What's new

U.S. bristles at stiff Pakistani NATO fees

Wrong info mate,here is our official position!
............

Well, the "official" position does not seem to be very successful. There is no apology so far, and not even the prospect of one. The drone attacks are continuing. All that is left are the negotiations for a higher rate, and even they do not seem to be going well for Pakistan. Let's see where the dollar figure settles.
 
U.S., Pakistan fail to reach deal on supply routes ahead of NATO summit

From Mike Mount and Elise Labott, CNN
updated 7:15 PM EDT, Sat May 19, 2012


Chicago (CNN) -- The United States and Pakistan will not reach a deal on opening NATO supply routes before coalition leaders meet on Sunday, two senior U.S. officials told CNN.

"There is no deal, and there won't be one until President (Asif Ali) Zardari returns" to Pakistan, one senior official said, "and even that is not assured."

The two sides had hoped to have a deal before Zardari arrived in Chicago this weekend to join NATO allies and other coalition partners for a meeting on Afghanistan.

"The main thing is to get a deal," one senior official said. "It's less important as to when."

With no deal, officials said U.S. President Barack Obama would not meet with Zardari. The two leaders were to possibly meet in a trilateral meeting with Afghan President Hamid Karzai on the issue of political reconciliation in Afghanistan. Pakistan's support in reaching a deal with the Taliban is seen as critical in ending the war in Afghanistan.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is expected to meet with Zardari in Chicago, the officials said.

Ahead of the NATO summit on Afghanistan's future, Pakistan was requesting $5,000 per truck as a condition to reopen the supply lines between the two South Asian countries, U.S. officials said. The officials said Saturday that the United States would not agree to pay the stiff fees.

The new cost is a sticking point in weeklong negotiations between Washington and Islamabad to open the roads, known as the ground lines of communication or GLOCs. U.S. officials say the fees are inflated.

"We're hopeful the GLOCs will be reopened soon, but we're not going to agree to unreasonable charges. The Pakistanis understand that," said a senior defense official who is not authorized to speak publicly about the talks.

Previously, the United States had been paying just a "small fraction" of the requested fee, officials said.

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said the United States would refrain from such a deal due to budgetary restraints.

"Considering the financial challenges that we're facing, that's not likely," Panetta told the Tribune newspaper service earlier in the week.

Pakistan shut down the supply routes -- stretching from Afghanistan through the lawless western tribal regions of Pakistan and down to the southern port of Karachi -- last November after dozens of its troops were killed in a mistaken U.S. airstrike.

The routes offer a shorter and more direct route than the one NATO has been using since November that goes through Russia and other nations and avoids Pakistan altogether.

Pakistani Ambassador Sherry Rehman said Washington was paying more for the northern route.

"Perhaps, if you look at the end route where your trucks move through much longer, but I believe the double of that amount is paid," Rehman said.

But U.S. officials said the nations along the northern route do not receive "Coalition Support Funds," which should allow Pakistan to lower costs.

The supply route will take on more significance as NATO troops prepare to depart Afghanistan by 2014 and will have to move heavy equipment and supplies out of Afghanistan for shipment from Karachi.

The drawdown forms a big part of the agenda at the NATO summit in Chicago starting Sunday.

Pakistan did allow four trucks containing supplies destined for the U.S. Embassy in Kabul to cross its border Friday, the first in six months.

Rehman called it a first step.

"So this is a new beginning. And, obviously, I bring good tidings," Rehman said.

But U.S. officials were less optimistic. Besides the cost, said one official familiar with the talks, there remained "quite a few other issues" to be worked out. He did not specify what those were.

U.S., Pakistan fail to reach deal on supply routes ahead of NATO summit - CNN.com
 
Pakistan looking for 'positive conversation' on Nato routes in Chicago: Sherry Rehman

381547-SherryRehmanphotofile-1337462333-617-640x480.jpg

Rehman says entire Pak-US relationship could not be judged on the Haqqani network issue.

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Ambassador to the United States, Sherry Rehman has said that Pakistan is looking at a ‘positive’ conversation about reopening of Nato supply routes but it will be pre-mature to say when the trucks will resume supply.

“Pakistan is still demanding US President Barrack Obama’s apology over Pakistani soldiers death in US air strikes,” she told CNN in an interview.

About crossing over of four trucks into Afghanistan, she said,”we are allowing diplomatic cargo, and as far as I know, trucks, cargo and lorries are suspended, ban on some humanitarian supply may have lifted but no serious materials have been crossing over and all have been suspended for six months.”


On the eve of the Chicago summit, Ambassador Rehman spelled out Islamabad’s position on various issues including the November 26,2011, cross-border drone strikes, reopening of Nato supply routes, Pak-US ties after Salala incident, the May 2 incident and Haqqani network issues.

About the Chicago summit, she said this is a big summit where all leaders especially Pakistan and Afghanistan will be conferring to bring stability and peace to the region. She added that Pakistan had a role in the region and the alliance’s summit presented an opportunity to redefine it.

“We have joint goals that can converge, but you know that the relationship is in a bad place for over six months,” she pointed out.

About the formal apology from the US over November 26 Nato air strikes, the ambassador said this issue is not going off the table — 24 coffins draped in our national flag, killed at the hands of not an enemy, but a friend has caused national furor in Pakistan.

She said a joint sitting of the Parliament has asked for a formal apology from the US and Pakistani people seek restriction over air strikes’ deaths.

“This unconditional invitation to Pakistan is a very positive breakthrough. We don’t want interference in Afghanistan, but want to support peaceful security transition, which can also bring stability to the region,” the envoy said.


On the issue of Osama bin Laden, Sherry Rehman said that there is an Abbottabad Commission that is investigating it. “No body wanted to see OBL in Pakistan, we have helped hunt down al Qaeda,” she said.

About the Haqqani network, she said, it has become a catch word to judge the Pak-US relationship, however, she cautioned that the entire relationship could not be predicated on this spin. She pointed out that the Pak-Afghan border is a porous border and it needs policing on both sides to stop the free movement of terrorists across it.


Update:
CHICAGO: President Asif Ali Zardari arrived in Chicago on Saturday afternoon (Central Time) to participate in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Nato) Summit 2012.

Zardari was scheduled to meet Nato Secretary General Fogh Rasmussen on the same day. However, officials told The Express Tribune that it had been cancelled. A Nato public affairs official said that the meeting had been cancelled due to agenda reasons.

A Pakistan embassy spokesperson explained that the President’s plane had been delayed, and that the meeting will be rescheduled. ”We are in touch with NATO for rescheduling the meeting.”

http://tribune.com.pk/story/381229/nato-summit-zardari-en-route-to-chicago/
 
Well, the "official" position does not seem to be very successful. There is no apology so far, and not even the prospect of one. The drone attacks are continuing. All that is left are the negotiations for a higher rate, and even they do not seem to be going well for Pakistan. Let's see where the dollar figure settles.
How exactly would things be different had Pakistan not closed the supply routes in response to the US murder of 24 Pakistani soldiers?

1. The US was already refusing to reimburse $3 billion in CSF funds
2. Drone strikes were occurring frequently
3. Pakistan was not being included in the US 'End Game for Afghanistan'
4. The US 'Deep State' was maligning Pakistan through its propaganda machine every chance it got

What is the significant difference between now and then (before the NATO supply closure)?
 
How exactly would things be different had Pakistan not closed the supply routes in response to the US murder of 24 Pakistani soldiers?

1. The US was already refusing to reimburse $3 billion in CSF funds
2. Drone strikes were occurring frequently
3. Pakistan was not being included in the US 'End Game for Afghanistan'
4. The US 'Deep State' was maligning Pakistan through its propaganda machine every chance it got

What is the significant difference between now and then (before the NATO supply closure)?

Yeah but when all is said and done Pakistan still wouldn't be able to make a half-decent sales pitch for its narrative and what appears to be an already dwindling support for Pakistan in the world would regress even further !
 
Well, the "official" position does not seem to be very successful. There is no apology so far, and not even the prospect of one. The drone attacks are continuing. All that is left are the negotiations for a higher rate, and even they do not seem to be going well for Pakistan. Let's see where the dollar figure settles.
WhAt ever it is, its our official position, 5000 usd with apology , or go fight your, fight!
NATO soilders will, going to drink a bottle of minrl wAter neArly, 6 usd, if pakistan not open s that, goddam NaTo supplies, or they will going to die, with hunger, fr sure, eco-wAr?
 
How exactly would things be different had Pakistan not closed the supply routes in response to the US murder of 24 Pakistani soldiers?

1. The US was already refusing to reimburse $3 billion in CSF funds
2. Drone strikes were occurring frequently
3. Pakistan was not being included in the US 'End Game for Afghanistan'
4. The US 'Deep State' was maligning Pakistan through its propaganda machine every chance it got

What is the significant difference between now and then (before the NATO supply closure)?

Rather I think the root cause should be tackled. So far, pakistan's army has been reluctant to launch cleaning operation in its tribal areas. Those militants get a free hand to attack NATO forces in Afghanistan.

The antagonism comes from both sides. US is definitely not very pleased with pakistan. Perhaps the only reason why the relationship is still intact is US requires pakistan for cheap NATO supply. Yet, US is unprepared to offer much concessions to pakistan as evident from the latest negotiations.

The problem can be solved if pakistan's army becomes more valiant and straightforward towards cleaning taliban fil.th. Talibans have caused much more damage to pakistan than US yet its army is not prepared to clean up the northern tribal areas.

WhAt ever it is, its our official position, 5000 usd with apology , or go fight your, fight!
NATO soilders will, going to drink a bottle of minrl wAter neArly, 6 usd, if pakistan not open s that, goddam NaTo supplies, or they will going to die, with hunger, fr sure, eco-wAr?

Die? NATO has multiple options for its supplies. Russia is supporting NATO's position in Afghanistan. You should hope that terrorists are eradicated and peace/stability returns to Afghanistan rather than wishing for something that would never happen.
 
Iran, cuba n china, they all r still a part , of this world, its just , a few hundred thousand nato, soilders to , die fighing,US,s dam war, before , evry one of, 48 nations strat negociations, with pakiStAn, for their safe passege, US knows, it & the clock is, ticking, its nt pakistAn army, in the talibAns den, its nATo!
 
BTW, pressure is mounting on Pakistan government from public (in this election year) to keep supply shut, so these price negotiations gona end up in dust bin.

Public doesn't run the country yaar. Shouting from media studious is very easy. Running the country actually a whole different ball game.

C'mon dont tell me you were surprised when the opening of the routes was announced.
 
Rather I think the root cause should be tackled. So far, pakistan's army has been reluctant to launch cleaning operation in its tribal areas. Those militants get a free hand to attack NATO forces in Afghanistan.

The antagonism comes from both sides. US is definitely not very pleased with pakistan. Perhaps the only reason why the relationship is still intact is US requires pakistan for cheap NATO supply. Yet, US is unprepared to offer much concessions to pakistan as evident from the latest negotiations.

The problem can be solved if pakistan's army becomes more valiant and straightforward towards cleaning taliban fil.th. Talibans have caused much more damage to pakistan than US yet its army is not prepared to clean up the northern tribal areas.



Die? NATO has multiple options for its supplies. Russia is supporting NATO's position in Afghanistan. You should hope that terrorists are eradicated and peace/stability returns to Afghanistan rather than wishing for something that would never happen.

So pay the dam peace price ?
Its still the cheapest route?
Peace,in afghanistan & dam resolutions of the freedOm of baluchistan, wow? What a peace settlment!
Where is dam green bag of, dam biggest captailist superpower of the, world?
Btw, chinese are really, keen to give more, credit, just take,from them, get supplies, takeout rambos, & get the hell outaa here?
Its simple!
 
A short interesting talk with Michael Scheuer - A former CIA agent who headed the team hunting OBL from '96-'99 ! Some of his other talks are pretty interesting too and I'd suggest anyone who has the time to do check them out on youtube !


P.S Its a little old but it makes the point well enough !

P.P.S The part concerning Pakistan is in the first couple of minutes ! And No I don't agree with the title !
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well...as your politicians have now realised, the new dustbin is a lot worse than the old one!

We see India in a very bad position to talk about dustbins whiles it is in a garbage bin an can hardly get out of it.

Wait till Pakistan starts using its coal reserves (The projects have already started) and you will see that they do not need the American money which is conditional on fighting on the side of the US, be it just or unjust wars(mostly the latter), and with too many other strings attached that it will make any rational nationalistic Pakistani puke when he realises the sickness of it all, and the games of madness being played by the west, Israel and India.
If the natural resources of Afghanistan are estimated at $3 trillion, than you can expect at least something like that in Pakistan.
 
Rather I think the root cause should be tackled. So far, pakistan's army has been reluctant to launch cleaning operation in its tribal areas. Those militants get a free hand to attack NATO forces in Afghanistan.

The antagonism comes from both sides. US is definitely not very pleased with pakistan. Perhaps the only reason why the relationship is still intact is US requires pakistan for cheap NATO supply. Yet, US is unprepared to offer much concessions to pakistan as evident from the latest negotiations.

The problem can be solved if pakistan's army becomes more valiant and straightforward towards cleaning taliban fil.th. Talibans have caused much more damage to pakistan than US yet its army is not prepared to clean up the northern tribal areas.



Die? NATO has multiple options for its supplies. Russia is supporting NATO's position in Afghanistan. You should hope that terrorists are eradicated and peace/stability returns to Afghanistan rather than wishing for something that would never happen.
Here is russian , vodka for you, sir!
TOP NEWS
Russia says action on Syria, Iran may go nuclear
Thu, May 17 15:35 PM EDT
Russia says action on Syria, Iran may go nuclear
By Gleb Bryanski

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev warned on Thursday that military action against sovereign states could lead to a regional nuclear war, starkly voicing Moscow's opposition to Western intervention ahead of a G8 summit at which Syria and Iran will be discussed.

"Hasty military operations in foreign states usually bring radicals to power," Medvedev, president for four years until Vladimir Putin's inauguration on May 7, told a conference in St. Petersburg in remarks posted on the government's website.

"At some point such actions which undermine state sovereignty may lead to a full-scale regional war, even, although I do not want to frighten anyone, with the use of nuclear weapons," Medvedev said. "Everyone should bear this in mind."

Medvedev gave no further explanation. Nuclear-armed Russia has said publicly that it is under no obligation to protect Syria if it is attacked, and analysts and diplomats say Russia would not get involved in military action if Iran were attacked.

Russia has adamantly urged Western nations not to attack Iran to neutralize its nuclear program or intervene against the Syrian government over bloodshed in which the United Nations says its forces have killed more than 9,000 people.

Medvedev will represent Russia at the Group of Eight summit in place of Putin, whose decision to stay away from the meeting in the United States was seen as muscle-flexing in the face of the West.

Putin said previously that threats will only encourage Iran to develop nuclear weapons. Analysts have said that Medvedev also meant that regional nuclear powers such as Israel, Pakistan and India could get involved into a conflict.

As president, Medvedev instructed Russia to abstain in a U.N. Security Council vote on a resolution that authorized NATO intervention in Libya, a decision Putin implicitly criticized when he likened the resolution to "medieval calls for crusades".

Medvedev rebuked Putin for the remark, and some Kremlin insiders have said the confrontation over Libya was a factor in Putin's decision to return to the presidency this year instead of letting his junior partner seek a second term.

Russia has since accused NATO of overstepping its mandate under the resolution to help rebels oust long-time leader Muammar Gaddafi, and has warned it will not let anything similar happen in Syria.

Since Putin announced plans last September to seek a third presidential term and make Medvedev prime minister, Russia has vetoed two Security Council resolutions condemning Assad's government, one of which would have called on him to cede power.

Russia's G8 liaison Arkady Dvorkovich said Russia will try to influence the final version of the G8 statement at a summit in Camp David this weekend to avoid a "one-sided" approach that would favor the Syrian opposition.

"In the G8 final statement we would like to avoid the recommendations similar to those which were forced upon during the preparations of the U.N. Security Council resolutions," Dvorkovich said. "A one-sided signal is not acceptable for us."

Russia successfully managed to water down the part of the statement on Syria at a G8 summit in France in May 2011, removing the calls for action against the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

"We believe that the United Nations is the main venue to discussing such issues," Dvorkovich said.

LAST APPEARANCE

The G8 summit is likely to be the last appearance among all the leaders of industrialized nations for Medvedev, who embraced U.S. President Barack Obama's "reset", improving strained ties between the nations.

Dvorkovich said Putin's absence from the summit, the first time a Russian president has skipped one, would not affect the outcome: "All the leaders, I saw their reaction, are ready to comprehensively work with the chairman of the government (Medvedev)."

Dvorkovich said that at a bilateral meeting with U.S. President Barack Obama, Medvedev will raise opposition to attempts by some U.S. lawmakers to introduce legislation which will address human rights violations in Russia.

Such legislation could take a form of the so-called Sergei Magnitsky bill, named after the Russian lawyer who died in prison in 2009. The Kremlin human rights council says he was probably beaten to death.

The bill would require the United States to deny visas and freeze the assets of Russians or others with links to his detention and death as well as those who commit other human rights violations.

"New legislation which will address new political issues as imagined by some U.S. congressmen or senators is unacceptable," Dvorkovich said, promising a retaliation.

(Editing by Michael Roddy)

We will , we will rock ya!
Its time to play, the game!great game?
 
A short interesting talk with Michael Scheuer - A former CIA agent who headed the team hunting OBL from '96-'99 ! Some of his other talks are pretty interesting too and I'd suggest anyone who has the time to do check them out on youtube !


P.S Its a little old but it makes the point well enough !

P.P.S The part concerning Pakistan is in the first couple of minutes ! And No I don't agree with the title !
Even you aren't agreed, with it, but would ya, like to agree on the, point, to nuke pakistan, if it doesn't, agree to open, Nato supplies?
& what could be the, impact would, it bring to USA, aftEr wards?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
These 18 wheeler trucks carrying 40 or 50 tons wreak havoc on our highways. The US has to pay dearly for this damage to our infrastructure.
 
Back
Top Bottom