What's new

US contemplating reversal of its Pakistan policy

illusion8

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
12,232
Reaction score
-20
Country
India
Location
India
06 June 2012

The United States is contemplating a total reversal of its highly ineffective Pakistan policy. This was stated by Prof Christine Fair, Assistant Professor at Georgetown University’s Edmund A Walsh School of Foreign Service while delivering a talk on "The situation in the ******* region" at Observer Research Foundation on June 4, 2012.

Frankly expressing her views from both Pakistani as well as American perspectives, Prof. Fair said that the US does not have a long-term policy for Pakistan, and the present practice of granting aid with the aim of fighting the roots of terrorism has not yielded any results. Consequently, despite fighting the Taliban, the US has inadvertently supported them while alienating the civilian population.

Prof. Fair said that the Pakistan’s decision to close ground supply routes for NATO troops in Afghanistan backfired as the NATO forces soon developed alternative air routes. This, in turn, led many Western leaders to recognise the futility of engaging Pakistan in the war on terror. She also pointed out that the killing of Osama Bin Laden in Pakistan further convinced policy makers in Washington of its duplicity.

Asked about the Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s perceived lack of understanding about the situation in the West Asia and the ******* region, Prof Fair said that presidential candidates learn very quickly once they take office. As an example, she pointed out Barack Obama’s similar naïveté four years ago and how he learnt and adapted his foreign policy within months into his presidency.

Prof. Fair said that President Obama is disappointed with Pakistan’s counter-terrorism performance, and that the US administration is contemplating containment to force it to abide to its obligations.

According to Prof. Fair, the futility of attempts to alter the pro-jihadist worldview of Pakistan’s foreign policy elite make a serious case of containment, which would hold Pakistan responsible for any terrorist attack with its ’signature’ on it.

Prof. Fair challenged the conventional wisdom that civilian governments in Islamabad are more responsible. She argued that past history suggests a linearity of foreign policy making between military and democratic regimes. This is compounded by a drastic transformation of the popular mindset towards fundamentalism and hatred against India.

Prof. Fair said there have also been numerous instances of the general public supporting mass killing of Shias, other non-Sunni groups and ’blasphemers’. Lashkar e-Toiba (LeT) and its charity front Jamaat ud-Daawah (JuD) have gathered public support for their persecution of religious minorities.

Prof Fair described the ’dumbing down’ of the Pakistan Army, especially in terms of education levels of recent recruits. She pointed at empirical evidence to suggest that terrorist organisations and the army are drawing their members from the same regions. She also said that higher levels of jihadist infiltration into the security forces poses a serious threat to the security of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal.

When asked to suggest changes to US policy in Pakistan, Prof. Fair drew from the carrot and stick analogy and said that it was time to shift to the stick. As part of the anticipated US policy of containment, Prof Fair suggested expansion of the US ’hit-list’ to include more militant leaders, greater scrutiny of individuals within the ISI who are Taliban allies, and increase in the frequency of drone attacks.


ReportDetail

There is a very visible shift in the US policy vis a vis Pakistan, I think this relation has gone beyond repair.
 
. . .
Nobody cares. You'll have a hard time ''selling'' this to Pakistanis who at this point really could care less.

Whether they "buy" it or not, Pakistanis must pay attention to any potential changes in international policies, for no nation, let alone a nuclear power, can exist in isolation.
 
.
Nobody cares. You'll have a hard time ''selling'' this to Pakistanis who at this point really could care less.


It is going to be very tough with the kind of implications that Pakistan would face in the long run.
 
. .
Whether they "buy" it or not, Pakistanis must pay attention to any potential changes in international policies, for no nation, let alone a nuclear power, can exist in isolation.
True but that does not mean that one has to cooperate with a country as deceptive as the US. An alliance with Israel would solve all problems.
 
. .
i'd advise the same to Washington

That is advice that Washington already follows, i.e. keeping an eye on international events and policies, and of course trying to influence them in a beneficial way, as much is possible.
 
.
lack of understanding about the situation in the West Asia and the ******* region, Prof Fair said that presidential candidates learn very quickly once they take office. As an example, she pointed out Barack Obama’s similar naïveté four years ago and how he learnt and adapted his foreign policy within months into his presidency.
This is why I don't like him. A fake smooth talking phony.
 
. .
Hmmm. I thought Ms. Fair was relatively pro-Pakistan in the Washington media/political realm?

Anyway, to what extent America and Pakistan can part with each other remains to be seen. Even the obnoxious Panetta doesn't think that there should be a complete break..yet.

In my opinion Leon Panetta would be the single-most important -person- to have ruined the American-Pakistani relationship; shortly before the R. Davis fiasco Pakistan-America were having regular rounds of 'strategic dialogues'. So what changed? No, the OBL raid did not put any blame in any official capacity on Pakistan. It is Panetta. Almost single-handedly he has alienated the Pakistan. This old idiot has nothing to lose at his age and only his 'legacy' to preserve.

You don't think such things are possible? That one person's personality can have 'strategic' consequences? I beg to differ if you do. I work for a 'state' agency and I can tell you that, even in America, most people are apathetic unless their own personal interests are involved, that most people tend to be 'yes sir' in meetings, and that most people look forward to the weekend, that most people just shrug it off and pass the 'buck'...
 
.
Whether they "buy" it or not, Pakistanis must pay attention to any potential changes in international policies, for no nation, let alone a nuclear power, can exist in isolation.
Couldn't agree more...one has to look at broader prospective, the effect on economy, politics, strategic end, in future.

All the countries, whether its US, China, Russia,EU, India, etc. are concerned, no matter which bloc they belong, they have economic ties with each other....

Some even come to common front to address few concerns...such as Islamist terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan. India,Pakistan, US, China...all have there concerns regarding it.:smokin:
 
.
That is advice that Washington already follows, i.e. keeping an eye on international events and policies, and of course trying to influence them in a beneficial way, as much is possible.
Beneficial to who exactly? And is this not interference in the internal affairs of another country, contrary to countless UN resolutions?
 
.
Reversal of what? America has never had any strategy as such for Pakistan
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom