U.S. bristles at stiff Pakistani NATO fees

[VCheng]

I disagree! the problem is the lack of verification of theseCSFs . Alot of these go into the pockets of the variousNGOs and intermediate contractors who are forced up on us. The rest that is left is perhaps "filtered" through various pockets before it comes into the government coffers. At least this way we will know what is coming our way.

Lax internal financial controls are not USA's fault, are they? The solution lies within Pakistan.

The second and most important issue is one of national integrity. Thjis is money which the US owes us on account of using our land to transport its goods and most likely plan its exitfrom Afghanistan. The coalition support fund is a hand out which is no longer acceptable to us. This should be our psyche that we should no longer accept handouts and learn to stand on our own two feet. The US will be gone come 2014 and so will the CSFs . Pakistan InshaAllah will remain and this is what we need to prepare for.
Araz

I hope Pakistan is able to stand on its own two feet soon, although the period immediately beyond 2014 is a bit ambitious. I would say may be 20-30 years of sustained, honest effort.

.......... but the fact is that Pakistan has very little maneuvering room given the NATO countries' dominance of global finance. The best Pakistan can do is to suck it up and live to fight another day.

Isn't that exactly what I say? Thank you for agreeing with me.

 

[mjnaushad]

I think they should stop the AID and give the money in tax.....


Will help Pakistan as our leaders wont be considered beggers infront of awam....

Will help US politics as they took firm stand and cut down our AID....


I think from $250 to $5000 shocked them.... But they might agree on figure in between.

 

[Developereo]

That is exactly what the Kerry-Lugar Bill was designed to achieve, by ensuring that funds could be audited to get directly to the people who needed them the most, but we all know how that story ended with the opposition of the same elite you deride succeeding in scuttling this feigned attack on Pakistan's "sovrainitee".

AM answered part of the concern with American operations in Pakistan. The other problem is what the Afghans call 'aeroplane aid'. Most foreign aid ends up going back to the donor countries through NGO overhead, foreign contractors, consultants, etc. A fairly small percentage ends up being actually spent in the recipient country.

There are no easy answers but there needs to be some middle ground where humanitarian work gets done as expected.

Anyway, getting off-topic, I suppose.

 

[VCheng]

AM answered part of the concern with American operations in Pakistan. The other problem is what the Afghans call 'aeroplane aid'. Most foreign aid ends up going back to the donor countries through NGO overhead, foreign contractors, consultants, etc. A fairly small percentage ends up being actually spent in the recipient country.

There are no easy answers but there needs to be some middle ground where humanitarian work gets done as expected.

Anyway, getting off-topic, I suppose.

Well, it is sort of tangentially related to the topic: Getting whatever funds Pakistan gets from reopening supply routes should first and foremost be used to repair and then develop infrastructure, so that it can serve the nation long after 2014. If that does not happen, due to lax internal financial controls, just like the "aeroplane aid" you mention, how can that be blamed on outside entities like USA? The solutions lie within, not without, Pakistan.

 

[deckingraj]

The theatrics over 'too much money' are just that, theatrics meant for the average yokel - the amount of money involved here, as you pointed out, is pocket change for the US given the existing astronomical spending on the Afghan war.

US total expenditure on Afghan war is in trillions..Does that mean they should throw away few billions since it is pocket change in comparison to trillions??? I would love to save my money wherever i can and especially in today's circumstances where i would love to pack my bags and leave the place at my earliest convenience, no?? Secondly spending extra bucks should not hurt if it is really essential otherwise i would be fool to not go back to the status quo..

The main reason behind US objections to the increased transit cost are likely the same as those behind the refusal to reimburse the $3 billion in pending CSF funds since 2010, and the refusal to push (in any significant manner) for increased trade access to the US market for Pakistani products.

The US policy at this point is pretty clearly one of 'squeezing Pakistan financially', and even if the US swapped the CSF funds/aid with the new transit fees, formalizing the new agreement would take away significant US leverage in controlling the money flow to Pakistan, and take away the oft parroted talking point of 'we give aid to Pakistan'.

You may be right..However if i am recalling it correctly then before this saga Pak used to charge $250 a truck and now demanding a whopping $5000. It is 20 times then what was the cost originally...One has to be a fool to accept it at face value...20 times cost escalation in a matter of 6 months and that too from a country whose geo-political might is miniscal in comparison with the sole super power..not sure why are we surprised at the reaction...

 

[Developereo]

That should be the mantra...First stand up on your feat and then challenge others...

The maxim only works if the leadership has the vision (and desire) to aim for self-reliance. Why institute tax reforms and tax oneself when it's much easier to periodically roam the globe with a begging bowl?

Isn't that exactly what I say? Thank you for agreeing with me.

The issue is not your criticism or 'truth' about Pakistan -- we all do that -- but lack of the same when America does something wrong.

Might rules, but does not make right.

 

[deckingraj]

The maxim only works if the leadership has the vision (and desire) to aim for self-reliance. Why institute tax reforms and tax oneself when it's much easier to periodically roam the globe with a begging bowl

Though taxes are not the most efficient means to bring economy back to its feet but in Pak case taxes are pathetically low...Not sure why we haven't seen much actions in this regard...

 

[VCheng]

The maxim only works if the leadership has the vision (and desire) to aim for self-reliance. Why institute tax reforms and tax oneself when it's much easier to periodically roam the globe with a begging bowl?

And whose fault is that?

The issue is not your criticism or 'truth' about Pakistan -- we all do that -- but lack of the same when America does something wrong.

Might rules, but does not make right.

I am more even-handed than most here, actually, but feel free to disagree.

=======================

Back on topic: Whatever increase is negotiated for resuming the supply routes will likely go into the same bottomless pit with no lasting benefits, but it would be harder to blame on USA after 2014, for the continuing financial meltdown that Pakistan faces if it does not change change course.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Isn't that exactly what I say? Thank you for agreeing with me.

No, Developereo has both criticized US policy as well as argued for a pragmatic approach from Pakistan.

Your position is to justify/excuse every single US transgression, while calling for Pakistan to cave in to US demands.

 

[VCheng]

No, Developereo has both criticized US policy as well as argued for a pragmatic approach from Pakistan.

Your position is to justify/excuse every single US transgression, while calling for Pakistan to cave in to US demands.

So the de facto requirement to be regarded as a credible "patriot" on DefPk is to mindlessly bash USA in a knee-jerk fashion? I hope not! Anyways, not my problem, since I do not worry about that anymore.

===========================

Back to the topic, I think it was a mistake on Obama's part not to meet Zardari, but may be he wanted to drive home the point that further negotiations are likely going to be tough for raising the transit rates.

 

[araz]

Lax internal financial controls are not USA's fault, are they? The solution lies within Pakistan.



I hope Pakistan is able to stand on its own two feet soon, although the period immediately beyond 2014 is a bit ambitious. I would say may be 20-30 years of sustained, honest effort.



Isn't that exactly what I say? Thank you for agreeing with me.

On your first para, Iwould refrain from commenting here. I think you know the gist of my thoughts on the issue. On the second issue, it is not the actual standing, but the intellectual recognition that we should not be a beggar state and should learn to stand on our own two feet. As to the post 2012 era, I remain very pessimistic about the way the world will go. I dont see anything good coming out of this. We live in an age of deception, i dont think as a nation we would be allowed to prosper at all. I see us in an even worse state before things get better.
Araz

So the de facto requirement to be regarded as a credible "patriot" on DefPk is to mindlessly bash USA in a knee-jerk fashion? I hope not! Anyways, not my problem, since I do not worry about that anymore.

===========================

Back to the topic, I think it was a mistake on Obama's part not to meet Zardari, but may be he wanted to drive home the point that further negotiations are likely going to be tough for raising the transit rates.

I dont think that has ever been the case. No one is more critical of the way PAkistan has gone in the last 10 years than I have ,but people accept it. Your problem is one of seeing the US in a different light to the one that you see Pakistan in and this is what people object to.
Araz

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

So the de facto requirement to be regarded as a credible "patriot" on DefPk is to mindlessly bash USA in a knee-jerk fashion? I hope not! Anyways, not my problem, since I do not worry about that anymore.

More like the 'de facto requirement to be regarded as a credible US immigrant patriot' is to bash Pakistan in a knee jerk fashion and excuse every single US transgression and illegal act, as you appear to practice.

 

[Developereo]

Though taxes are not the most efficient means to bring economy back to its feet but in Pak case taxes are pathetically low...Not sure why we haven't seen much actions in this regard...

Taxes are needed to fund basic governance: education, infrastructure, law enforcement.

In the absence of proper taxation, compounded by corruption, governance suffers and, without stable governance, you can't attract investment and grow an economy.

 

[VCheng]

............ i dont think as a nation we would be allowed to prosper at all. I see us in an even worse state before things get better.
Araz

Therein lies the flaw in your thinking that is very typical of Pakistani thought these days, with all due respect of course: It is NOT the world that is not "allowing" Pakistan to develop! If things are growing bad to worse, the fault should be accepted as being squarely within Pakistan, and that is where the solutions lie too. This "unfair persecution" mentality must stop if Pakistan is to rectify anything that ails it.

 

[Developereo]

Well, it is sort of tangentially related to the topic: Getting whatever funds Pakistan gets from reopening supply routes should first and foremost be used to repair and then develop infrastructure, so that it can serve the nation long after 2014. If that does not happen, due to lax internal financial controls, just like the "aeroplane aid" you mention, how can that be blamed on outside entities like USA? The solutions lie within, not without, Pakistan.

Of course, how Pakistan misspends the money is the fault of the Pakistani establishment. My other comment about American aid was merely to point out the American hypocrisy in bemoaning anti-Americanism within Pakistan. If America was serious about forging a positive relationship with the Pakistani nation, it knows what to do. Of course the US administration is paid to safeguard American interests and they decide where Pakistani public opinion lies in their list of priorities.