What's new

US legislation seeks ban on assistance to Pakistan

Cheetah786

PDF VETERAN
Joined
Aug 23, 2006
Messages
9,002
Reaction score
-3
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
WASHINGTON, Jan 24: A new legislation, already endorsed by the House of Representatives, calls for stopping US military assistance to Pakistan if Islamabad fails to halt the resurgence of Taliban inside its territory.

The first piece of legislation by the new Congress since it was sworn in earlier this month also urges the Bush administration to help resolve the Kashmir dispute between India and Pakistan.

Meanwhile, at a briefing at the Pakistani embassy, Ambassador Mahmud Ali Durrani acknowledged that anti-Pakistan feelings were strong in the United States because of “misperceptions” about the country’s role in the war against terrorism.

“We are already standing on our head, what else we could do,” he asked. “They should not blame us for their failures.”

The proposed legislation urges the US president to certify that Islamabad is making all efforts to “prevent Taliban from operating in areas under its sovereign control, including in the cities of Quetta and Chaman” before releasing any funds or approving licenses for enhancing its military capability.

The new provisions form part of the Implementation of 9/11 Commission Recommendations Act, 2007, aimed at revamping the US national security and foreign policy apparatus to address challenges post-9/11.

Three countries have been singled out in the proposed legislation: Pakistan, Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia.

A congressional aide, who did not want to be identified, told Dawn that the legislation “shows the general mood in both the chambers, which is not very favourable to Pakistan,” said the aide who did not want to be identified.

The section on Pakistan lays down a set of policy objectives that range from ensuring free and fair parliamentary elections this year to securing borders to “prevent movement of militants and terrorists into other countries.”

The Act, cleared by the House of Representatives, is now being discussed in the Senate.

The legislation acknowledges that “since September 11, 2001, the government of Pakistan has been an important partner in helping the United States remove the Taliban regime in Afghanistan and combating international terrorism in the frontier provinces of Pakistan”.But “there remain a number of critical issues that threaten to disrupt the relationship between the United States and Pakistan, undermine international security, and destabilise Pakistan”.

Recognising Pakistan’s importance in the war against terror, it grants the US president the power to forge a “strategic partnership” but places limitations on the president’s authority to provide credit on favourable terms for purchase of military equipment and spares.It emphasises that for fiscal years 2008 and 2009, US military assistance to Pakistan may not be provided” unless the president “determines and certifies” that the Pakistan government is taking all actions against Taliban.

These include credit for military sales and purchases in Foreign Assistance Act and Section 23 of Arms Export Control Act along with licenses for any item controlled under this Act.

The US president may waive the limitation on assistance for a fiscal year if he determines and certifies to the appropriate congressional committees that it is important to the national security interest of the United States to do so.

The areas where Pakistan needs to take action against the resurgent Taliban militia have been identified as Quetta, Chaman, the North West Frontier Province and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas.

Once the Act is passed, the president will be required to submit within 90 days to the relevant Congressional committees a report on the US strategy towards Pakistan that should spell out the “long-term” plan which the US has in mind to “accomplish the goal of building a moderate Pakistan.”

The bill identifies the “critical issues” that need immediate action as:

• Curbing the proliferation of nuclear weapons technology.

• Combating poverty and corruption.

• Building effective government institutions.

• Promoting democracy and the rule of law, particularly at the national level.

• Addressing continued presence of Taliban and other violent extremists throughout the country.

• Maintaining the authority of the Government of Pakistan in all parts of its national territory.

• Securing borders of Pakistan to prevent movement of militants and terrorists into other countries and territories.

• Effectively dealing with Islamic terrorism.

The Act also lays out policy guidelines for the US government, which is not binding on the administration of the day but does give a sense of Congress.

These include:

• To work with Pakistan to combat international terrorism, especially in the frontier provinces, and to end the use of Pakistan as a safe haven for forces associated with the Taliban.

• To establish a long-term strategic partnership with Pakistan to address these issues.

• To dramatically increase funding for programmes of the United States Agency for International Development and the Department of State that assist Pakistan in addressing such issues, if Islamabad demonstrates a commitment to building a moderate, democratic state, including significant steps towards free and fair parliamentary elections in 2007.

• To work with the international community to secure additional financial and political support to effectively implement the policies set forth in this subsection and help to resolve the dispute between the government of Pakistan and the government of India over the disputed territory of Kashmir.
http://www.dawn.com/2007/01/25/top1.htm
 
Is this ever gonna happen?.........., this is just a bill
Foreign military such as US cant work inside Pakistan, and it wont happen.
 
Where is the suggestion to ban assistance to Pakistan in this artilce ????/

it says the admin should clear that Pakistan is doing enough after which funds shoudl be approved.

Secondly the Act says more cooperation with Pakistan on Part of US needed
 
Where is the suggestion to ban assistance to Pakistan in this artilce ????/

it says the admin should clear that Pakistan is doing enough after which funds shoudl be approved.

Secondly the Act says more cooperation with Pakistan on Part of US needed

"The Congress has made it clear that for fiscal years 2008 and 2009, any assistance under sections pertaining to credit for military sales and purchases in Foreign Assistance Act and Section 23 of Arms Export Control Act along with licenses for any item controlled under this Act “may not be provided” unless the US President “determines and certifies” that the Pakistan government is taking all action against Taliban. "
 
"The Congress has made it clear that for fiscal years 2008 and 2009, any assistance under sections pertaining to credit for military sales and purchases in Foreign Assistance Act and Section 23 of Arms Export Control Act along with licenses for any item controlled under this Act “may not be provided” unless the US President “determines and certifies” that the Pakistan government is taking all action against Taliban. "

yes that what i was saying
that they said release of funds after President clarifies it did say that funds should not be released at all not for a ban.


but hmmmmmmmmm it also means that if the Next president isnt Pakisatan-friendly we will have tough time to get it.
 
yes that what i was saying
that they said release of funds after President clarifies it did say that funds should not be released at all not for a ban.

What? I didnt understand?
 
Is this ever gonna happen?.........., this is just a bill
Foreign military such as US cant work inside Pakistan, and it wont happen.

True but nevertheless the message should be taken seriously since the legislation shows the general mood in both the chambers, which is not very favourable to Pakistan.

If the Democrats win, the situation could even get worse.
Is it still safe to get military equippement from the US?
 
True but nevertheless the message should be taken seriously since the legislation shows the general mood in both the chambers, which is not very favourable to Pakistan.

If the Democrats win, the situation could even get worse.
Is it still safe to get military equippement from the US?

if democrates win pakistan can kiss all the Military Aid good bye
 
Hillary and Obama, both are strong candidates for the Democrates and I expect Hillary to get the popular vote between the two.
 
Hillary and Obama, both are strong candidates for the Democrates and I expect Hillary to get the popular vote between the two.

Well both are candidates for the democrates, so both are unfavourable for Pakistan, then why Hillary?
 
Cuz she is much more popular on account of her husbands past presidancy. Though Obama is no less a popular candidate. He is wildly popular there and will probably get the majority of afro-american's support. And thats a lot ;)

Though i think the point that could work big time against him is that he is a Moslem. I believe he took an oath on the Koran?? Not sure, if he is, it would work against him in US politics.
 
Cuz she is much more popular on account of her husbands past presidancy. Though Obama is no less a popular candidate. He is wildly popular there and will probably get the majority of afro-american's support. And thats a lot ;)

Though i think the point that could work big time against him is that he is a Moslem. I believe he took an oath on the Koran?? Not sure, if he is, it would work against him in US politics.


You are confusing things here. Barack Obama is not a Muslim. You are thinking of Keith Ellison who indeed is a Muslim and took his oath on Thomas Jefferson's own copy of Quran which was lent to Ellison by the Library of Congress.
 
You are confusing things here. Barack Obama is not a Muslim. You are thinking of Keith Ellison who indeed is a Muslim and took his oath on Thomas Jefferson's own copy of Quran which was lent to Ellison by the Library of Congress.

Ah ok mate. So then Obama has a good path ahead of him. He will have most of the Afro-Americans vote, and Hillary is very popular as it is. Lets wait and see who emerges.
 
Cuz she is much more popular on account of her husbands past presidancy. Though Obama is no less a popular candidate. He is wildly popular there and will probably get the majority of afro-american's support. And thats a lot ;)

Though i think the point that could work big time against him is that he is a Moslem. I believe he took an oath on the Koran?? Not sure, if he is, it would work against him in US politics.

Obama was first elected just 2yrs ago and he in no sense qualifies to be president of superpower. He just doesnt has experience to run a country.
 

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom