US President Biden will soon talk to PM Imran Khan: Wendy Sherman

[araz]

In Urdu, we have a proverb کِھسْیانی بِلّی کَھمْبا نوچے

English version: an embarrassed person (country) vents his/her feeling in aggression". American statement reminds them of their shame and blame.. and then suddenly, oh "we'll speak to Pakistan because Pakistan wants so".

View attachment 783196

I am glad the people that handle diplomacy are not as abrupt as some of the posters on the forum. My comments are general and not directed at you specifically so apologies in advance if you feel this way.
Please posters need to understand that optics are so important in the game that gets played. Firstly she was shown Pak displeasure by SMQ not coming to see her. She was received by a mid level officer and the message was conveyed. She then had a meeting with SMQ as she had gone visiting. The army chief met her informally in his Shalwar Kameez signifying informality but also lack of support from the top brass to US demands.
Iam not a soothsayer, but directly or indirectly the message has been carried across that we are not happy. Our lines where we will cooperate and where we will not have been communicated clearly as well.
It must be understood that these statements and optics are not a marker for permanent relations but can change depending on who needs what from whom. I think the ball has been firmly placed in the US court as to the level of diplomacy or interest that it will show in patching things up. I do not think Biden will call IK just yet but there may be a secretary of state to SMQ call initiated by the former to break this ice. One the other hand if the US is hellbent on playing the blame game then the current indifference will remain.
So what have we achieved? We have told the US where we are at and what must be done by it to get to where we both need to be. The US can now:
A. Increase pressure on us to comply by direct or indirect means . FATF, IMF or support from tbe Secretary of State to anti Pak bills might be what is done.
The effect will be short to medium term but the outcome will be to push Paklands more staunchly into the China camp.
B. The US might relent slowly from its established position by FO TO FO communication followed by a Biden call at some stage. Other alternates such as Kamala Harris talking to IK, Foreign Secrefary wanting to talk to IK will be tried and possibly gently but firmly denied.
C. The US depending on its need forPakistan might then offer to invest in CPEC along with some other tidbits ignoring mother India. Modi might smart but will recover. Nothing concrete that will hurt aindia will be given.
Option B might be tried in my view although we might see a combo of A+B.
A

 

[Path-Finder]

hold on wasnt that amritsari chor saying that one dosent phone, a.k.a mai baap biden!!!

 

[TheTallGuy]

My mind is reading
the long awaited and asked about call may be to tell we are putting harsh military sanctions. nobody screws the uncle tom and gets away with it.

My Heart is reading
"So Bismillah!"

 

[airmarshal]

I dont think this current leadership is dying to talk to US President. Imran was invited to watch a cricket match with Boris Johnson, he did not go. So this leadership is different. Also, this is coming from Geo TV. I cant trust it.

 

[Adonis]

The Americans are full of shit.

Lol...yes mate.. whole world is full of shit...US, India, Western Countries, Arabs (since they don't listen to you anymore).....Only good people are Chinese and Turks...(so far)...they will also be full of Shit as soon as they join rest of the world.

Biden can shove his phone call where the sun doesn't shine

So far ..someone is dying for that call... mentioning it in every interview, statement he makes...Sun is infact not shining on him

 

[Thorough Pro]

Who wants to talk to this fuckhead?
Is he even capable of talking to the intelligent Pakistani PM on his own?

View attachment 783165

US President Biden will soon talk to PM Imran Khan: Wendy Sherman

We know every country wants to have a telephone conversation with US President, says Wendy R Sherman.“I am sure this contact will take place soon, so I don’t think it should mean anything else,” top US diplomat...

www.geo.tv

 

[Gilljutt]

I bet Imran will give him an earful of racists, fascists India.

 

[FuturePAF]

I am glad the people that handle diplomacy are not as abrupt as some of the posters on the forum. My comments are general and not directed at you specifically so apologies in advance if you feel this way.
Please posters need to understand that optics are so important in the game that gets played. Firstly she was shown Pak displeasure by SMQ not coming to see her. She was received by a mid level officer and the message was conveyed. She then had a meeting with SMQ as she had gone visiting. The army chief met her informally in his Shalwar Kameez signifying informality but also lack of support from the top brass to US demands.
Iam not a soothsayer, but directly or indirectly the message has been carried across that we are not happy. Our lines where we will cooperate and where we will not have been communicated clearly as well.
It must be understood that these statements and optics are not a marker for permanent relations but can change depending on who needs what from whom. I think the ball has been firmly placed in the US court as to the level of diplomacy or interest that it will show in patching things up. I do not think Biden will call IK just yet but there may be a secretary of state to SMQ call initiated by the former to break this ice. One the other hand if the US is hellbent on playing the blame game then the current indifference will remain.
So what have we achieved? We have told the US where we are at and what must be done by it to get to where we both need to be. The US can now:
A. Increase pressure on us to comply by direct or indirect means . FATF, IMF or support from tbe Secretary of State to anti Pak bills might be what is done.
The effect will be short to medium term but the outcome will be to push Paklands more staunchly into the China camp.
B. The US might relent slowly from its established position by FO TO FO communication followed by a Biden call at some stage. Other alternates such as Kamala Harris talking to IK, Foreign Secrefary wanting to talk to IK will be tried and possibly gently but firmly denied.
C. The US depending on its need forPakistan might then offer to invest in CPEC along with some other tidbits ignoring mother India. Modi might smart but will recover. Nothing concrete that will hurt aindia will be given.
Option B might be tried in my view although we might see a combo of A+B.
A

Pretty good analysis, although Option C has one flaw; CPEC. The US won’t join any BRI project, much less the flag ship of BRI; CPEC. What the US could do is work with Pakistan on the Trade route to Central Asia if the Afghans become or stay cooperative on issues of concern to the US. Even China has encouraged this kind of economic cooperation in the past, so they won’t mind. It might be seen as undermining Russian influence (or at least domination) in Central Asia, which might make it enticing for the US. The US wants to be a party in all regions of the world, and ceding influence in Central Asia to just the neighbors could create a blind spot that could come back to haunt the US.

The projects that could be brought back are the TAPI pipeline and rail links between Karachi’s port and Central Asia via Chaman and the Khyber pass.

 

[graphican]

I am glad the people that handle diplomacy are not as abrupt as some of the posters on the forum. My comments are general and not directed at you specifically so apologies in advance if you feel this way.
Please posters need to understand that optics are so important in the game that gets played. Firstly she was shown Pak displeasure by SMQ not coming to see her. She was received by a mid level officer and the message was conveyed. She then had a meeting with SMQ as she had gone visiting. The army chief met her informally in his Shalwar Kameez signifying informality but also lack of support from the top brass to US demands.
Iam not a soothsayer, but directly or indirectly the message has been carried across that we are not happy. Our lines where we will cooperate and where we will not have been communicated clearly as well.
It must be understood that these statements and optics are not a marker for permanent relations but can change depending on who needs what from whom. I think the ball has been firmly placed in the US court as to the level of diplomacy or interest that it will show in patching things up. I do not think Biden will call IK just yet but there may be a secretary of state to SMQ call initiated by the former to break this ice. One the other hand if the US is hellbent on playing the blame game then the current indifference will remain.
So what have we achieved? We have told the US where we are at and what must be done by it to get to where we both need to be. The US can now:
A. Increase pressure on us to comply by direct or indirect means . FATF, IMF or support from tbe Secretary of State to anti Pak bills might be what is done.
The effect will be short to medium term but the outcome will be to push Paklands more staunchly into the China camp.
B. The US might relent slowly from its established position by FO TO FO communication followed by a Biden call at some stage. Other alternates such as Kamala Harris talking to IK, Foreign Secrefary wanting to talk to IK will be tried and possibly gently but firmly denied.
C. The US depending on its need forPakistan might then offer to invest in CPEC along with some other tidbits ignoring mother India. Modi might smart but will recover. Nothing concrete that will hurt aindia will be given.
Option B might be tried in my view although we might see a combo of A+B.
A

@araz, thanks for the comment. Of course, my opinion and approach wouldn't be the same if I had the responsibility to represent the Nation through the office and achieve National goals. Then I would be diplomatic, I would be playing by the norms and I would be cautious in my statements... but this is exactly what Americans have chosen not to do despite sitting in the diplomatic office.

Visibly Wendy has failed herself in her diplomatic role or succeeded in releasing her venom intent-fully... you can label her expression in one way or the other, but the fact remains Wendy has spoken poorly about our country while using the stage of our enemy. She has tried to hurt Pakistan or perhaps appease India at the cost of Pakistan - in either case, it is derogatory and offensive.

Now - having said that - while the Government of Pakistan has not responded squarely to the United States - you and I should reflect our true feelings. Public response is the only alternative we have to express our dissatisfaction with this episode. If we too were as diplomatic as the foreign office has been then who is left to reply to Americans? No one? Our Foreign Minister not receiving her, or COAS not seeing her in uniform is not a sufficient response to the public degradation attempt. If you and I would not speak and not express ourselves... guess who else will.

And I am equally glad you and I are not in the foreign office as we wouldn't be having this conversation then.

 

[truthseeker2010]

I am glad the people that handle diplomacy are not as abrupt as some of the posters on the forum. My comments are general and not directed at you specifically so apologies in advance if you feel this way.
Please posters need to understand that optics are so important in the game that gets played. Firstly she was shown Pak displeasure by SMQ not coming to see her. She was received by a mid level officer and the message was conveyed. She then had a meeting with SMQ as she had gone visiting. The army chief met her informally in his Shalwar Kameez signifying informality but also lack of support from the top brass to US demands.
Iam not a soothsayer, but directly or indirectly the message has been carried across that we are not happy. Our lines where we will cooperate and where we will not have been communicated clearly as well.
It must be understood that these statements and optics are not a marker for permanent relations but can change depending on who needs what from whom. I think the ball has been firmly placed in the US court as to the level of diplomacy or interest that it will show in patching things up. I do not think Biden will call IK just yet but there may be a secretary of state to SMQ call initiated by the former to break this ice. One the other hand if the US is hellbent on playing the blame game then the current indifference will remain.
So what have we achieved? We have told the US where we are at and what must be done by it to get to where we both need to be. The US can now:
A. Increase pressure on us to comply by direct or indirect means . FATF, IMF or support from tbe Secretary of State to anti Pak bills might be what is done.
The effect will be short to medium term but the outcome will be to push Paklands more staunchly into the China camp.
B. The US might relent slowly from its established position by FO TO FO communication followed by a Biden call at some stage. Other alternates such as Kamala Harris talking to IK, Foreign Secrefary wanting to talk to IK will be tried and possibly gently but firmly denied.
C. The US depending on its need forPakistan might then offer to invest in CPEC along with some other tidbits ignoring mother India. Modi might smart but will recover. Nothing concrete that will hurt aindia will be given.
Option B might be tried in my view although we might see a combo of A+B.
A

IK is the only person resisting US, all the rest are those whose children, families and hence interest is in the west. Although pakistan's economic interest is and should be with the chinese camp. Those running it has more to do US institution. So thats why you are now seeing Chinese not showing level of interest as there were in the past.

A. Pak will remain in greylist. US will have the strings due to Paklands economic situation and dichotomous leadership.
B. US will just keep transactional relationship.
C. US will invest in pakistan? why?

 

[araz]

@araz, thanks for the comment. Of course, my opinion and approach wouldn't be the same if I had the responsibility to represent the Nation through the office and achieve National goals. Then I would be diplomatic, I would be playing by the norms and I would be cautious in my statements... but this is exactly what Americans have chosen not to do despite sitting in the diplomatic office.

Visibly Wendy has failed herself in her diplomatic role or succeeded in releasing her venom intent-fully... you can label her expression in one way or the other, but the fact remains Wendy has spoken poorly about our country while using the stage of our enemy. She has tried to hurt Pakistan or perhaps appease India at the cost of Pakistan - in either case, it is derogatory and offensive.

Now - having said that - while the Government of Pakistan has not responded squarely to the United States - you and I should reflect our true feelings. Public response is the only alternative we have to express our dissatisfaction with this episode. If we too were as diplomatic as the foreign office has been then who is left to reply to Americans? No one? Our Foreign Minister not receiving her, or COAS not seeing her in uniform is not a sufficient response to the public degradation attempt. If you and I would not speak and not express ourselves... guess who else will.

And I am equally glad you and I are not in the foreign office as we wouldn't be having this conversation then.

Hi.
I have only chosen to respond due to posters suggesting a response bordering on diplomatic suicide. My problem is that the US polity does not give 2 hoots about public opinion of any other nation barring the US citizens whom they control very effectively. US is big enough to keep its people occupied with its own state politics or issues rather than looking outside of the US.
AS SUCH the response had to be from the foreign office. The optics of it have not gone unnoticed by the US making the foreign office spokesperson respond to news about the cold response in Pakistan.
Unfortunately beyond that Pakistan is not currently in a position to respond.
A

 

[graphican]

Hi.
I have only chosen to respond due to posters suggesting a response bordering on diplomatic suicide. My problem is that the US polity does not give 2 hoots about public opinion of any other nation barring the US citizens whom they control very effectively. US is big enough to keep its people occupied with its own state politics or issues rather than looking outside of the US.
AS SUCH the response had to be from the foreign office. The optics of it have not gone unnoticed by the US making the foreign office spokesperson respond to news about the cold response in Pakistan.
Unfortunately beyond that Pakistan is not currently in a position to respond.
A

@araz, I respect your opinions and believe you have the right to respond or rely on the foreign office's approach. I do not perceive your diplomatic approach as incorrect. Your approach has my respect.

For others, like myself, our love and National sentiments demand us to voice our dissatisfaction as a (minimum) responsibility. I should choose my response ethically, but no response is not a plausible choice. I hope you have consideration and respect for this approach. It is not a compulsion on you - but a reciprocal expectation.

Now my response or your lack of response will have no impact on the American state. We both know that. If Americans chose to stay blind to the people of the country - they will eventually pay a price as they did in Afghanistan. You cannot stay super-power sailing the ocean (of people) by ignoring the ocean.