What's new

The Pak-US Relationship

OK, be afraid, be very afraid - US will put the screws on your economy and you will........what?? Didn't Pakistan survive without US aid before? And what better than to be off this addiction to US aid, anyways, when was the last time an ordinary Pakistani experienced US Aid??, Politicians, sure, but that's too bad for them.

Friends, the US is a great country and it's people warm and big hearted, we have problem with either - Pakistan cannot, must not, be a party to the neo-imperial project which is the substance of US policy with regard to Pakistan and the region -- the kinds of things US wants from Pakistan, it cannot deliver and the kinds of things Pakistan wants from the US, the US cannot deliver.

These suggestions that Pakistan will collapse are immature and unhelpful.
 
OK, be afraid, be very afraid - US will put the screws on your economy and you will........what?? Didn't Pakistan survive without US aid before? And what better than to be off this addiction to US aid, anyways, when was the last time an ordinary Pakistani experienced US Aid??, Politicians, sure, but that's too bad for them.

Friends, the US is a great country and it's people warm and big hearted, we have problem with either - Pakistan cannot, must not, be a party to the neo-imperial project which is the substance of US policy with regard to Pakistan and the region -- the kinds of things US wants from Pakistan, it cannot deliver and the kinds of things Pakistan wants from the US, the US cannot deliver.

These suggestions that Pakistan will collapse are immature and unhelpful.

Well, let's try to look at it this way: If the present US-Pakistan relationship is so detrimental for Pakistan, then why is there not sufficient pressure on the government to break off diplomatic, economic and military ties with the US. After all, such a step is going to presumably be very popular with a majority of the public, and claims that Pakistan can survive without US aid are thought to be robust.

Like they say, "put your money where your mouth is".
 
We need to accept things where they stand -
Crusaders are capturing resources , and they will eliminate all nations with sizable armed forces - so sooner or later it will be Pakistan's turn so I think its about time , Pakistan and other sizable Muslim nations come together - and form a cooalition

Releatiosn with leader of Crusader nation is not necessary I think we just need to believe in our own self - and face things where they are
 
We need to accept things where they stand -
Crusaders are capturing resources , and they will eliminate all nations with sizable armed forces - so sooner or later it will be Pakistan's turn so I think its about time , Pakistan and other sizable Muslim nations come together - and form a cooalition

Releatiosn with leader of Crusader nation is not necessary I think we just need to believe in our own self - and face things where they are

Armageddon has been imposed to us since 9/11.........and it is definite that some of the Arab Countries we gonna lost for instance Turkey,Syria Iraq and greater Israil is going to be there very soon but Mahdi A.S will be there to fight back INSHALLAH ...........we have to be determined and we have to believe what ALLAH has said to us ........ we need to follow our Prophet Hazrat MUHAMMAD SAW .... that will be our only way to survive ......

and relations with crusaders will be on our interest base .... if we find our interest then there shouldn't be anything to stop us to establish a relation with any crusade country .........

may ALLAH bless Umat-i-Muhammadia (SAW)
 
Asalamu Alaikum.

We cannot sit on our behinds and wait for the Mahdi. Pakistan is taking all the necessary steps. The Saudis are asserting themselves, the American dollar is on its way to collapse, USA is no longer what it used to be, and Pakistan has a very strong alliance with China and China is making very strong moves in the region.

Whether the American military plans to or not is irrelevant, the point is that they will be forced to leave the region mostly because of their domestic and economic situation. The american population is armed to teeth and the moment dollar collapses all bets are off. So I wouldn't really worry about the American interference in Pakistan on a long term basis. If somehow some miracle happens and pigs grow wings and start flying and the American economy bounces back in reality [not cooked books by the politicians] then USA has a chance to make a come back. But with majority of their states nearing bankruptcy, it is hard to say how they will be able to re-evaluate their economic system when the American politicians are busy piling their own wealth and cooking up numbers at all govt levels instead of searching for real solutions for real problems.

So Pakistan is already in a position where it will be able to dictate American withdrawal terms once the dollar collapses, which I believe is on the horizon. Once the the American dollar collapses American govt will not be able to print money out of thin air, it will go under big time and will auction off the remaining assets in order to just pay the installments on the present loans. Once their dollar has no value they will crash and burn, and it will happen eventually. It is an inevitability that cannot be avoided. China is already in the process of dumping the dollar, the only thing keeping the dollar afloat is the fact that OIL is priced in American dollars. It is a double edged sword for the American govt, they are expanding militarily thinking that they can keep the dollar as the world's reserve currency while dollar is collapsing and their economy is sinking. They are borrowing money that they cannot pay back to fund a military expansion that they think will keep the dollar afloat. It is a vicious cycle and America will not be able to withstand it. The American politicians have already pretty much killed off any and all manufacturing in the USA and I don't see how they will be able to stand up to the seemingly unlimited supply of the Asian markets.

anyways, just my 25 cents :)
 
USA isnt sincere with Pakistan...its is doing business with you....you do this and we do that...you do that and we do this...dont trust it ever....not a single american died after 9/11 but look at you.....30k people of your countrymen died after 9/11 what did u achieved or gained??Look at your economy....after the raymond incident look at your country's image.......live as a lion for a day rather then living like jackal for 1000 years
 
USA isnt sincere with Pakistan...its is doing business with you....you do this and we do that...you do that and we do this...dont trust it ever....not a single american died after 9/11 but look at you.....30k people of your countrymen died after 9/11 what did u achieved or gained??Look at your economy....after the raymond incident look at your country's image.......live as a lion for a day rather then living like jackal for 1000 years

look i do not have any grudge against you just because you are libiyan ... but the thing you have done to us is un-forgettable.... i wish your leader couldn't have uttered anything regarding the transfer of atomic technology from pakistan to libya
 
I do not understand why Pakistani's complain about USA so much.
1) Every country has to think about their benefits so does USA do, Pakistan has to think about their benefit. Why you are expecting USA to fix your problem?
2) About war on terror, you had the choice and you sided with them with choice, so what is there to complain. When they asked you to do certain things, you asked goodies in return and also said we will be happy to help. So when you happily sign on deals with them, why complain later?
(Even for RD case, papers mentioned that PA asked for more F16/other military goodies to release him, then what is the fuss about).
 
Most people let their emotions overtake them.

The USA has a nature where it doesn't see anybody as its 'friends' or 'trustworthy' or 'untrustworthy'. It sees everything in terms of its interests, well it USED to think in terms of interests but now the USA govt is run by corporations which are in turn owned and run by the Zionists, hence the mind boggling USA policies that only seem to be damaging America and its future at the expense of the Zionists interests.

So calm down and relax.
 
Hello Everyone...

You all have done a great job here...I like the way you all think and implemented the ideas of writing this post in efficient way....

you came all the way just to encourage us ..... i really appreciate your effort for this
 
Pakistan should pursue an independent, non aligned policy and not allow itself to be used as a client state
 
US and Pakistan: allies with mutual disgust
April 30, 2011

By Walter Rodgers

The bizarre case of Raymond Davis – the CIA contract employee who shot and killed two Pakistani men who were pursuing him on the streets of Lahore Jan. 27 – illustrates just how poisonous relations between the United States and Pakistan have become.


The controversy over Mr. Davis’s role in Pakistan, his release, and Pakistan’s internal intelligence agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), has spotlighted the already strained US-Pakistan relationship. But what’s ultimately being fought out is whose influence will reshape Afghanistan, especially after July, when the drawdown of US troops begins.

The context of the Davis incident mimics the spy novels of John le Carré or Graham Greene.

The streets of Pakistan – where the confrontation unraveled – are a dangerous place. Most Westerners who travel in Pakistan, and who can afford it, hire an armed driver, a bodyguard, or both. I used to hide my cellphone in a deep pocket and carry a wallet filled with paper to hand over to motor scooter pirates at intersections if someone stuck a gun in the car window to rob me.

While driving, Davis was tailed by two men for more than two hours (the timeline given by Pakistani officials). According to Davis’s statements, at a stoplight, the two men pulled up beside him, and one brandished a pistol. He alleged that they were going to rob him. But it would not have been difficult to imagine he was the target of an assassination. As details emerged to fill out the story, such a possibility seems more likely.

The former Green Beret pleaded self-defense. Street piracy, kidnapping, and murder are so common on Pakistani streets that local police normally shrug at such incidents rather than investigate. Not this time. It turns out the pursuers weren’t just thugs. Pakistani officials reported – and it is now widely believed – that the two men actually worked for the ISI. These officials claim the men were trailing Davis because he was a spy and had traveled to restricted areas without authorization.
What’s the real story?

Were they simply following and intimidating Davis, as Pakistani security officials have alleged? Or were they about to take out an American citizen who the State Department said had diplomatic immunity? Davis apparently thought this was the case. And what was it “our spy” was discovering about the ISI’s black ops that Pakistan didn’t want him to learn?

One version holds that Davis’s CIA team was gathering intelligence on Lashkar-e-Taiba, an Islamist terrorist group the ISI has reportedly employed to perpetrate attacks on India. It’s also been suggested that Davis was “working” northern Waziristan, where Islamabad has resisted US requests to root out Taliban and Al Qaeda elements in the Islamist stronghold. Whatever Davis’s mission, one Pakistani friend told me that Davis had angered the ISI by trying to link up with militant groups. That turf war between the United States (CIA) and the ISI lies at the heart of the Davis incident.

After 47 days in jail and reported US threats to slash aid to Pakistan (billions a year), Davis was released after a reported $2.3 million payoff (blood money) to the dead men’s families.

A relationship of distrust

Islamabad now wants the CIA to reduce its presence in Pakistan. But the relationship between Islamabad and Washington has long been ugly and disingenuous. In December 2001, while the rest of the world was sympathizing with the US after 9/11, I was interviewing the head of the Islamist Jamaat-e-Islami party who proceeded to tell me how much Pakistanis despised the US. This anti-American animosity in Pakistan is nearly universal, despite the $18 billion in aid Washington has doled out since 9/11.

Now Pakistan wants the relationship with the US reconfigured. It – especially the ISI – resents the CIA’s footprint there. Worse, it probably fears Washington really wants to neutralize Pakistan’s growing nuclear arsenal.

Islamabad complains loudly that it’s excluded from the US intelligence loop. But it’s common knowledge in Pakistan (and the US) that the ISI has substantial ties to the Taliban, Al Qaeda, and right-wing Islamic zealots – many of whom are the same folks trying to kill Americans in Afghanistan. Some suspect the ISI may even know where Osama bin Laden is hiding. The US intelligence community doesn’t trust the ISI. But then, as my Pakistani friend said, “No one in Pakistan trusts the ISI.”
The battle for influence in Afghanistan

Central to these tensions is the battle being fought in Afghanistan – the battle for influence. Pakistanis bristle at what they see as growing Indian influence in Afghanistan, and some contend that India funds anti-Pakistan Taliban factions responsible for terrorist bombings.

Along with that growing Indian presence, Islamabad is also sensitive to a growing Iranian sway in Afghanistan. As Pakistani journalist Aftab Borka observed, “Pakistan will always be anxious until it is the dominant, if not the only, player in Afghanistan.”

Walter Rodgers, a former senior international correspondent for CNN, writes a biweekly column.

Courtesy: Christian Science Monitor
 
The whole world is distancing itself from the US (Arab countries, African countries, Europe), & for good reason. Time for Pakistan to do the same.
 
ref:Source: Pakistan's PM urged Afghans to seek other allies besides U.S. - CNN.com

Source: Pakistan's PM urged Afghans to seek other allies besides U.S.
By Jill Dougherty, CNN Foreign Affairs CorrespondentApril 29, 2011 -- Updated 0118 GMT (0918 HKT)
t1larg.yousaf.gilani.afp.gi.jpg

Pakistani Prime Minister Syed Yousaf Raza Gilani looks on as he meets with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on July 18, 2010 in Islamabad shortly before the signing of a new trade transit treaty between Pakistan and Afghanistan.STORY HIGHLIGHTS
The meeting was held in April in Kabul
The source says Pakistan's prime minister suggested closer ties to China
Tensions have been high between Washington and Islamabad in recent months

(CNN) -- Pakistan's prime minister urged Afghan government officials to look for other partners to ally with beyond the United States in a meeting earlier this month, and suggested it seek closer ties with China, a source close to the Afghan government told CNN.

But Afghan sources disagree on how strongly the Pakistanis were trying to push their neighbors, and there is no indication from either source CNN spoke to about the Afghan government's receptiveness to the idea.

At the meeting between senior Afghan and Pakistani officials April 16 in Kabul, Afghanistan, Pakistani Prime Minister Yousaf Gilani urged the Afghans to draw closer to Pakistan and to China, disengaging with what he depicted as a weakened United States, according to the source close to the Afghan government.

The meeting was first reported by the Wall Street Journal.

The source, who did not attend the meeting but has spoken with a number of the officials who were present, said that while the topic was not the only subject discussed in the meeting, Gilani did tell the Afghans that Pakistan can protect them but they need to accelerate the withdrawal of U.S. troops from the country.

Gilani, the source said, painted the United States as a declining power, weakened economically, and in debt to China.

"What motivated Islamabad to do this is not clear," this source said, "but the relationship with the U.S. is at an all-time low, (Afghan President Hamid) Karzai is very unhappy with the U.S., and they saw an opportunity make this point."

In an interview with CNN on Thursday, Pakistan's ambassador to the United States, Husain Haqqani, described the accounts of his prime minister's activities as a "complete fabrication."

"Where are Pakistan and Afghanistan going to go by dumping the United States?" Haqqani said. "The fact of the matter is Afghanistan is a country that needs the Americans to rebuild. Pakistan is a country that needs American assistance."

Haqqani said he is expecting U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to visit the region "in the near future." The State Department has not confirmed the trip yet.

"I think that Pakistan, Afghanistan and United States will work together," Haqqani said. "Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is committed.... Look to her leadership. We expect her to be in the region. We will be moving forward together, together, and that these stories are going to die as many similar stories died in the past."

A senior source in Afghanistan's presidential palace also told CNN that the meeting did not center on a concerted effort to get Afghanistan to drop its long-term partnership plans with the United States.

"There is no planned effort to try to tell Afghanistan that it has to leave the United States as its ally. We are allies with and we want to be friends with our neighbours," the palace source said.

That source said the Afghan government wants "to make sure no one feels vulnerable by our long-term partnership" with Washington, referring to Pakistan.

"Of course, the Pakistani delegation had negotiations on Afghan bilateral relations to strengthen them and they have their concerns," the palace source added.

In a statement responding to the Wall Street Journal story, the Pakistani government called the assertions in the article "baseless."

"Pakistan fully supports an Afghan-led, Afghan-owned process for peace and reconciliation. This fundamental principle is now widely acknowledged," the statement said. "Pakistan recognizes the key role of the United States in promoting stability, peace and harmony in Afghanistan."

Next month, the United States, Afghanistan and Pakistan are holding a tri-lateral meeting in Islamabad, noted the statement from Pakistan.

"The purpose of ongoing engagements with Afghanistan and the United States is to have strategic coherence and clarity," the statement noted.

At the Kabul meeting, the source close to the Afghanistan government said, Gilani read from a prepared text -- something uncommon at such meetings, which usually are more informal. This was an indication, the source said, that the ideas presented had been worked on and were not just off-the-cuff comments. There was nothing "provocative" in the remarks, the source said, but one must read "between the lines."

"It tells more about relations between the U.S. and Pakistan and how they have hit rock-bottom," the source said, than it does about Pakistan-Afghan relations.

Pakistan's generals, who exert enormous influence on the government, the source said, "want to go back to the 1980s."

"They're stuck in a time warp in which they think they can push back at the U.S. and force the U.S. to deal with them in a regional, not just national, context."

The relationship between the United States and Pakistan has been tense in recent months, following the arrest and subsequent release of CIA contractor Raymond Davis, who was charged with killing two Pakistani men in what he said was a robbery attempt in Lahore.

Ties have also been strained over CIA drone strikes at targets in Pakistan, near the Afghan border. Several strikes have claimed the lives of what some Pakistani officials have said were innocent civilians. The United States does not officially acknowledge the CIA's secret drone program that targets al Qaeda militants, but it is the only country operating in the region with the capability to carry out such strikes.
 
Does the Pakistan - US relationship require "saving"?? and the the terms?? you decide:



Saving the US-Pakistan relationship
Harlan Ullman



Make no mistake! The US-Pakistan relationship is in its most fragile and vulnerable condition since the founding of Pakistan more than six decades ago. Good and bad reasons have created a trust deficit that is still metastasising. Operation Geronimo and the incursion deep into Pakistan by US Special Forces that killed Osama bin Laden without permission or knowledge of Islamabad have supercharged the deep grievances, differences and contentious issues that divide Washington and its major, non-NATO ally.

Consider three different sets of circumstances — one real and the other two hypothetical — to understand better the often vast differences in the values, perceptions and interests of Pakistan and the US as a vital step in finding ways to resolve what appear as intractable issues and divides.

Raymond Davis is the first case. In January, Davis shot and killed two Pakistanis in Lahore who, he claimed, threatened him. A third was killed when a vehicle from the US Consulate sent to rescue Davis went down the wrong way of a one-way street and collided with a motorcyclist. The US immediately demanded Davis’ release claiming diplomatic immunity and threatening strong action if the demand was not met.

The case dragged on for many reasons including Pakistan’s assessment that Davis had no immunity at the time because of an expired visa. Regardless of the facts, the Pakistan government at the highest level promised the US that the case would be resolved but in a Pakistani way. The initial US anger cooled as information became available on what to Pakistanis seemed to be a simple case of murder irrespective of diplomatic niceties.

Ultimately, a way around was found but on a Pakistani and not American timetable. The families of the dead Pakistanis were compensated and under the Quranic law, which let Davis off the hook. Davis was released. Strategic patience won out. The lesson is clear. Before a rush to judgment over the bin Laden affair, patience is essential on both sides.

Now suppose the raid had failed and bin Laden was not in residence. Or worse, suppose this was a ruse and bin Laden was actually hiding elsewhere. The Obama administration would have been assailed from every direction. Memories of the Bay of Pigs in 1961 and Desert One, the failed attempt to free US embassy personnel held hostage in Tehran in 1980, would have filled the airwaves. Republicans would have had a field day asserting this was another example of Democratic incompetence. And the furore from inside Pakistan would have been explosive, with likely demands that would have put the US in an impossible position.

What was crucial here was Osama bin Laden. He was there, he was killed; and while the US violated Pakistani sovereignty and more importantly did not trust its erstwhile ally to protect the intelligence until after the mission was accomplished, the certainty of the outcome made from an American perspective everything right.

The final hypothetical is the most provocative. It is 3:00 am in the morning. The president of the US is awakened by a phone call from Raul Castro that Cuban commandos have just left US territorial waters after snatching bin Laden from his hideaway in southern Florida. Further, Castro tells the president that Cuba is sending bin Laden to the International Court of Justice for trial.

Wow!

To some degree, how a president would react to that news is playing out in Pakistan over bin Laden. The notion of a real alliance has been shattered by keeping the raid secret from Pakistan. To many observers, that bin Laden could turn up at the home of Pakistan’s West Point and within 40 miles of Islamabad was either a result of incompetence or complicity. That the US raid was not detected by the Pakistani military was a devastating blow to the one highly respected institution in the nation on which the people could depend.

Despair, frustration and outrage co-exist now in Pakistan and euphoria in the US. So, can the damage be repaired? Fortunately, both sides understand that it is in our mutual interests to set the relationship on an upward trajectory.

The US must exercise patience as in the Davis case. Pakistan needs to understand that, unlike the Davis case, this one must be settled on a mutual timetable and terms. The starting point must be a thorough, objective, complete and transparent civilian-led investigation. That the Pakistan Army has started its own investigation will not be sufficient.

Crucially, the civilian leadership must reassert itself. President Asif Zardari has no choice but to tell his Chief of Army Staff Ashfaq Kayani that the fate of the nation hangs in the balance. Unless both the US and Pakistan can now resolve the huge differences and divides that separate us, both sides will suffer and suffer badly.

We are out of time.


The writer is Chairman of the Killowen Group that advises leaders of government and business and Senior Advisor at Washington, D.C.’s Atlantic Council
 
Back
Top Bottom