What's new

The Pak-US strategic dialogue

General Kayani needs to understand that the people will not allow him to overthrow an elected government. Those times are done and over with.

How did you come to that conclusion ? This is a man without which Judiciary would be in Zaradari's grubby paws, without him callin the shots i shudder at the thought of where this country would have ended up.

Kayani is the single man who has pulled Pakistan out of this mess of a century, a time where the news of "Pakistan is going to fall apart" were coming in more often than the weather report this man gave this country a new hope. Above all he restored the hope and confidence of Pakistanis in their army. We had lost in Afghanistan forever, keeping the Americans at bay this guy managed to not only effectively root out the TTP but put Pakistan on the front row seat in London conference.

I cant even think of where we would be had he not been there, a little gratitude would be nice. In
 
General Kayani - A Musharraf in the making?

General Ashfaq Kayani, the chief of staff of the Pakistan Army, is much in the news these days. Senior foreign diplomatic officials make it a point to consult with him when in Islamabad. He has just renewed the term of the ISI chief, Shuja Pasha, and he has recently commented at length on Pakistan’s role and interests in Afghanistan. His presence in the political limelight is nothing short of intriguing. After all, Pakistan has a legitimately elected government and is ostensibly a functioning democracy. More to the point, barely a year ago, a host of commentators had blithely argued that he would prove to be the model for an apolitical general.


He is not a Musharraf in the making. He is quite different and likes to keep a low profile unlike Musharraf. He believes in "more action and less words". And these are some of the reasons that he has earned more respect than any of his predecessors.:pakistan:
 
wellll im sure he willl bring crash tin of cobras and old artilllery which we are using from 2 decades nothing new in it
 
A huge outcome is coming from the dialogue. When US invite COAS, it means, US is going to show all his cards in Afghanistan and road map for peace in Afghanistan too. Plus soon Pak armed forces will be part of NATO, plus finalizing to establish NATO depot in Pakistan too. Lots of good news, but let's see what US will ask in return and Indian concerns will be addressed. India has all eyes and ears on this dialogue. How high India will jump, its all depend how much Pakistan will get, after serving long wars for US as ally. But its time Pakistan deserve alot from US.

Pak will be a part of NATO? Where did you get that from.. is that true? Anyone to confirm this please? With all respect, I just dont see that happening!
 
N-plants to figure in talks, says Patterson

By Anwar Iqbal
Sunday, 21 Mar, 2010

WASHINGTON: Pakistan’s request for nuclear power plants may come up for discussion during the US-Pakistan strategic dialogue, which begins in Washington on March 24.

The indications came from two senior US officials, ambassadors Richard Holbrooke and Anne W. Patterson.

Ambassador Patterson, the US envoy in Islamabad, told a Los Angeles-based Pakistani newspaper: “We are beginning to have a discussion with the Pakistan government” on the country’s desire to tap nuclear energy. “We are going to have working level talks” on the issue in Washington this month.

She told the Pakistan Link newspaper that earlier America’s “non-proliferation concerns were quite severe” but attitudes in Washington were changing. “I think we are beginning to pass those and this is a scenario that we are going to explore,” she added.

Mr Holbrooke, the US special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, was less categorical but what he said at a briefing on Friday on the US-Pakistan strategic talks conveyed a similar message.

“While addressing Pakistan’s energy needs, are you considering helping them establish nuclear power plants to meet their energy needs?” he was asked.

A transcript released by the State Department on Saturday quoted Mr Holbrooke as saying: “We have a very broad and complex agenda in these talks, and this is the first strategic dialogue ever at this level, and the first of this administration. And we’re going to listen carefully to whatever the Pakistanis say.”

The response marks the first time a US official did not reject the Pakistani request outright. On all previous occasions, US officials insisted that their agreement for supplying nuclear power plants to India was exclusive to New Delhi and could not be offered to another country.

The Washington Post reported earlier this month that the Obama administration was taking several steps to address Pakistani security concerns. “One is to implicitly accept Pakistan’s status as a declared nuclear weapons state and thereby counter conspiracy theories that the United States is secretly plotting to seize Pakistani nukes,” the report said.

Last month, a US scholar wrote an article in the Wall Street Journal backing Pakistan’s demand that the US should negotiate a nuclear deal with Pakistan, as it did with India.

“More so than conventional weapons or large sums of cash, a conditions-based civilian nuclear deal may be able to diminish Pakistani fears of US intentions while allowing Washington to leverage these gains for greater Pakistani cooperation on nuclear proliferation and terrorism,” wrote C. Christine Fair, an assistant professor at Georgetown University.

In her interview to the Link, Ambassador Patterson said the US was acutely conscious of the precarious energy situation in Pakistan, of people “sweating in 120 degree” without electricity, and would play its due role in raising installed generating capacity and making up for the present shortfall. US companies will be persuaded to invest in the power sector in Pakistan.

DAWN.COM | Front Page | N-plants to figure in talks, says Patterson
 
A huge outcome is coming from the dialogue. When US invite COAS, it means, US is going to show all his cards in Afghanistan and road map for peace in Afghanistan too. Plus soon Pak armed forces will be part of NATO, plus finalizing to establish NATO depot in Pakistan too. Lots of good news, but let's see what US will ask in return and Indian concerns will be addressed. India has all eyes and ears on this dialogue. How high India will jump, its all depend how much Pakistan will get, after serving long wars for US as ally. But its time Pakistan deserve alot from US.
I don't think you'll get a 'huge outcome' from the talks immediately. What you might have is US commitment for funding certain infrastructure and economic projects and promises to study other projects that the GoP wishes to initiate. There will likely also be continued commitment to fund military equipment purchases to improve Pakistan's COIN capacity.

On the civilian nuclear power front, it is indeed a huge shift for the US to even agree to 'talks about talks', and it is a welcome one, but given how complex the issue is, expect no immediate breakthroughs on it. This particular meet will, hopefully, merely be the start of a dialog process that will eventually result in an NSG waiver for Pakistan and allow Pakistan to tap other nations for setting up NPP's to cover Pakistan's energy requirements.

On the trade front there has been some talk of the US providing GSP+ status to Pakistani imports - some indications recently from the US imply suggest that the US may be more interested in providing greater market access to select products from all parts of Pakistan rather than restricting them to the ROZ's in the tribal areas, but at best expect continued negotiations on that front as well - though even then it would be a move forward if the two sides are able to define an end goal for those negotiations.
 
What impact would COAS presence have on the talks? I means is there anything specific that is going to be gained by his visit?
 
On the civilian nuclear power front, it is indeed a huge shift for the US to even agree to 'talks about talks', and it is a welcome one, but given how complex the issue is, expect no immediate breakthroughs on it. This particular meet will, hopefully, merely be the start of a dialog process that will eventually result in an NSG waiver for Pakistan and allow Pakistan to tap other nations for setting up NPP's to cover Pakistan's energy requirements.

I agree with your take on the Nuclear side of things. Any talks on this mattar are positive. Even agreeing to talk about Nuclear deal is a big deal given our past record. So its better late than never!
 
Pak-US strategic dialogue agenda: agriculture, communication, defence and security and other topics to be discussed
MUSHTAQ GHUMMAN

ISLAMABAD (March 22 2010): The Pakistan-US strategic dialogue, to commence in Washington on March 24, will cover issues like circular debt, revenue collection/value-added tax (VAT) implementation and deficit targets, official sources told Business Recorder.

The dialogue, according to US President's Special Representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrook, will focus on agriculture, communication and public diplomacy, defence and security, economic development and finance, trade environment, social issues and energy and water.

Details of the issues to be discussed between the officials of the two countries are as follows:

1) Agriculture

i) Crop enhancement (wheat and horticultural) and livestock productivity (control of animal disease) and market systems; water management and irrigation infrastructure improvement; progress under Afghanistan-Pakistan-US Trilateral; sanitary-phytosanitary capacity building; export of Pakistani mangoes to the US (proposed pilot shipment this season, proposed capacity building over the next year) and Pakistani Seed Act and Plant Breeder's Act (improved capability to benefit from biotechnological advances).

2) Communications and Public Diplomacy

i) Media and regulatory frameworks; (ii) communications platforms and content; (iii) countering extremist voices; (iv) defining and reaching audiences and; (v) expanding access to information.

3- Defence and Security

i) Pakistani 'COIN' Operation; (ii) Pakistani operation overview; (iii) USG military assistance (USG) and; (iv) enabling hold-build activities in Pakistan; (v) long-term Pakistani military modernisation; and (vi) presentation on defence planning exchange (USG).

3-Economic Development and Finance: Macroeconomic Environment

(i) Signing thermal power rehabilitation agreements (Secretary W and P, Ambassador Patterson); (ii) circular debt resolution; (iii) revenue collection/VAT implementation; and (iv) deficit targets.

4-Trade Environment (45 minutes)

i) Reconstruction Opportunity Zones (ROZs; (ii) Free Trade Agreement (FTA); (iii) GSP; (iv) investment environment; (v) TIFA Developments; (vi) USAID Trade Facilitation and Economic Growth Programs;(vii) USTDA cold storage and non-energy programs; transit trade negotiations.

5- Social issues

i) University partnerships in research and education; (ii) education administration in a decentralised system; (iii) sustaining US investment in Pakistan's educations sector; (iv) curriculum reform; (v) women's education/girls' education; (vi) public-private-religious school models and; (vii) school violence.

6-Energy and Water

i) Update on Pakistan programme (new generation update; efficiency; collections; performance contracts for distribution companies); (ii) update on US signature program (immediate impact projects); Disco support program; OPIC; USTDA; USDOC trade missions; planning for lab visits. Water (Pakistani priorities; UU approach to water and assistance planning).

Business Recorder [Pakistan's First Financial Daily]
 
Army Chief Driving Pakistan’s Agenda for Talks

By JANE PERLEZ
Published: March 21, 2010

KARACHI, Pakistan — In a sign of the mounting power of the army over the civilian government in Pakistan, the head of the military, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, will be the dominant Pakistani participant in important meetings in Washington this week.

At home, much has been made of how General Kayani has driven the agenda for the talks. They have been billed as cabinet-level meetings, with the foreign minister as the nominal head of the Pakistani delegation. But it has been the general who has been calling the civilian heads of major government departments, including finance and foreign affairs, to his army headquarters to discuss final details, an unusual move in a democratic system.

Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi has been taking a public role in trying to set the tone, insisting that the United States needs to do more for Pakistan, as “we have already done too much.” And it was at his request that Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton agreed this fall to reopen talks between the countries at the ministerial level.

The talks are expected to help define the relationship between the United States and Pakistan as the war against the Taliban reaches its endgame phase in Afghanistan. It is in that context that General Kayani’s role in organizing the agenda has raised alarm here in Pakistan, a country with a long history of military juntas.

The leading financial newspaper, The Business Recorder, suggested in an editorial that the civilian government of Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani should act more forcefully and “shun creating an environment conducive to military intervention.”

The editorial added, “The government needs to consolidate civilian rule instead of handing over its responsibilities, like coordination between different departments, to the military.”

“General Kayani is in the driver’s seat,” said Rifaat Hussain, a professor of international relations at Islamabad University. “It is unprecedented that an army chief of staff preside over a meeting of federal secretaries.”

General Kayani visited the headquarters of the United States Central Command in Tampa, Fla., over the weekend, and will attend meetings at the Pentagon with the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen, and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates on Monday. He is also to attend the opening ceremony of the talks between Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Qureshi at the State Department on Wednesday, a spokesman at the American Embassy in Islamabad said.

The most pressing concerns in the talks, according to officials on both sides, will be trying to establish confidence after several years of a corrosive relationship between allies, which only in the past few months has started to gain some positive momentum.

But the complexity of the main topics at hand — the eventual American pullout from Afghanistan, and Pakistan’s concerns about India — is expected to make for a tough round of talks.

On the positive side for Pakistan, the Obama administration has been rethinking its policies toward the country, said Maleeha Lodhi, a former Pakistani ambassador to the United States.

“There is a realization that some of its assumptions over the past year were not correct: that Pakistan’s security paradigm could be changed, that its military could be pressured,” Ms. Lodhi said.

Meanwhile, concerned about efforts by the Afghan government to engage in talks with Taliban rebels, who have important bases and allies on Pakistani soil, the Pakistani government will offer itself as a mediator in any such negotiations, Professor Hussain said.

He said that the message would be, “If you want to talk to bring the Afghan Taliban into the mainstream, you should talk to us.”

Tensions with Afghanistan have been raised by some of Pakistan’s recent operations against the Taliban, most notably the recent capture in Pakistan of a senior Afghan Taliban leader, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar. The former head of the United Nations mission in Afghanistan, Kai Eide, said Friday that the arrest had jeopardized back-channel negotiations with Mr. Baradar’s faction of the Taliban.

But the spokesman for the Pakistani Foreign Ministry, Abdul Basit, said Saturday that Mr. Baradar’s arrest had nothing to do with reconciliation efforts in Afghanistan.

India’s growing role in Afghanistan was also high on Pakistan’s agenda. The spokesman for the Pakistani military, Gen. Athar Abbas, said Pakistan would be “conveying very clearly” its displeasure with India’s offer to help train the Afghan Army at the behest of American and NATO forces. Pakistan has made a counteroffer to train the Afghans, an offer that Pakistan knows is unlikely to be accepted but that it made to pressure Washington to stop the Indian proposal, Pakistani analysts said.

General Kayani arrives in Washington after what the Pakistani military considers a stellar nine months in fighting the Pakistani Taliban, first in the region of Swat and most recently in South Waziristan.

The militants, according to the Pakistanis, have been weakened in their bases in the tribal areas, but at a high cost. According to Pakistani Army figures, 2,377 soldiers were killed in the two campaigns. About 1 in 10 of those killed were officers, a very high rate, Professor Hussain said.

With those sacrifices and the heavy toll on army equipment in mind, Pakistan is expecting quicker reimbursement from the United States of its expenses in fighting the militants, General Abbas said.

Pakistan has complained that the United States has unfairly held up payments of $1.2 billion for 2009 under an agreement to help finance the fight against insurgents. For its part, Washington says its auditors need to satisfy Congress that the Pakistani military has properly spent the money owed.

A version of this article appeared in print on March 22, 2010, on page A6 of the New York edition.
 
Ok people calm down. I didnt say that he has these ideas but was merely pointing out that how much ever we like the guy. he should understand that he is subordinate to the civilians (how ever incompetent they may be).
 
Well this is serious talk one needs to understand the context of the situation plus the timeing which worrie india alot i wonder why...n the level of this Strategic talks

It's a give take situation it's not deal or no deal..

ON pakistan's side there is a heavy list of things which we want them to do such as civil nuclear deal over 30 billion dollars on the other side U.S wants to get the hell out of afghanistan with the clean cheet.


U.S start realizing the regional improtances of pakistan it will not be a surprise for me if U.S agree on our terms keep your fingers crossed n hope for the best:pakistan::usflag:
 
General Kayani in Washington; Pakistan’s most powerful man
MAR 21, 2010 19:16 EDT
DEMOCRACY | KAYANI | PAKISTAN | PAKISTAN ARMY | UNITED STATES
So much for democracy. When Pakistan holds a “strategic dialogue” with the United States in Washington this week, there is little doubt that the leading player in the Pakistani delegation will be its army chief, General Ashfaq Kayani.

We have got so used to Americans dealing with the Pakistan Army in their efforts to end the stalemate in Afghanistan that it does not seem that surprising that the meeting between the United States and Pakistan would be dominated by the military. Nor indeed that Dawn columnist Ardeshir Cowasjee would describe Kayani as the most powerful man in Pakistan. Even the grudging admiration granted in this Times of India profile of Kayani by Indrani Baghchi is in keeping with the current mood.

But before taking it for granted that this is a normal state of affairs, do pause to consider how it might seem if Britain, for example, which has worked closely with the United States on both the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, sent a delegation to Washington in which the army chief was expected to call the shots. Also in the interests of keeping everyone honest, remember that it was not actually supposed to be this way.

The United States has always preferred to deal with military rulers in Pakistan, but the forced exit of former military ruler Pervez Musharraf in 2008 and the election of President Barack Obama had raised hopes Washington might be about to turn over a new leaf, with policies which encouraged the development of civilian democracy. Its preference for military rulers in the past has been partially blamed for suppressing democracy in Pakistan (though others blame either the country’s own hapless politicians or the overweening nature of the army, depending on which side of the argument you sit).

So what happened to the change promised by Obama, which encouraged many Pakistanis to hope that for once Washington would “pour money into democracy as opposed to autocracy“?

Inside Pakistan itself, the political parties have been at loggerheads, leaving Kayani looking like the only national figure who remained above the fray. In a sense he retained the army’s traditional “parental role”, ready to step in if the fighting between the rival politicians got out of hand. A bruising battle between President Asif Ali Zardari and the judiciary also limited the scope for the government to clip the wings of the powerful military.

Kayani, meanwhile, has both vowed to keep the army out of politics while retaining a tight grip on foreign and security policy. He spoke out fiercely against a reported incursion by U.S. ground troops in 2008 and in 2009 condemned provisions in the Kerry-Lugar U.S. aid package which called for greater civilian oversight of military appointments and promotions.

The army also burnished its image by launching operations in Swat and Waziristan to clear out Pakistani Taliban who had become increasingly unpopular in Pakistan, raising Kayani’s profile further. And although Kayani is due to retire in November this year, the one-year extension granted this month to the head of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency, Lieutenant General Ahmad Shuja Pasha, has got everyone wondering whether he too might have his term extended.

Just to be clear, there is no talk of a military coup. And nor is Kayani a new military dictator in the making — he is said to be far more collegiate and far more dependent on the goodwill of his Corps Commanders than his predecessor. His role has been more comparable to one once attributed to Turkey’s own generals, of exercising control from behind the scenes – giving him a leading position which some argue leaves little space for civilian democracy to grow.

But is Pakistan alone responsible for giving the upper hand to the military? Or has the United States played its usual role of favouring the army over the politicians in its search for the one strong leader who might deliver what it needs from Pakistan?

The war in Afghanistan has proved far more difficult to turn around than it might have appeared during Obama’s election campaign. The attack on Mumbai by Pakistan-based militants in November 2008 also sabotaged Obama’s hopes of finding a regional solution to the Afghan war, and of encouraging peaceful relations between India and Pakistan which might dilute the India-centric thinking of the Pakistan Army.

Obama says he wants to start drawing down troops from Afghanistan in 2011. Seeking help from the Pakistan Army chief who appears to have the power to deliver may appear to be a more useful expediency than encouraging the long-term growth of civilian democracy. Do remember however that Washington has a history of putting expediency first when it comes to its relations with Pakistan.

General Kayani in Washington; Pakistan’s most powerful man | Analysis & Opinion | Reuters
 
Back
Top Bottom