Trump ponders crackdown on Pakistan over terror ties despite experts' warnings

[wiseone2]

You have missed the point entirely. The question is not about sizes, its about assigning blame to convenient patsies and then sounding the retreat.

better analogy would be
North Vietnam - Pakistan
South Vietnam - Afghanistan

Laos and Cambodia were collateral damage. Laos was used as a supply route by Vietcong with no official involvement of Laos.

 

[cloud4000]

Interesting discussion, but the best course of action for US is to withdraw from Afghanistan completely. Leave the Afghan government to the mercy of their incompetence, corruption, and stupidity. All the regional players -- China, Russia, and Pakistan -- should help facilitate this withdrawal.

If the Taliban ultimately control Afghanistan, so what? US has shown inclination before they are willing to work with them. Only reason Taliban was ousted in 2001 was their reluctance to deal with Al-Qaeda.

Will Trump allow this. Not right away. His ego won't let him. He thinks he can win every battle by sheer force of will.
He's the wildcard.

As for India. If it thinks it can handle Afghanistan all alone, let's see them try. I have my doubts, but I presume they will have the same problems as US before them. But we shall see.

In essence, it would be for US to withdraw from Afghanistan and let regional players handle the situation.

 

[Icarus]

@Icarus are their any remote chances of something similar to what happened with the Iranian drone, happening with the US drone because if it doesnt rest assured US is going to go deeper and deeper with such strikes.

Despite what Islamabad and Washington maintain, it is an open-secret that Pakistan and the USA have a tacit agreement on the use of drones. When I was in Bajaur, there were a lot of drone flights overhead and we were given access to detailed maps generated from the data collected from those drones. Most drone strikes have had a local component dropping "the chip/sim" as it is colloquially known which the missile homes in on.
That being said though, I am sure that there are conditions and red lines that govern the use of drones. Although they used to fly all the time over Bajaur, I did not even once find them over Swat or even in Dir/Malakand.
If those red lines are crossed, I believe Pakistan will shoot down the drone. The US however, wouldn't cross those red lines. The implications of any such action overwhelmingly outweigh any possible rewards, unless of course we are faced with another OBL type scenario where the US might be tempted to take on some measure of risk for a high risk/high reward operation.

better analogy would be
North Vietnam - Pakistan
South Vietnam - Afghanistan

Laos and Cambodia were collateral damage. Laos was used as a supply route by Vietcong with no official involvement of Laos.

You still don't get where I'm coming from. In preparation for departure from South Vietnam, the US declared that the VC and NVA were hiding out and attacking from Cambodia and Laos. Subsequently, the US dropped more bombs on Laos than they used in the entire second world war.
Laos was used as an excuse, a face saving measure. The bombing was a means to bolster that excuse as they cut their losses and bid farewell to the disastrous campaign in Vietnam.

 

[LeGenD]

The US has basically
dug its own grave. It is playing all sides. As long as the US keeps appeasing India to counter China it won't achieve peace in Afghanistan.

Its a strange grave in which US can come and go as it pleases.

We have heard this tough American talk before and we are not impressed. The Americans are kidding themselves to think they can influence Pakistan by carrying out drone strikes, enforcing economic sanctions etc. The Americans fail to grasp that Pakistan is not in their influence zone. It has been like that for a while now, but the Americans seem oblivious or in denial mode. Pakistan and other regional countries won't allow Afghanistan to become a total US/Indian colony which is used to destabilize other countries. The American game in Afghanistan is over.

Unfortunately that is not true - American decisions and actions (do) affect us. Pakistan's geopolitical tilt towards China is [in part] to reduce its 'vulnerability' in the US-PAK engagement paradigm because disparity in capabilities and options is vast in this paradigm between the two sides.

Easy for you to say all that since you sit in Norway and are a commoner. Should you ever get the chance to become PM or COAS - only then you will come to understand the big picture - the pressure points and weaknesses of Pakistan and how US can leverage them.

Influence is not a static thing - it may wane in a particular period of time but peak in another because geopolitical developments may set its course. US-PAK relations hit rock bottom during the period (1988 - 2001) but 9/11 event changed the situation.

You might think that American influence has diminished in recent years but this is not true. Don't let a COLD period fool you into thinking otherwise.

ISIS-K in Afghanistan and CPEC in Pakistan - two developments are once again making American intervention in this region relevant and ushering into a new era for US to reassert its influence over Pakistan because US understands that CPEC is Pakistan's latest pressure point. China is indeed in the picture but only naive think that China will risk confrontation with US over CPEC - the overarching OBOR project comprises of SIX ROUTES in total. If one route is choked, China can fallback on another - this is the grand plan.

We Pakistani - are responsible for our security and fate in the end. If we decide to commit suicide tomorrow, China cannot do anything about it.

China and Russia are going to get more assertive and involved in Afghanistan as American influence wanes. We are already seeing the first signs and they are promising. Also, Pakistan is happy to see more Russian and Chinese involvement in Afghanistan. Pakistan wants to see a change in Afghanistan because American policies have been an utter disaster. Pakistan has suffered immensely both in human and economic sense. The Americans are insensitive to Pakistan's losses and sacrifices. This only compounds the problems. The Americans are naturally irked by the China/Russia development and hence blaming Pakistan for their failures, but blame games won't get them anywhere.

I am sorry but this is a FANTASY running in your head and it will come down crashing as soon as Trump administration will take a decision vis-a-vis Afghanistan - very soon I shall add.

Russia and China might have interests in Afghanistan but they are not partners in this matter - their talks do not suggest a common ground in matters pertaining to Afghanistan. Russia cannot be trusted when it comes to Afghanistan - it would rather reignite fires there just to get back to the US. Conversely, China desires peace in Afghanistan due to CPEC and Xinjiang.

American intervention in Afghanistan is of entirely different construct because 9/11 was the fundamental instrument for intervention. Russia and/or China did not had to endure a 9/11 from Al-Qaeda Network like US or we all would have seen how friendly they have been in their response. Very easy to judge US in this position.

Americans have propped a democratic regime in Afghanistan and it is a reasonable 'line of communication' with Afghanistan for the rest of the world including Russia, China and Pakistan.

How many hold talks with Taliban? They are absolutely nutters when it comes to foreign policy. Some used to call Mullah Mansour a stooge of ISI: http://www.tolonews.com/node/12774

More information here: https://www.vox.com/2016/6/21/11988948/afghanistan-mullah-mansour-taliban

Good luck for negotiations with those Taliban nutters. If you really think that China and Russia can ensure lasting peace in Afghanistan then you need a serious wake-up call. This country is fragmented beyond belief.

Democratic leadership setup in Kabul is the [only] platform which enables Afghans from all backgrounds to come together. There is no other way around it.

The reason why Trump is unable to formulate a policy on Pakistan is because he and his minions don't have a clue how to rectify the mess in the first place. Obama failed miserably in Afghanistan and was a far more insightful leader than Trump could ever be. Trump and his amateur team has no clue. Afghanistan will turn to be another US failure. Especially under Trump. The writing is on the wall.

Pakistan should keep distance as far as US demands in Afghanistan are concerned. We have been there and done it before. Nothing good will happen.

Oh dear.

Trump administration had its hands full with Democrats during the 1st year of its term but now it is settling down and have room to ponder over other issues.

News for you: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligence...n-afghanistan-let-the-generals-handle-it.html

Last week, President Donald Trump unveiled his strategy for how his administration would fight the ongoing war against the Taliban and various other jihadist groups in Afghanistan. The good news and the bad news is that Trump himself will not be actively managing the U.S. participation in the Afghan conflict, but instead will give the Defense Department latitude to set troop levels and their level of engagement at its discretion, without interference from the White House.

To be honest, this is how things should have been in Afghanistan. Politics are never good for any conflict in the long-term.

And yes, we know how insightful Obama administration was vis-a-vis Afghanistan. Don't get me started on his blunders in this region. I can write a thesis on it.

Interesting discussion, but the best course of action for US is to withdraw from Afghanistan completely. Leave the Afghan government to the mercy of their incompetence, corruption, and stupidity. All the regional players -- China, Russia, and Pakistan -- should help facilitate this withdrawal.

If the Taliban ultimately control Afghanistan, so what? US has shown inclination before they are willing to work with them. Only reason Taliban was ousted in 2001 was their reluctance to deal with Al-Qaeda.

Will Trump allow this. Not right away. His ego won't let him. He thinks he can win every battle by sheer force of will.
He's the wildcard.

As for India. If it thinks it can handle Afghanistan all alone, let's see them try. I have my doubts, but I presume they will have the same problems as US before them. But we shall see.

In essence, it would be for US to withdraw from Afghanistan and let regional players handle the situation.

Unfortunately, this is not possible at the moment.

People still assume that Taliban is whole and united in its cause like it was under leadership of Mullah Omar but this is simply not true: Taliban has also splintered under pressures of conflict and other factors. Check the aforementioned links for information in this regard.

Afghan government might be corrupt and inept but it is the only platform that enables Afghans from all corners to come to the negotiation table - it is the 'line of communication' for the Afghans and foreigners as well.

 

[Malik Usman]

Why people become blind and deaf when the matter comes for Pakistan. Nobody want to listen what is Pakistan's stance. Pakistan is saying from long time that Indian RAW and Afghan Intelligence agency are doing terrorism in Pakistan they are training, funding terrorist to enter in Pakistan and do blasts to kill innocent people and not to forget Balichistan where India is supporting separist groups to destabilize Pakistan. But Uncle Sam need no worry as long as Muslims specially in Muslim country are dying.

 

[Logicaldude]

1 what was pakistans experience in power sharing deals with Taliban? Did you not cut like 3 or 4 deals with them? Why do you think Afghanistan will be any different?

2 Ghani was considered very pro Pakistan when he took power. He made his first foreign trip right after to Pakistan and even visited (mind you, he visited) your COAS before he met your PM. How can you so casually put all blame on Afghanistan? Have you considered WHY things went south? Could Pakistan be at fault in some way?

3 why does Pakistan find it impossible to support the Afghan govt whole heartedly? Are there not many other reasons than just blaming India?

4 will Pakistan not win lots of international admiration and credibility by backing the Afghan govt and deal with the Taliban blowback? I know not easy, but how are things going right now?

I hope no mod will delete my comment. Looks like anything asking fundamental questions to pakistans "we know best" foreign policy controllers is not tolerated, while utterly BS comments by false flag dutch (lol) weirdoes and chini overlords are all the rage

I dont know what to say to people who think worlds foremost military,economic, scientific, soft power, diplomatic power with scores of developed countries backing it when it counts fully is scared of body bags?

I mean W T F!!!

 

[Jacob Martin]

These type of reports are just western media flattery and greatly satisfying for indians. In reality US no longer has significant leverage over Pakistan BUT Pakistan does (although Pakistan did not use it as such). US policy utterly failed in Afghanistan and verge of loosing it all. So as a sore looser US will huff and puff to distract and indians are willing to offer its state operated terror apparatus to keep US hold its loosing position. And for geographically handicapped india, if US leaves Afghanistan, its the end of the road for any direct engagement in Eurasian dream.

On the ground, Talibans are increasingly gaining territories and there is decapitating infighting within US installed regime in Kabul. All major power brokers in the region; Pakistan, Iran, China, Russia and dominant power on ground Talibans, are against US presence. For US its time to calculate if it is possible to hang on to its last remaining position in Afghanistan? Antagonizing Pakistan will surely cost US more than it lost already BUT india (Modi) is advising Trump otherwise.

Have you considered a career in creative writing?

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Trump ponders crackdown on Pakistan over terror ties despite experts' warnings
As US mulls strategy over country’s support for terrorist groups in Afghanistan, experts say tougher stance could drive Pakistan toward China and Russia

Authors: Sune Engel Rasmussen in Kabul and Julian Borger in Washington

The Trump administration is considering taking a harder stance against Pakistanfor supporting terrorist groups in Afghanistan, but experts warn that pressure alone will not bring peace.

Similar tactics have failed in the past, and analysts warn that the US can only influence the south Asian country by coupling force with diplomacy, which Donald Trump seems to shun.

And attempts to strong-arm Islamabad could push it deeper into a growing alliance with China and Russia, and lead to more instability.

China in particular offers Pakistan an opportunity to counter the strengthened union between the US and India, whose presence in Afghanistan the Pakistani military considers an existential threat.

Among the tools considered by the Trump administration, according to Reuters, are expanding drone strikes, withholding aid and revoking Pakistan’s status as a major non-Nato ally.

But attempts to bully Pakistan into submission will only drive Islamabad further toward China, said Ayesha Siddiqa, author and research associate at the School of Oriental and African Studies in London.

“It also means that in Afghanistan, there will be more violence. Pakistan sees Afghanistan as an American-Indian project against Pakistani interests,” she said.

US policy on Afghanistan is evolving at a time when the defence department is particularly powerful in policy-making, after Trump delegated authority to his defence secretary, James Mattis, to set troop deployment levels there.

Meanwhile the state department is weakened by a continuing outflow of veteran diplomats and a notable lack of urgency in replacing them on the part of the secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, who has backed plans to cut the departmental budget by a third.

On Friday, the acting special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan (SRAP), Laurel Miller, left the post along with her deputy, leaving doubts over the future of the position, which was created in 2009 by Barack Obama. A state department statement said that Tillerson “has not made a decision” on the issue.

“It’s a distinction without a difference whether a decision has been made, since there is functionally nobody in the office,” said James Cunningham, a former US ambassador to Afghanistan. “The key part of this isn’t whether there is an SRAP office. It is how is the senior official who is responsible for these issues, and as far as I know, that basically doesn’t exist. This is all part of the whittling down, eviscerating, debilitating of the state department’s ability to participate effectively in diplomacy.”

Economically, China has long surpassed the US in importance in Pakistan. The crown jewel in China’s Pakistani venture is a $62bn infrastructure project, the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. But China has also acquired everything from power companies and contracts to collect garbage to stakes in the Karachi stock exchange.

Pakistan is widely believed to harbour and support Taliban militants, and has been regarded as a spoiler in peace talks.

“It’s unprecedented and very different from what Pakistani-American relations ever were. While the US invested in Pakistan, its dominance will never be like what the Chinese will be,” said Siddiqa.

For Russia, a US-Pakistani rift opens space to oppose American power, as it does through proxies in Syria.

Western officials in Kabul believe, partly for this reason, that Russia has increased its weapons support for the Taliban.

“If I were Putin, I’d be smirking and thinking, this is my chance to get back at the Americans and turn Afghanistan into another Vietnam,” said Siddiqa.

Russia has admitted to sharing intelligence with the Taliban, to fight Isis affiliates.

The Pakistani defence minister has called on Russia to take the lead in stabilising Afghanistan, and in September, Russia and Pakistan conducted their first joint military drill near Peshawar.

However, Hassan Askari Rizvi, a Pakistani analyst, said there is a limit to how much diplomatic turbulence countries in the region are willing to cause.

“For Russia, the first preference in south Asia is obviously India, and therefore Pakistan is not expecting a major shift in relations in the near future,” he said. “There may be a downgrading of relations between them, but Pakistan and US will not totally abandon each other.”

However, he cautioned against intensifying drone strikes on Pakistani soil. “Drones will not help,” he said. “If they are used on the mainland, Pakistan will not accept it, and might retaliate by shooting some drones down,” he said.

Barack Obama also tried to coerce Pakistan, by cutting economic assistance and lowering diplomatic contacts. For instance, Obama never visited Islamabad in his eight years as president.

Obama also reached out to Pakistan’s arch-rival, India, whose prime minister Narendra Modi was welcomed by Trump at the White House on Monday, amid reports that India would buy 22 US Guardian drones for its navy and discuss the possible shift of production of F-16s fighter jets to India.

“Thank you very much for … ordering equipment from the United States. Always makes us feel very good,” Trump said in a joint appearance with Modi in the White House cabinet room. “There’s nobody makes military equipment like we make military equipment.”

If one thing unites various regional powers, it is suspicion of American motives in Afghanistan. In a desire to deny the US its monopoly as a powerbroker, Moscow invited delegates from 12 countries to a peace conference on Afghanistan in March.

Meanwhile, the US is likely planning a deployment of 4,000 additional troops to its longest war.

Countries in the region have long suspected the US of wanting a permanent base in Afghanistan under the guise of fighting terrorists. “They do not believe in the counter terrorism bona fides of the US,” said Barnett Rubin, director of the Afghanistan-Pakistan Regional Program at New York University.

He added that a troop surge and hard Pakistan line can only succeed if coupled with strong diplomacy. “But they can’t do that by slashing the state department by one-third,” he said.

Afghans have lived under a geopolitical tug-of-war since Russia’s and Britain’s 19th century Great Game. Now it seems more countries than ever are willing to expend political and economic capital to maintain a foothold.

“Unless there is an agreement about Afghanistan between Iran, Russia, China, Pakistan, India and the US, Afghanistan will be unstable,” Rubin said. “And if the idea is that Afghanistan is defended and secured by becoming an American base, there won’t be an agreement.”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jun/27/trump-pakistan-terror-afghanistan-china-russia

Bring it on!!!!!!!..........there is hardly a relationship between America & Pakistan anyways. These are the same people who said they are going to do to us what they did to Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and Libya. They can't for obvious reasons. Let them continue to talk and do not action. Suits us fine.

 

[LeGenD]

Bring it on!!!!!!!..........there is hardly a relationship between America & Pakistan anyways. These are the same people who said they are going to do to us what they did to Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and Libya. They can't for obvious reasons. Let them continue to talk and do not action. Suits us fine.

Relax man.

Tough stance doesn't implies destruction of Pakistan. It is a pressure tactic in large part.

 

[SecularNationalist]

Pagal kuta sala

 

[LeGenD]

Despite what Islamabad and Washington maintain, it is an open-secret that Pakistan and the USA have a tacit agreement on the use of drones. When I was in Bajaur, there were a lot of drone flights overhead and we were given access to detailed maps generated from the data collected from those drones. Most drone strikes have had a local component dropping "the chip/sim" as it is colloquially known which the missile homes in on.
That being said though, I am sure that there are conditions and red lines that govern the use of drones. Although they used to fly all the time over Bajaur, I did not even once find them over Swat or even in Dir/Malakand.
If those red lines are crossed, I believe Pakistan will shoot down the drone. The US however, wouldn't cross those red lines. The implications of any such action overwhelmingly outweigh any possible rewards, unless of course we are faced with another OBL type scenario where the US might be tempted to take on some measure of risk for a high risk/high reward operation.

Cooperation used to be very good in the days of Bush administration. Things began to go downhill when Leon Panetta took charge of CIA and Barack Obama patted him on the back. This guy would sanction unilateral strikes in Pakistan and his actions became the major source of rift between two states. Raymond Davis, Osama Bin Laden, Salala and Mullah Mansour are [famous] cases but there are other 'incidents' as well (and equally damaging) which got much less publicity.

Situation is better now but let us see what decision Trump administration will take.

 

[Storm Force]

MODI & TRUMP is the perfect storm forming brewing for Pakistan.

Two redneck anti Islamic leaders and two very IN YOUR FACE I don't care too much FOR TIPPY Tappy diplomacy is what Modi & Trump are about.

I predict a steady rise in Indian Influence in Afghanistan At the wink wink behest of USA..

And YES I do predict indian Raw Agents to cause stir trouble via the back door from Afghan/pak border.

Pakistan has completely LOST ALL support & faith FROM USA........ and you can blame your ISI & ARMY for their idiotic attempts to claim they new nothing about OBL

Finding OBL in Pakistan was the biggest blunder the Pakistani ever made.

As for suggesting China & Russia can replace USA ... ............ not a chance

 

[LeGenD]

MODI & TRUMP is the perfect storm forming brewing for Pakistan.

Two redneck anti Islamic leaders and two very IN YOUR FACE I don't care too much FOR TIPPY Tappy diplomacy is what Modi & Trump are about.

I predict a steady rise in Indian Influence in Afghanistan At the wink wink behest of USA..

And YES I do predict indian Raw Agents to cause stir trouble via the back door from Afghan/pak border.

Pakistan has completely LOST ALL support & faith FROM USA........ and you can blame your ISI & ARMY for their idiotic attempts to claim they new nothing about OBL

Finding OBL in Pakistan was the biggest blunder the Pakistani ever made.

As for suggesting China & Russia can replace USA ... ............ not a chance

Right.

Wait for Pakistan to offer some 'investments' to Donald Trump and he will be willing to talk.

 

[Storm Force]

Right.

Wait for Pakistan to offer some 'investments' to Donald Trump and he will be willing to talk.

No Chance

The Chinease are running that Show Now

 

[That Guy]

MODI & TRUMP is the perfect storm forming brewing for Pakistan.

Two redneck anti Islamic leaders and two very IN YOUR FACE I don't care too much FOR TIPPY Tappy diplomacy is what Modi & Trump are about.

I predict a steady rise in Indian Influence in Afghanistan At the wink wink behest of USA..

And YES I do predict indian Raw Agents to cause stir trouble via the back door from Afghan/pak border.

Pakistan has completely LOST ALL support & faith FROM USA........ and you can blame your ISI & ARMY for their idiotic attempts to claim they new nothing about OBL

Finding OBL in Pakistan was the biggest blunder the Pakistani ever made.

As for suggesting China & Russia can replace USA ... ............ not a chance

China has already replaced the US, for Pakistan, so your point is factually wrong.

The rest of your comment is nothing more than wishful thinking. Indian influence in Afghanistan is already at its peak, it won't rise any further. In fact, it has nowhere to go but down.

The only thing I will agree on is that RAW will likely increase its covert terrorism operations in Baluchistan, considering they probably have enough support from the US, for the Trump administration and the CIA to turn a blind eye.