U.S. Starts Shipping Out, via Risky Pakistan Route

[Jungibaaz]

We don’t deny that fact that our relationship has seen its fair share of ups and down. At the same time, some of our past debacles have provided us with great lessons. We’ve learned the importance of working together to achieve our shared objectives. We do not want the past mistakes to recur, and that’s one of the main reasons you see our officials meet on the regular basis to address our shared concerns. We’ve made a lot of sacrifices in the region along with Pakistan. In order to prevent those sacrifices from going to waste, it is important for us to maintain a healthy partnership with Pakistan in the future. We’ve always emphasized Pakistan’s importance in the WOT, and the bottom line is that we need to continue to cooperate and coordinate for the sake of preventing our common enemies from succeeding. We restate what General Joseph F. Dunford, commander, International Security Assistance Force, said during a meeting with Chief of Army Staff, General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani: "The Pakistanis, the Afghans and the international community all desire peace and security in the region. These meetings are important to achieving that goal as we continue to explore ways to expand our relationship.”

Ali Khan
DET, United States Central Command
U.S. Central Command

This wonderful relationship has already collapsed.
The mistrust is clear. It was all made abundantly clear when the blame game started.
When US officials and along with many Afghan ministers began to blame Pakistan for every incident in Afghanistan.
Your failures blamed on us, and our sacrifices forgotten. We fought your war and you had the nerve to blame us and tell us to 'do more'.

Spare us the sweet talk.
You said it yourself, we are an important ally IN this WOT.
Relations will continue to be bitter until US withdrawal at which point we will probably be abandoned or even slapped with sanctions.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

This wonderful relationship has already collapsed.
The mistrust is clear. It was all made abundantly clear when the blame game started.
When US officials and along with many Afghan ministers began to blame Pakistan for every incident in Afghanistan.
Your failures blamed on us, and our sacrifices forgotten. We fought your war and you had the nerve to blame us and tell us to 'do more'.

Spare us the sweet talk.
You said it yourself, we are an important ally IN this WOT.
Relations will continue to be bitter until US withdrawal at which point we will probably be abandoned or even slapped with sanctions.

Which is why, pray that the Americans remain in Afghanistan. Till they do; you have some leverage over them, supply routes and all. If you lose that, then the future becomes uncertain.

 

[neehar]

They are planning bases, if they don't have us on board..........use your imagination.

they can use the air transport for smaller troops..i think that russians are also interested to establish their bases in afghanistan (needed to be confirmed though). nato did nothing but further escalate the tensions here and leaving the region half way,after all they got nothing to loose.we're the ones who have to deal with it.unfortunately

 

[neehar]

What if the greatest interest of that not so evil superpower is the economic/strategic demise of our continent. What if we collectively represent the biggest threat to the crown in the next 2 decades?

Is it all about technology? - Can Japan,Germany,Australia etc be regarded as free nations?...and mother of all questions...does the Asian story has to be the same as them?

well thats inevitable..no country can stay strong for eternity..asia is growing and faster than the west..economically we'll cross the west but militarily its only possible once we get together.and people are realizing that disputes btwn neghbours is of nobodies good..5 months ago i never thought that i would be chatting with a pakistani like this..and i can say that things are changing for better with the generations

 

[Cyberian]

To hear this news is always a good news.

Only 639 days to go till January 1, 2015.

 

[BATMAN]

What does analysts.. tell about the future of India and NA in Afghanistan!

 

[pakdefender]

Removal of American presence means removal of Indian parasites from Afghanistan as well, as the US pack up so will India have to pack up, under US protection India managed to get into Afghanistan and destabilize Pakistan. In fact US invited India in Afghanistan for this very reason ( Leon Panetta made a special trip to India for this ) additionally american wanted India to shoulder taking casualties in Afghanistan but Indian strategy was always to hide behind American presence in Afghanistan and letting the Americans take the brunt of war attrition and losses.
Removal of American presence blows india’s cover and the support infrastructure that India has setup in Afghanistan for destabilizing Pakistan will also come crashing down. More that anyone else America’s continuous presence in Afghanistan goes in India’s favour so naturally Indians are out peddling snake oil that American presence in Afghanistan is good for Pakistan

 

[RazorMC]

You are right. The bottom line is Iran is an important player in the region, like it or hate it. Everybody will have to come to terms with that. Of course some elements of the Iranian leadership with their antipathy towards the west have not made it easier, just as the extremely myopic views of USA regarding ME have like wise added fuel to fire.

KSA and UAE will remain as 'spoilers'. After all they have a "turf to defend" !

Iran's other problem is their foreign policy towards the GCC. The dynasties see its meddling as a threat to their thrones. Plus the rhetoric Ahmedinejad pumps out will make it difficult for future leadership to step back without looking like traitors and/or facing international humiliation.

Which is why, pray that the Americans remain in Afghanistan. Till they do; you have some leverage over them, supply routes and all. If you lose that, then the future becomes uncertain.

Staying there is foolish and they've learnt their lesson about Afghanistan. I don't see any major reason for them to extend their tenure and keep losing billions. They'll just move out and then watch the Pak-US relations see new lows.

America's response to the IP gas pipeline is a mere trailer.

 

[RazorMC]

We don’t deny that fact that our relationship has seen its fair share of ups and down. At the same time, some of our past debacles have provided us with great lessons. We’ve learned the importance of working together to achieve our shared objectives. We do not want the past mistakes to recur, and that’s one of the main reasons you see our officials meet on the regular basis to address our shared concerns. We’ve made a lot of sacrifices in the region along with Pakistan. In order to prevent those sacrifices from going to waste, it is important for us to maintain a healthy partnership with Pakistan in the future. We’ve always emphasized Pakistan’s importance in the WOT, and the bottom line is that we need to continue to cooperate and coordinate for the sake of preventing our common enemies from succeeding. We restate what General Joseph F. Dunford, commander, International Security Assistance Force, said during a meeting with Chief of Army Staff, General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani: "The Pakistanis, the Afghans and the international community all desire peace and security in the region. These meetings are important to achieving that goal as we continue to explore ways to expand our relationship.”

Ali Khan
DET, United States Central Command
U.S. Central Command

Very diplomatic answer.
But the transitional relationship between Pak-US is evident from the choice of words.

Pakistan's partnership is always mentioned alongside WoT.

Those who can see have seen.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Iran's other problem is their foreign policy towards the GCC. The dynasties see its meddling as a threat to their thrones. Plus the rhetoric Ahmedinejad pumps out will make it difficult for future leadership to step back without looking like traitors and/or facing international humiliation.

Staying there is foolish and they've learnt their lesson about Afghanistan. I don't see any major reason for them to extend their tenure and keep losing billions. They'll just move out and then watch the Pak-US relations see new lows.

America's response to the IP gas pipeline is a mere trailer.

Right again. To start with; Iran's present regime is not "dynasty-friendly" and they believe that they have been ordained to replicate their revolution throughout the region. While (understandably) the GCC 'Badshahs' have a turf to defend. Or they will have to disappear. It is an existential struggle for them. And at the risk of offending some here; the ever-looming fact of the Shia-Sunni divide in the Muslim world has two primary players continually jockeying for supremacy- Saudi Arabia and Iran.

Yes, I do agree that Ahmedinejad and some of the Ayatollahs have ratcheted up the rhetoric to lunatic levels. But does that reflect the majority of Iranian public opinion? I believe it does not. Iranians in general are far more equable than their leadership. Just the present system of their "Chadori Curtain" somewhat hides it.

If I were a Pakistani; then I would genuinely worry about the situation in the area post the American draw-down in Afghanistan. There are even more 'Djinns' waiting to be uncorked from bottles there.
As an Indian also; I have some reason for concern, but not for worry. Since Pakistan will have to become the buffer and absorb most of the impact.

 

[Sergi]

When the exodus is in full swing—military commanders expect the logistics push to reach its peak this August—the U.S. will be sending about 1,500 military vehicles and 1,000 containers per month out of Afghanistan. The majority—around two-thirds of that cargo—will move through Pakistan, military officials say.

So nearly 500 military vehicles and 333 containers daily for a year .......

God bless America ...... Then God bless Pakistan

 

[RazorMC]

@Capt.Popeye, Exactly. I'm sure the US is fully aware of what its draw down means for the region: Everyone getting up and ready to fight it out. Unfortunately for us, the theater will not be limited to Afghanistan. It will extend its natural course eastwards into Pakistan.

Since there's no way to avert it completely, the only solution left is to minimize the impact and try not to get in America's naughty books just yet.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

@Capt.Popeye, Exactly. I'm sure the US is fully aware of what its draw down means for the region: Everyone getting up and ready to fight it out. Unfortunately for us, the theater will not be limited to Afghanistan. It will extend its natural course eastwards into Pakistan.

Since there's no way to avert it completely, the only solution left is to minimize the impact and try not to get in America's naughty books just yet.

I would'nt see it in 'good books/bad books' terms. Just that there is no point unnecessarily exacerbating the points of disagreement. Actually (if Pakistan is sincere) then Pakistan should act as a facilitator for multi-lateral action to stabilise Afghanistan. As it is, Pakistan has become a smaller player in Aghanistan compared to the days of its Zenith when the 'Bear Trap' was sprung. On another thread related to Afghanistan; @muse and I were discussing Zardari and then later Kiyani's trip to the Kremlin. What was the purpose of that trip?
As I know it; it was an attempt to reclaim some of the lost primacy that Pakistan had in Afghan matters. Did that happen? I asked the muse the same question there. He did not venture a reply.

So I pose that same question to you? Otherwise, who else wishes to see Pakistan in the earlier position of primacy that it enjoyed in Taliban Afghanistan?
Is it Iran?
Or is it USA and/or NATO?
Or let us consider your close friend, China. Does China wish that Pakistan must have primacy in Afghan matters?
All of the above, save USA/NATO could be considered to be countries with serious and genuine concerns about Afghan matters, since they are immediate neighbors of Afghanistan.

Mull over the questions and tell me what you think.

 

[RazorMC]

@Capt.Popeye,

Trips to Moscow weren't just for Afghan matters IMO. Relations with the US were taking a downturn and we needed some diplomatic muscle on our side if things went sour. Can't say if it worked or not, but it just exposed our flawed thinking pattern of leaping before looking.

Pakistan's role in Afghanistan has shifted lately, from active to passive. There are a lot of factors, but I think that public opinion here in Pakistan is heavily anti-involvement. In fact, many people simply want to dump (sorry for the word, just demonstrating the emotions) the refugees back to where they came from. So perhaps previous levels of engagement will not go down well with the general public.

Second, India's lobbying worked much better than ours and Pakistan has been largely left out of core issues. The US talking to Taliban while criticizing our negotiations is an example of them denying us any strategic space. And the list goes on and on.

Now, you are right when you say that there are countries who have their own interests in Afghanistan and seek to end Pakistan's involvement/influence altogether. But China does not interfere with others. It's moves are business-oriented and will not undermine Pakistani efforts.

Iran on the other hand, wants a form of government that is preferably non-Salafi or atleast not influenced by Sunni Pakistan or the GCC.

Then there is Afghanistan itself who has adopted an anti-Pakistan stance. Recent incidents have just proven some important points:
1. Afghanistan does not want to work with Pakistan
2. It will not even consider minimal military training/excercise with us
3. It is heavily pro-India

So there are definitely several factors working against Pakistan's interest but there are a couple of things that work for us. First is the imminent return of Taliban or pro-Talib individuals in the coming setup. Next is the same anti-Iran bloc that wants to surround Iran and prevent any reach into other countries. Moscow has already admitted (though they are just words for now) that Pakistan's involvement in Afghanistan is necessary, or something to that effect.

Not a perfect answer, I know. But it's midnight here soooooo...

 

[Secur]

As I know it; it was an attempt to reclaim some of the lost primacy that Pakistan had in Afghan matters. Did that happen? I asked the muse the same question there. He did not venture a reply.

Honestly , you really believe that Pakistan will have to ask Kremlin to restore this " supposed " lost primacy that we used to have knowing that even the major powers agree that without Pakistan on board there can be no peace in Afghanistan hence the failure of Bonn conference and Chicago summit or possibly it was the Russians asking for some space in that country since Kiyani was invited there by the Russians , not the other way ? The influence of Islamabad in that country is unparalleled to any other whether the present Afghan Govt or you would like to admit or not and unfortunately this isn't going to do down any soon , Iran's influence is only limited to the Shi'ite population in the country which are a minority ... That is another matter that the people of Pakistan are now largely fed up of this unending Afghan war and refugee crisis ( which is worst than you can think on the cyber space ) and want a policy of " total abandonment " towards that sorry excuse of a country ... Except for a desire of a Govt that doesn't allow any anti Pakistan activity from that soil , we have no interest left there ...

Second of all , how exactly are the relations between Iran and the West going to take a U turn over night as you are expecting after the withdrawal ? Even if the US mends its ties with Tehran and withdraws sanctions and allows them the nuclear program , it still has to face the GCC's hostility if it pursues that path not to mention any regime coming to power in Tehran will follow the same ideology , they still have many grievances towards that West , there's no question about that ... The same hostility towards West will continue with the same warnings to Tel Aviv ... Can the Americans afford that pissing off Arabs for Iran who are the largest buyer of their weapons and possess the world's largest oil reserves ? I do not think so ...