and until we see certain steps taken,” State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said.

The US was particularly “looking to improve our cooperation in counter-terrorism, in counterinsurgency”, she told journalists.

“The United States continues to seek a constructive, collaborative, mutually beneficial relationship with Pakistan,” she stressed, adding, “We’ve been talking to Pakistan at all levels about the issues behind these decisions.”

Nuland further said, “We are working together on how we can improve our relationship particularly in the categories of counter-terrorism and counterintelligence.”

She recalled that on May 25, Islamabad demanded that about 100 US advisers leave Pakistani soil, effectively halting military training, adding, “We obviously can’t do that in an environment where Pakistan has asked our trainers to go.”

The suspended aid includes about $300 million to reimburse Pakistan for some of the costs of deploying more than 100,000 soldiers along the Afghan border, according to the New York Times.

On Sunday, US President Barack Obama’s chief of staff, William Daley, had told a television channel that the US had decided to withhold almost a third of its annual $2.7 billion security assistance to Pakistan.

Pakistan says it has 140,000 soldiers in the northwest, more than the 99,000 American troops in Afghanistan, fighting a local Taliban insurgency.

The US has long called on Pakistan to do more to crack down on terrorists, such as the al Qaeda-linked Haqqani network, who use its soil to attack within Afghanistan, but the army says its troops are too over-stretched.

Relations between the key allies in the war on al Qaeda drastically worsened after US commandos killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan in May. afp

 

[VelocuR]

Reading the military’s message

Chief of Army Staff, General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani presiding over the 139th Corps Commanders’ Conference held at General Headquarters Rawalpindi on Thursday. PHOTO ISPR


The Pakistan Army is different from that of India in that it makes its opinion known on national matters. The 139th Corps Commanders’ Conference on June 9, 2011 at the GHQ, presided over by Chief of the Army Staff (COAS) General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, has said that it wants its ‘military-to-military’ relationship with the US reassessed in light of the post-May 2 Joint Parliamentary Resolution of May 14, 2011, which had asked the army to end America’s trespass into Pakistan’s territory and end US drone attacks on Pakistani soil.

The statement wants Pakistanis to stand united. It vows political neutrality but may have shown the military’s hand a bit on the subject of the establishment of a joint commission by the government in the follow-up to the parliamentary joint resolution: “Some quarters, because of their perceptual biases, were trying to deliberately run down the armed forces and the army in particular”. If this is intended at the criticism in the media following the Abbottabad raid and the PNS Mehran attack, then one has to see that much of what the media is saying is an accurate reflection of public sentiment. Many people are angered by the fact that a major chunk of the annual budget goes to the armed forces and for that they expect better results in terms of fighting off terrorists, securing their own installations or even in tracking down the world’s most-wanted terrorist.

Another point mentioned in the statement is that US assistance meant for the military be diverted towards economic aid “which can be used for reducing the burden on the common man”. This rejection of American assistance by the army is based on the following numbers which must come as a surprise to all in Pakistan. Instead of the $13-15 billion in military aid, the civilian government got only $8.6 billion, out of which only $1.4 billion were given to the army over the last decade! The world has been led to believe, however, that the Musharraf government received $10 billion as civilian aid, which it heavily diverted to the army. Releasing these figures would suggest that the army wants to dispel the notion that it is the biggest beneficiary of US aid. That said, it should be understood that the issue shouldn’t be that of the Pakistani military having a direct relationship with the US military but rather that it work with the Pentagon along the parameters set for it by parliament and the elected government of the day.

As for public sentiment, it would be fair to say that the Pakistan Army clearly stands with the people of Pakistan since most of them also seem to dislike America. It stands also with the ‘Voice of the People’ in parliament, which has issued a strong directive to the army — supported by all political parties — to end drone attacks, if need be by ending Nato supplies through Pakistan. But the statement has a message for the people of North Waziristan Agency too, asking them to get rid of the ‘foreigners’ in their midst and defend their territory — a clear pointer to the army’s intent of sooner or later going after the terrorists in North Waziristan. Perhaps we may also see a change of policy insofar as the seeming tolerance of various jihadi outfits is concerned. If that happens, that would be good for Pakistan.

The military’s statement must be examined carefully, in particular by the US, since it must see why so much of its pledged assistance has not been delivered. The opinion in Washington is divided, but those in office think the US cannot do without Pakistan if it wants to fight al Qaeda. Those who oppose this view point to the anti-Americanism within the military, its isolationist India-centric mindset and the infection of sympathy for extremists within some in its ranks. In the final count, the question that must be asked is: How realistic is the objective that parliament set before the army (in the former’s joint resolution)? Politics may get a fillip from exaggeration and hyperbole but wars are not undertaken on the basis of jazba. One journalist died revealing the odds facing Pakistan, indirectly stressing the need to avoid isolation through rejection of international support. Soon the ‘national consensus’ may come to be built on coercion and fear of death.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 11th, 2011.

 

[VCheng]

The Pakistan Army is different from that of India in that it makes its opinion known on national matters. ...........

I would suggest that the Pakistan Army is different than that of MOST other countries in that it makes its opinion known on national matters. After all, it is the guardian of the first and only muslim nuclear power in the world!

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

i think some of you retards are still over-looking the fact that Army Chief himself asked that the so-called "military aid" be diverted for civilian use

 

[VCheng]

i think some of you retards are still over-looking the fact that Army Chief himself asked that the so-called "military aid" be diverted for civilian use

No Sir! As a certified "retard", I am actually impressed that the COAS has taken such a bold and public step, much overdue as it was.

 

[Pak_Sher]

We have to pay you to control your own territory? Lol, and you all complain about violated soveriegnty. You have none.

No one attacked us in the first place and WOT is not Pakistan's War. If we stop attacking the militants they stop attacking us. That is where it will stop.

 

[Omar1984]

Obama is ruining Pakistan-American relations. McCain and even Bush were better friends of Pakistan than that Obama.

MOD EDIT: Racist comment edited out

 

[Stealth IFV]

Obama is ruining Pakistan-American relations. McCain and even Bush were better friends of Pakistan than that monkey-face Obama.

Have some respect for their head of state, your Zardari is more than an eye sore as well. Especially hitting on Palin while looking like that, was a new blow to Pakistani prestige.

 

[unicorn]

USA will soon realize that if they stop the aid money they will not be able to run the show smoothly in Afghanistan.They will only leave Afghanistan until Pakistan said so.The sooner they realize this the better for them.

 

[Last Hope]

We have to pay you to control your own territory?

Yes. Cause it was and is you who are sending them up here.
This was quoted by your undercover agent, Raymond Davis who was integrated, and he accepted that it is CIA and US who are behind the attacks as well as TTP in Pakistan.

 

[manojb]

Us got its man. AQ back broken Now its winding up time in afgan op. Drone will help not having many ground troops. Wot in afgan is ending, i suppose, unless pak want to put taliban back on track.

 

[illuzioN]

yes Pakistan withdraw your troops... they are useless in the WoT

 

[Nothing4U]

so essentially you're ready to provide a free pass to the militants who will further wreak havoc within Pakistan.
Suicidal tendencies, is what comes to mind.

bhartis dont need to be wooried abt pakistan

 

[Awesome]

We have to pay you to control your own territory? Lol, and you all complain about violated soveriegnty. You have none.

You're forgetting one major fact, the Taliban primarily wants to attack Americans. They are attacking Pakistanis because we stand in harms way in defence of the Americans. If those good for nothing thankless leaders of yours are not going to pay up for the costs side as agreed, we'll restructure our forces in such a way they would again have good cause to start fighting American again. We can better defend ourselves by replacing these forces into offensives rather than patrol duty on checkposts.

The militant traffic is going to go towards Afghanistan more than it would come from there with the PA not present and acting like a lightning rod. Good luck with that.

 

[Pfpilot]

Ah now, this is another master stroke by the Pakistani military...see, now any future terrorist attacks will be blamed on American reluctance to pay endless amounts of aid. And when more attacks happen on the Afghani side, with the attackers coming from the Pakistani side, our military will once again cry about the lack of funds to maintain a large army presence. It is this political ability that has allowed the military to remain to so strong in pakistan.
The reality remains, much of Pakistans problems are self created, our soldiers have shown they are capable of much greater, were the right leadership present. Whatever the allegiance of our leadership, they should atleast care about the young men in uniform giving their lives for the half hearted effort we are putting into fighting the war on terror. Getting less aid or no aid at all should be beside the point, that we must do everything we can eliminate the menace that has been terrorizing our society for a decade now...but sadly that isnt beneficial to our military generals...too bad for Pakistan.