U.S. bristles at stiff Pakistani NATO fees

[Developereo]

The problem is the position of the USA is one of want, not need. The Americans, as the premier superpower have endless routes to choose from and can strong arm a whole host of nations to let them funnel in supplies.

That's simply wrong.

The US does NOT have many other realistic options. The only other viable option is the NDN but it does not allow arms shipment. Far more importantly, it requires Russia's blessing and, now that Putin is back in town, the US extremely concerned.

That is why US pressure on Pakistan has mounted significantly in the last few weeks -- it all has to do with Putin's return.

Pakistan is playing into the perception of a nation that is unwilling to help, and at worst, standing in the way of the fight against extremism and terrorism. While you and me agree that is largely unfair and incredibly biased; as the foremost military and media power, the American opinion and spin carries far more weight.

The US has always held that power and used it over the last decade. Even before Salala, Mullen and Co. (and their protege Karzai) rarely missed an opportunity to malign and scapegoat Pakistan for their failures. That has not change and will not change, regardless of NATO supplies.

Basically, it is a situation of a rapist holding a gun to the victim's head. Does the victim continue to do the bidding? for how long?

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Cheng, you should answer AM's question because it was a valid one

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

The reason I say Pakistan has lost out on strategic significance due to the blockade is related to post-2014 Afghanistan. Pakistan will now find it much more difficult to have as influential a voice at the table as it would have otherwise had as an ally, and once the extra funds it may succeed in wrangling as transit fees as swallowed up by pre-existing liabilities, it will cost it dearly elsewhere.

That is utter conjecture - when the US is not willing to give Pakistan a significant/tangible voice in the 'end game' leading into 2014, why would they have any interest in giving Pakistan a voice post 2014, when, hopefully, the NATO draw-down would in fact be tied into the 'reconciliation' efforts made pre-2014.

The part is bold is nothing more than conjecture born of wishes, prayers and hopes, but nothing that would be substantial enough to pin any definite plans upon. What if the jarring produces a collapse of the whole teetering edifice? Isn't that a more likely outcome?

It could certainly induce an economic collapse, and if Pakistanis are unable to vote for a different kind of leadership in the face of such a collapse, then it doesn't really matter whether aid will come into Pakistan or not, since the ambivalence of the average Pakistani will ensure a lack of progress regardless of the relationship with the US.

 

[Pfpilot]

i agree with most of your points and appreciate your response

on the issue of fighting extremism - let there be no doubt that the State has been against extremism and terrorism and Pakistan has neither the incentive nor the need to be seen as a hindrance to the ''war on terrorism''

but with that said, when Washington is in contact with the same people we are (but we get burned and blamed for their failure to achieve their objectives in Afghanistan) -- it causes confusion.

the issue here is the hypocrisy and double standards.....but what matter is, the neighborhood is ours. Beyond trillions of dollars and un-invited military presence NATO has no basis or justification for its campaign in Afghanistan. Several top senior officials in U.S. have been cited as saying that Al Qaeda's operational ability in the region is highly eroded and they are in disarray.

they should focus on AQ in Arabian Peninsula because that is where many of the international terrorist plots are originating.....and on Al Qaeda, it was only years ago the western media was all praise about Pakistan's counter-terrorism efforts and cooperation. However today (due partly because of ineptness of our leadership) either Pakistan is being highly mis-understood or its just vested interests and a vilification campaign simply to pressure Pakistan and try to make Pakistan do whatever others tell it to do.

i do agree that its not helpful or productive to be at odds with the ''lone superpower'' and in fact i dont think it suits Pakistan to break ties or be seen as ''hindrance'' to peace in Afghanistan (which we aren't and never have been)...however, Pakistan must take its own course of action in order to ensure its own security as well as regional security




it's not our fault if NATO alienated 45-50% of Afghanistan population by arming and funding rival ethnic groups and contributing to (rather than solving) the issues in that country

I don't disagree with you at all. If I'm being honest with myself, no longer living in Pakistan, I am out of touch with the emotional aspect of this whole ordeal. Whatever the wrongs the Americans maybe responsible for, I feel it is important for Pakistan to back off to protect it's existence as a separate entity. As I try to be calculative and unbiased, I full realize I may have been of a completely different opinion were I living in Pakistan and dealt with the constant death and destruction.

While I agree with the impossible situation Pakistan finds itself in, I find it equally important to realize that the Americans aren't going to back down from their own stance without causing the kind of instability that may destroy Pakistan. Since they hold all the power and are answerable to no one, the Americans tend to make the rules as they go along...the idea is to appease the American citizen regardless of what ills befall the foreign victims of those policies. And truth be told, all nations are like that, but unlike the Americans, we are answerable to a large group of nations due to our disadvantaged economic position. When one Afghani crosses the border and kills Pakistan soldiers, the US can apologize or not and no one will be able to lift a finger. On the other hand, if a terrorist even inhales the sand from the Pakistani side of the border, the Americans can and will and react with fury. Is this fair? Not it isn't, but it is the reality. They make the rules and when they fall on the wrong side of those laws, they change those very same rules.

I am all for Pakistan standing up for itself, but when you are standing up to a bully with a loaded shotgun, with nothing but the good morals on your side, you are going to get blown to bits. Pakistan is facing a high risk situation with little in the way of reward. We may gain an apology, but we will not be able to rid ourselves of American influence, especially since our leaders rely on it to bankroll their personal aspirations. On the other hand, if things don't turn out in our favor, the situation of Pakistan could very well get worse than it is today. Once again, your points have great value, I merely feel we are not fortunate enough to be able to burden the load of standing up for them.

That's simply wrong.

The US does NOT have many other realistic options. The only other viable option is the NDN but it does not allow arms shipment. Far more importantly, it requires Russia's blessing and, now that Putin is back in town, the US extremely concerned.

That is why US pressure on Pakistan has mounted significantly in the last few weeks -- it all has to do with Putin's return.



The US has always held that power and used it over the last decade. Even before Salala, Mullen and Co. (and their protege Karzai) rarely missed an opportunity to malign and scapegoat Pakistan for their failures. That has not change and will not change, regardless of NATO supplies.

Basically, it is a situation of a rapist holding a gun to the victim's head. Does the victim continue to do the bidding? for how long?

Since the US treatment will not change, it brings into question, what Pakistan hopes to accomplish from taking this stand? That is all I was trying to say in a horribly long winded and confusing speech. If we are just trying to say enough is enough, then we can't do it so halfheartedly as is done now. While our leaders and military benefit from American dollars, we want them to stop meddling within our nation. While drone strikes are approved behind closed doors, our establishment cries foul in the media. The contradictory nature of our government's stance undercuts the changes we are trying to make in our relationship with the US. But I will stop here, so as not to marginalize further the valid issues being discussed between more knowledgeable members.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

I don't disagree with you at all. If I'm being honest with myself, no longer living in Pakistan, I am out of touch with the emotional aspect of this whole ordeal. Whatever the wrongs the Americans maybe responsible for, I feel it is important for Pakistan to back off to protect it's existence as a separate entity. As I try to be calculative and unbiased, I full realize I may have been of a completely different opinion were I living in Pakistan and dealt with the constant death and destruction.

While I agree with the impossible situation Pakistan finds itself in, I find it equally important to realize that the Americans aren't going to back down from their own stance without causing the kind of instability that may destroy Pakistan. Since they hold all the power and are answerable to no one, the Americans tend to make the rules as they go along...the idea is to appease the American citizen regardless of what ills befall the foreign victims of those policies. And truth be told, all nations are like that, but unlike the Americans, we are answerable to a large group of nations due to our disadvantaged economic position. When one Afghani crosses the border and kills Pakistan soldiers, the US can apologize or not and no one will be able to lift a finger. On the other hand, if a terrorist even inhales the sand from the Pakistani side of the border, the Americans can and will and react with fury. Is this fair? Not it isn't, but it is the reality. They make the rules and when they fall on the wrong side of those laws, they change those very same rules.

I am all for Pakistan standing up for itself, but when you are standing up to a bully with a loaded shotgun, with nothing but the good morals on your side, you are going to get blown to bits. Pakistan is facing a high risk situation with little in the way of reward. We may gain an apology, but we will not be able to rid ourselves of American influence, especially since our leaders rely on it to bankroll their personal aspirations. On the other hand, if things don't turn out in our favor, the situation of Pakistan could very well get worse than it is today. Once again, your points have great value, I merely feel we are not fortunate enough to be able to burden the load of standing up for them.

their supply routes will not be open by them pointing shotguns at us or attacking troops who are manning their posts.....it will further accelerate their defeat, and a loss of an ally they claim they need

 

[FaujHistorian]

their supply routes will not be open by them pointing shotguns at us or attacking troops who are manning their posts.....it will further accelerate their defeat, and a loss of an ally they claim they need

you my dear Sir are really simple in your mind about a lot of things.

USA and countries similar to USA do not accept defeat at the hands of puny countries.

For each US soldier dead, they usually kill 10-100 of their perceived enemy.

Why it is so?

Well a country becomes a super power by not playing nice. They become super by the biggest Big Boss and ruthless.

Read Islamic history and you will find the same thing.

Yazid destroyed Imam Hussain, and his very seed.

Afghan hoards dismembered any Hindu raja who opposed them.

Turks did the same to their enemies. Ask Armenians and they will tell you all about it.


Sorry to distract from the main topic.

Having given few examples from Islamic history, let me come back to American's possible response to Pakistan shutting down their supply routes.

1. Stoppage of international support (direct aid of 2.5 billions + money from IMF and world bank).
-- Many in Pakistan say, we have lived under sanctions and we can suffer more just like Iranians.
-- Well this is all fine and dandy but we are not a monolithic country like Iran. Our provinces have a habit of shouting separation at the drop of hat.

And this brings us to the second point.

2. Learn what Americans did to Columbia some 100 years ago. When Columbia refused to accept American terms about Panama Canal (1 billion $ back then), Americans "encouraged" Panama separation. Once Panama got independence, Americans gave the same amount of money $billion 1 to Panama and dug the canal.
-- Americans can simply provide air cover a la Libya to Balochis and in few months Balochistan could become independent. Then just like Panama, Americans can give $2.5 billions a year (that they now give to Pakistan) to Balochis and get a nice highway all the way to Kandhar from Gawader.

-- Why do you think Chinese are running away like rats when it comes to developing Gawader. They know their investment is not safe given Pakistan's unstable tendencies.

-- then what will be Pakistan's reaction? lob few missiles? to where? Explode nukie bumbs? but on whom?

I write this with heavy heart. I am talking about my beloved country.

But I am also aware enough about the military history of Pakistan and the USA and how the countries can hurt each other or help each other.


Pakistan being much much smaller country, can get hurt really bad so we must be very very careful. American is "unhappy" with us, but it has not given us the "enemy status". It is up to us to make sure we never become even a perceived enemy of America or any power that may be 50 times or more bigger than us.

This is all I want to say. My effort is not to prove you as idiot, instead all my words and feelings and emotions are to see my country as one and prosperous in the long run.

Pakistan Paindabad.

Peace to all.

 

[KingMamba]

So we should bend over because they might try and succede balochistan from us ? Oh please the US has been classified pakistan as enemies they refuse to pay us money we are rightfully owed have nearly bankrupted us wit losses from the WoT and are always provoking us at the afghan border i say keep the routes closed and leave this war we have done more than enough for this "ally"

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

without a shadow of a doubt it's not in Pakistan's interests AT ALL to be seen or perceived as a hindrance to the ''war against extremism''

Pakistan needs to work on its PR. Our side has definitely not done the greatest at PR - and we've focused more on private meetings and behind the scenes than on working on boosting our public perception and going on the record to clarify our position on certain matters

but on the issue of Supply Routes - it's through Pakistani territory so therefore Pakistani demands have to be respected. There is no way around it. The khakis are on the sidelines here, its the parliamentary review which the US Admin is holding in contempt.


as i said many times - an apology for Salala incident is well-deserved and warranted.....that will at least pave the way for less strains and more cooperation. US elections and Pakistani elections upcoming of course does complicate matters.

 

[ziaulislam]

pakistan is still allowing air route for NATO.
it would have been intersting had they blocked that route too.?

 

[KingMamba]

pakistan is still allowing air route for NATO.
it would have been intersting had they blocked that route too.?

They should to increase the pressure especially if they deny all our requests.

 

[Jango]

pakistan is still allowing air route for NATO.
it would have been intersting had they blocked that route too.?

Only non weapons are passing through. That too scarcely.

It's been a while since they passed through, as per my knowledge.

 

[Areesh]

you my dear Sir are really simple in your mind about a lot of things.

USA and countries similar to USA do not accept defeat at the hands of puny countries.

For each US soldier dead, they usually kill 10-100 of their perceived enemy.

Why it is so?

Well a country becomes a super power by not playing nice. They become super by the biggest Big Boss and ruthless.

Read Islamic history and you will find the same thing.

Yazid destroyed Imam Hussain, and his very seed.

Afghan hoards dismembered any Hindu raja who opposed them.

Turks did the same to their enemies. Ask Armenians and they will tell you all about it.


Sorry to distract from the main topic.

Having given few examples from Islamic history, let me come back to American's possible response to Pakistan shutting down their supply routes.

1. Stoppage of international support (direct aid of 2.5 billions + money from IMF and world bank).
-- Many in Pakistan say, we have lived under sanctions and we can suffer more just like Iranians.
-- Well this is all fine and dandy but we are not a monolithic country like Iran. Our provinces have a habit of shouting separation at the drop of hat.

And this brings us to the second point.

2. Learn what Americans did to Columbia some 100 years ago. When Columbia refused to accept American terms about Panama Canal (1 billion $ back then), Americans "encouraged" Panama separation. Once Panama got independence, Americans gave the same amount of money $billion 1 to Panama and dug the canal.
-- Americans can simply provide air cover a la Libya to Balochis and in few months Balochistan could become independent. Then just like Panama, Americans can give $2.5 billions a year (that they now give to Pakistan) to Balochis and get a nice highway all the way to Kandhar from Gawader.

-- Why do you think Chinese are running away like rats when it comes to developing Gawader. They know their investment is not safe given Pakistan's unstable tendencies.

-- then what will be Pakistan's reaction? lob few missiles? to where? Explode nukie bumbs? but on whom?

I write this with heavy heart. I am talking about my beloved country.

But I am also aware enough about the military history of Pakistan and the USA and how the countries can hurt each other or help each other.


Pakistan being much much smaller country, can get hurt really bad so we must be very very careful. American is "unhappy" with us, but it has not given us the "enemy status". It is up to us to make sure we never become even a perceived enemy of America or any power that may be 50 times or more bigger than us.

This is all I want to say. My effort is not to prove you as idiot, instead all my words and feelings and emotions are to see my country as one and prosperous in the long run.

Pakistan Paindabad.

Peace to all.

That was one of the most lame post I have ever read on t his board. Even worst than the Indian trolls have ever came up with. Pathetic. You are hopeless buddy. Pathetic to say the least.

 

[Vassnti]

That is utter conjecture - when the US is not willing to give Pakistan a significant/tangible voice in the 'end game' leading into 2014, why would they have any interest in giving Pakistan a voice post 2014, when, hopefully, the NATO draw-down would in fact be tied into the 'reconciliation' efforts made pre-2014..

I wonder if just the opposite would be the case? Now there are those that even if it is just enlightened self interest are activley on Pakistans side, the actual "friends" of Pakistan in the US esablishment are either resigning or being retired. Post 2014 and certainly post 2015 those on Pakistans side are likley to become much less vocal and those anti-Pakstan more so.

Now is the best chance for Pakistan to influence the balance of the relationship with the US and so far Pakistan has fumbled, they have a chance to recover but i think its a small window.
Pakistani's Like Americans and like most people have short memories for the good things and long memories for the bad its a fault we all share but one that perhaps some times for the greater good we need to work against.

 

[muse]

Some posters on this thread need to consult a map -- just look at what a terrible situation the US and the West in general find themselves in, a situation entirely of their own making -- Look at where US forces find welcome, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain - these non states, each a tribal tyranny are among the "friends" of the US - in each of these non states, there is strong resentment of the policies of the US and NATO, that is to say, should the US slip and allow "spring" in these non-states, the will and the voice of the people will be less than "friendly" towards the US and it's designs for the region -

However, should the US want yet another "enemy", and I would suggest that it seems that US does not realize that it is going about doing just that, then nothing Pakistan can do or not do, will stop that from happening -- The US seems to have lost it's confidence and it's nerve, the "American century" seems to have gotten off to a rocky (read disastrous start), in fact the project is to be shelved just 11 years after it began.

There are interesting negotiations going on with Iran -- if the Iranian price is not met, and the contagion of the "spring" makes it to these tyrannies the US supports, "game over". So, sure get tough with Pakistan, Pakistan's elites are side of the US (read Dollars), public opinion makes such "friendship" politically untenable - who said game over??

 

[FaujHistorian]

So we should bend over because they might try and succede balochistan from us ? Oh please the US has been classified pakistan as enemies they refuse to pay us money we are rightfully owed have nearly bankrupted us wit losses from the WoT and are always provoking us at the afghan border i say keep the routes closed and leave this war we have done more than enough for this "ally"

Shutting down supply routes of a large army is very similar to shutting down water and power to your apartment.

Hope you understand this.

So there are Pakistani origin people involved in terror in NY. Supposedly they were "CITIZENS" and "ALLIES" of America.

Should the NY police go around and shut down water and power to all the apartments where Pakistanis dwell?

that's called collective punishment and inhuman.

Unfortunately this is the same thing that you are proposing. Collective punishment for all NATO troops. Yes there was a sad incident in Salala. But you want to create a bigger fasad for Pakistan while sitting comfy apartment in NY that is protected by the very same troops and law enforcement agencies.

This is hypocritic at best if not downright treasonous.

peace,.