US panel cuts foreign aid, military aid to Pakistan

[Big Boss]

US panel cuts foreign aid, military aid to Pakistan

WASHINGTON - (AP) -- A House panel on Wednesday moved to cut the foreign aid budget by some 9 percent, targeting economic aid and contributions to the United Nations and the World Bank.

Despite the cuts, the legislation won bipartisan backing from the Appropriations foreign aid panel, though it's sure to draw a White House veto threat because it's in line with a broader GOP spending plan that breaks faith with last summer's budget and debt pact with President Barack Obama.

The panel maintains aid to Israel and Egypt at the administration's requests but denies $800 million that was requested for a special fund for training and equipping Pakistan's military in counterinsurgency tactics. The move appears to reflect wariness on the part of lawmakers toward the government of Pakistan, which failed to find Osama bin Laden for years until the U.S. military killed him a year ago.

Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., D-Ill., accused Pakistan of "harboring a fugitive" and likened the U.S.-Pakistan relationship to a "bad marriage."

Given the animosity toward Pakistan, the $800 million request for counterinsurgency efforts was an easy target, though the measure would permit transfers from other accounts to make up for some or all of the shortfall.

"It is a difficult relationship," said Rep. Kay Granger, the foreign aid measure's lead author.

The measure would also boost funding to help Mexico and Colombia fight drug cartels. But lawmakers denied the administration's request for $770 million to support political and economic reforms in the Middle East and North Africa in the wake of last year's Arab Spring anti-government uprisings in Tunisia, Egypt and elsewhere.

The $48 billion measure won voice vote approval by the panel, including the committee's senior Democratic member, Rep. Norm Dicks of Washington, who's supporting an early set of spending bills despite a blanket veto threat from the White House. The administration's threat comes in response to a move orchestrated by GOP leaders like Speaker John Boehner of Ohio to cut $19 billion from the $1 trillion-plus set aside for agency budgets.

A separate panel approved a measure cutting the Department of Homeland Security's budget by about 1 percent, with the Transportation Security Administration absorbing the biggest cuts. Agencies like the Customs Service and the Coast Guard won increases over Obama's requests, and the panel included $6 billion for the government's main fund for disaster relief. Grants to state and local governments for first responders would be increased by $416 million over current levels.

Meanwhile, the full House continued debating a $51 billion measure setting the operating budget for the Commerce and Justice departments. A late night was expected as conservatives peppered the measure with conservative policy prescriptions such as blocking the Justice Department from enforcing Obama's 2010 health care law.

In rapid succession Wednesday evening, Republicans also muscled through on near party-line votes provisions designed to prevent the Justice Department from taking legal action against state laws requiring voter identification and stop the Census Bureau from conducting detailed, long-form surveys that many lawmakers find to be unnecessarily intrusive.

Republicans were successful Tuesday night in a 238-173 vote to block the Justice Department from participating in lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of new tough state immigration laws, including those of Arizona and Alabama.

The measure is the first of 12 annual appropriations bills to hit the House floor as GOP leaders have front-loaded the process with measures that have won bipartisan backing in the Appropriations panel. It's unclear how much support the measures will get from the broader Democratic membership.

Panel cuts foreign aid, military aid to Pakistan

US panel cuts military aid to Pakistan - World News - IBNLive

 

[somebozo]

It means less money for corrupt despots like Zardari and Nawaz...please USA take your aid away it helps nothing but create more corruption and terrorism.!

 

[tvsram1992]

It means less money for corrupt despots like Zardari and Nawaz...please USA take your aid away it helps nothing but create more corruption and terrorism.!

No they will eat more money of yours

 

[Pfpilot]

Anyone who says we don't need this aid is not looking at the facts. As much as we wish, we could throw foreign aid back at the US in a fit of bravado, we are in no position to do so. Pakistan is more aid reliant than most Pakistanis are willing to admit. Cutting the aid removes one of the only source of revenue the government has. Pakistan has little revenue from other sources, thanks to a dwindling tax base, the black hole that is every Pakistani crown corporation, and key focus on military spending that has been an exercise in dumping endless money into an endless pit (as is the case with all nations).

Without US aid, the pressure increases on Pakistan's long suffering middle class to fork over more money and receive less benefit. A corrupt government will not suddenly become less corrupt by the reduction or curtailment of aid. In the end, to a Zardari or Nawaz Sharif, revenue is revenue, whether it is US aid, tax payer money, or bribes from local businessmen. If the current state of the economy is bad, it is nothing compared to what will happen without aid propping up national institutions of social and bureaucratic needs. We need aid, and lots of it, or the Pakistani economic model ceases to function.

However sad this reality maybe, it is foolish to expect the suffering that will be imparted by a lack of aid will change Pakistan. Some of the most corrupt periods in Pakistani history have taken place when aid was at its lowest. Unfortunately, unlike those period, today the rest of the Pakistani economy cannot replace aid as a viable revenue generating organization. In the end, the Pakistani public will suffer, while the politicians take their slice right from the top of the incoming cash. What you have here is a corporation passing the losses to it's customers...in this case, the politicians keeping their share and letting the difference come out of whats lefts for the common Pakistani.

 

[R0H1T]

Anyone who says we don't need this aid is not looking at the facts. As much as we wish, we could throw foreign aid back at the US in a fit of bravado, we are in no position to do so. Pakistan is more aid reliant than most Pakistanis are willing to admit. Cutting the aid removes one of the only source of revenue the government has. Pakistan has little revenue from other sources, thanks to a dwindling tax base, the black hole that is every Pakistani crown corporation, and key focus on military spending that has been an exercise in dumping endless money into an endless pit (as is the case with all nations).

Without US aid, the pressure increases on Pakistan's long suffering middle class to fork over more money and receive less benefit. A corrupt government will not suddenly become less corrupt by the reduction or curtailment of aid. In the end, to a Zardari or Nawaz Sharif, revenue is revenue, whether it is US aid, tax payer money, or bribes from local businessmen. If the current state of the economy is bad, it is nothing compared to what will happen without aid propping up national institutions of social and bureaucratic needs. We need aid, and lots of it, or the Pakistani economic model ceases to function.

However sad this reality maybe, it is foolish to expect the suffering that will be imparted by a lack of aid will change Pakistan. Some of the most corrupt periods in Pakistani history have taken place when aid was at its lowest. Unfortunately, unlike those period, today the rest of the Pakistani economy cannot replace aid as a viable revenue generating organization. In the end, the Pakistani public will suffer, while the politicians take their slice right from the top of the incoming cash. What you have here is a corporation passing the losses to it's customers...in this case, the politicians keeping their share and letting the difference come out of whats lefts for the common Pakistani.

Well unless you stop accepting aid from nations that employ the dangling stick/carrot therapy you won't ever become self reliant. The same goes for us & its a good thing we rejected UK's aid last year, not to mention their whole media got pissed off from everything like the IPL/Eurotyphoon et al, cause giving aid(not accepting it) is the first step towards building a proud & prosperous nation but obviously it should be phased out not necessarily end it in one go !

 

[Pfpilot]

Well unless you stop accepting aid from nations that employ the dangling stick/carrot therapy you won't ever become self reliant. The same goes for us & its a good thing we rejected UK's aid last year, not to mention their whole media got pissed off from everything like the IPL/Eurotyphoon et al, cause giving aid(not accepting it) is the first step towards building a proud & prosperous nation but obviously it should be phased out not necessarily end it in one go !

That is very relevant, but the problem arises when we look at the static state of Pakistani politics since the 1970s. The same players rule the nation, feudalism still influences the political landscape and the poor and illiterate still vote for those who make empty promises to improve their specific neighborhood. When the same people continue to run the country, the results will remain the same.

Pakistan has, on many occasions, lost access to such huge amounts of aid and has never been able to gain any self sufficiency out of the ordeal. The reason being, that the political leaders are in power for personal gain and prosperity...they feel no different robbing the Pakistani people or the Americans, so naturally there is no urgency to make any changes when aid is reduced.

India is very different, thanks to the Nehru days when feudalism was combated with furor. On top of that, the consistent focus on education allowed a generation of Indians to gain competence through education. India has the requisite number of educated and honest people to combat the massive amount of corruption that exists in the country, and they can do so without having to face off against the all powerful feudal lords. Pakistani intellectuals don't have anywhere near the same numbers nor a level playing field to fight on.

 

[Devil Soul]

US to debate bill calling for economic restrictions on Pakistan unless Nato routes reopen
By Huma Imtiaz
Published: May 10, 2012
WASHINGTON: The House Armed Services Committee approved a draft of the National Defense Authorisation Act early Thursday morning. The draft bill calls for a bar on preferential import of goods and services from Pakistan and reducing aid to just 10% of available funds unless Pakistan re-opens the Nato supply route and extends coopera”tion.

According to a press release issued on Thursday, the bill will now be debated by the House next week. If the House of Representatives passes the bill, it will have to be approved by the US Senate and signed by the President before it becomes law.

The bill of the National Defense Authorisation Act for fiscal year 2013, was introduced by US House Armed Services Committee chairman Rep. Buck McKeon. He also called for a bar on support or reimbursement provided to Pakistan until the Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta provides a report on “the model for reimbursement, including how claims are proposed and adjudicated; new conditions or caveats that the Government of Pakistan places on the use of its supply routes; and the new cost associated with transit through supply routes in Pakistan.”

The new bill has also asked the Secretary of Defense to certify that Pakistan’s government is committed to taking action and supporting counterterrorism operations against al Qaeda, associated networks, Haqqani Network, domestic and foreign terrorist organisations, dismantling the IED networks and preventing proliferation of nuclear materials. The certification also has to cite whether Pakistan is committed to issuing visas “in a timely manner for United States visitors engaged in counterterrorism efforts and assistance programs in Pakistan.”

The bill of the National Defense Authorisation Act is stipulated for fiscal year 2013, while extending the Pakistan Counterinsurgency Funds, also requires the Secretary of Defense, with the Secretary of State’s agreement, to submit updates on what their strategy is to utilise the fund, and what metrics are used to determine progress in the PCF.

The draft bill also has a provision that would “limit the authority of the Secretary of Defense to obligate or expend funds made available to the Pakistan Counterinsurgency Fund during fiscal year 2013 to not more than 10 per cent of the amount available until such time as the update is submitted to the appropriate congressional committees.”

The draft bill will be debated on Wednesday, May 9, which, according to a press release, “extends the prohibition on the transfer of detainees from Guantanamo Bay to the United States.”
US to debate bill calling for economic restrictions on Pakistan unless Nato routes reopen – The Express Tribune

 

[R0H1T]

That is very relevant, but the problem arises when we look at the static state of Pakistani politics since the 1970s. The same players rule the nation, feudalism still influences the political landscape and the poor and illiterate still vote for those who make empty promises to improve their specific neighborhood. When the same people continue to run the country, the results will remain the same.

Pakistan has, on many occasions, lost access to such huge amounts of aid and has never been able to gain any self sufficiency out of the ordeal. The reason being, that the political leaders are in power for personal gain and prosperity...they feel no different robbing the Pakistani people or the Americans, so naturally there is no urgency to make any changes when aid is reduced.

India is very different, thanks to the Nehru days when feudalism was combated with furor. On top of that, the consistent focus on education allowed a generation of Indians to gain competence through education. India has the requisite number of educated and honest people to combat the massive amount of corruption that exists in the country, and they can do so without having to face off against the all powerful feudal lords. Pakistani intellectuals don't have anywhere near the same numbers nor a level playing field to fight on.

Believe it or not your military is now the biggest impediment in your growth. Lets take IND out of the equation first, with your nukes neither the US or IND will try to tempt fate that's an undeniable fact unless one wants Armageddon or WW3 so that paranoia which helps the military to stay on top should be eliminated from the PAK psyche !

Then you have to get out of this perennial state of war inside & outside your country, no wartorn nation has prospered ever that's another corollary to my previous point therefore get out of Afghanistan first(stop being a US launchpad overtime) then root out AQ/Taliban & IND centric extremists completely cause violence will never give you Kashmir. If you really wanna have it then you need to present them a viable alternative not just an Islamic state besides without militancy the GoI would be hard pressed to justify the army in J&K !

Lastly in order to be as successful as say CN or IND you'll have to go the Turkey way i.e. a soft state not a hardline xenophobic nation like what most of the Western nations perceive Muslims to be !

 

[Pfpilot]

Believe it or not your military is now the biggest impediment in your growth. Lets take IND out of the equation first, with your nukes neither the US or IND will try to tempt fate that's an undeniable fact unless one wants Armageddon or WW3 so that paranoia which helps the military to stay on top should be eliminated from the PAK psyche !

Then you have to get out of this perennial state of war inside & outside your country, no wartorn nation has prospered ever that's another corollary to my previous point therefore get out of Afghanistan first(stop being a US launchpad overtime) then root out AQ/Taliban & IND centric extremists completely cause violence will never give you Kashmir. If you really wanna have it then you need to present them a viable alternative not just an Islamic state besides without militancy the GoI would be hard pressed to justify the army in J&K !

Lastly in order to be as successful as say CN or IND you'll have to go the Turkey way i.e. a soft state not a hardline xenophobic nation like what most of the Western nations perceive Muslims to be !

Your point about the military is spot on in my opinion, but I am assuming I am in the minority on this one. But in my opinion, you are confusing cause and affect as far as Islam is concerned. Pakistan was corrupt long before General Zia turned it into a pseudo Islamic state. Corruption has little to with religion and everything to do with the internal and external dynamic of that nation. We are corrupt because we are uneducated, we are corrupt because we are insecure, and we are corrupt, foremost because our nation has failed at every turn to provide us with fair opportunity.

As much as we all try to create a wall between political figures and ourselves; these leaders come from among us. They are corrupt because Pakistanis at every level are corrupt. Zardari is no different than a common man refusing to pay taxes or a poor man robbing others to feed his children. Corruption just manifests itself differently at all levels, in the form of greed at the top and survival at the bottom.

The status quo will remain regardless of our religious leanings. That is not to say extremism must not be combated, because it does and should be with the greatest extent of our capabilities and national will. But to expect that it will affect corruption in any sizable way seems misguided to me.

Coming back to your point on the role of the military. I have often expressed my sadness at it's controlling interest in the past, present and future of Pakistan. Till they remain all powerful, we will never be anything more than a military state. The PA would not let a doctor drive a tank, then why should the army general decide fiscal policy. But even the involvement of the military does not make this a black and white issue, because since you mentioned them, the Turks have a military that has an unusual amount of power, so is the case with the Bangladeshis and for that matter the Americans...all of those nations are headed to better things. Why is Pakistan failing then? Its never as simple as it seems, but if I could pinpoint a problem, the military would be a key issue.

 

[R0H1T]

Your point about the military is spot on in my opinion, but I am assuming I am in the minority on this one. But in my opinion, you are confusing cause and affect as far as Islam is concerned. Pakistan was corrupt long before General Zia turned it into a pseudo Islamic state. Corruption has little to with religion and everything to do with the internal and external dynamic of that nation. We are corrupt because we are uneducated, we are corrupt because we are insecure, and we are corrupt, foremost because our nation has failed at every turn to provide us with fair opportunity.

As much as we all try to create a wall between political figures and ourselves; these leaders come from among us. They are corrupt because Pakistanis at every level are corrupt. Zardari is no different than a common man refusing to pay taxes or a poor man robbing others to feed his children. Corruption just manifests itself differently at all levels, in the form of greed at the top and survival at the bottom.

The status quo will remain regardless of our religious leanings. That is not to say extremism must not be combated, because it does and should be with the greatest extent of our capabilities and national will. But to expect that it will affect corruption in any sizable way seems misguided to me.

Coming back to your point on the role of the military. I have often expressed my sadness at it's controlling interest in the past, present and future of Pakistan. Till they remain all powerful, we will never be anything more than a military state. The PA would not let a doctor drive a tank, then why should the army general decide fiscal policy. But even the involvement of the military does not make this a black and white issue, because since you mentioned them, the Turks have a military that has an unusual amount of power, so is the case with the Bangladeshis and for that matter the Americans...all of those nations are headed to better things. Why is Pakistan failing then? Its never as simple as it seems, but if I could pinpoint a problem, the military would be a key issue.

Don't think you got my point, corruption is as much a menace here if not more than say in PAK. People here fool others in the name of religion & our so called cultural, spiritual heritage only remains as a namesake.

The corruption part is wrt to vested interests in different spheres of life e.g.

You have the military which is responsible for this IND centric paranoia pretty visible everywhere that I've noticed, why cause power/money they feed off this fear likewise in IND there's the ruling elite which don't want to tackle the Kashmir issue(ABV was the last PM who sincerely tried IMHO) for obvious reasons.

Then you have the hardline Muslim clerics who don't necessarily go by Kuran they instead try to rule the followers in whatever way possible, then again its the same here with Nirmal Baba & co for instance !

 

[R0H1T]

The only solution that I see feasible to uplift PAK is to end this obsession about IND, you asked me "why Turkey/US with strong(er) military than PAK are more prosperous" - the answer to that is twofold.

Firstly both of them have peaceful borders unlike PAK so once again I'll reiterate get out of Afg & don't be a part of any military presence(or aid) whatsoever unless there's UN peacekeeping forces that you'd wanna be a part of.

Second but more importantly everything including the military is IND centric which yet again paves the way for dictators & real democracy takes a backseat.

We've moved away from this phase that we had with the US threat in 1971, before that it was CN since 1962 & till recently(1998) for PAK the feeling was the same. But with nukes be rest assured that no country can win a conventional war as inevitably it'll turn nuclear & no side will risk a billion or so lives therefore this fear(your fear) has no sound reasoning behind it !

 

[regular]

US panel cuts foreign aid, military aid to Pakistan

WASHINGTON - (AP) -- A House panel on Wednesday moved to cut the foreign aid budget by some 9 percent, targeting economic aid and contributions to the United Nations and the World Bank.

Its so absurd that they just cut off the aid just by 9% they need to cutt off by 100%.....Plz USA do us this biggest favor of this century to cuttoff all the aid to us as soon as possible to let us stand on our feet...........

 

[VCheng]

Your point about the military is spot on in my opinion, but I am assuming I am in the minority on this one. ..........

That minority is no longer as small as people think, and growing by the day. Hope for meaningful change is realistic.

.......... cuttoff all the aid to us as soon as possible to let us stand on our feet...........

Are you sure you have the proverbial feet you seem to be relying on developed enough to stand on? If not, falling headlong into a mouthful of dirt cannot be far away once the aid crutches are taken away.

 

[arp2041]

It means less money for corrupt despots like Zardari and Nawaz...please USA take your aid away it helps nothing but create more corruption and terrorism.!

don't worry we have the same problem, we have baba & madam

 

[Pfpilot]

That minority is no longer as small as people think, and growing by the day. Hope for meaningful change is realistic.



Are you sure you have the proverbial feet you seem to be relying on developed enough to stand on? If not, falling headlong into a mouthful of dirt cannot be far away once the aid crutches are taken away.

What about the fear of meaningful change? All powerful entities never give up power without a struggle, often destroying the very things they are trying to hold on to. If change comes, the Generals may put it down in the most grand and historic military tradition of all: a massacre of the very citizens they are sworn to protect. This will always be my underlying worry.