US Secretary of State Antony Blinken message for Pakistan

[Protest_again]

Told you so. Biden will much much worse than Trump ever was to Pakistan.

 

[IbnAbdullah]

Salaam


My guess is that the recent Omar sheikh Mohammed's verdict was by design. Essentially, you do something high profile like this for the value it will have once you undo it as a favour.

I highly doubt in matters as diplomatically sensitive as the issue of Daniel Pearl's murder, in a country like Pakistan the courts would be allowed to do whatever without some guidance.

With regards to whether Biden will be better or worst, I think things would move as they have been. Not great. However, Pakistan is in a much better situation now than a decade ago in relation to the US pressure because of China.

However, given the sort of problems the Biden administration has to deal with at home and on the broader global stage, I doubt Pakistan would get too much attention. That may be a good thing.

 

[Jungibaaz]

Told you so. Biden will much much worse than Trump ever was to Pakistan.

It’s been this way historically, we’re always much better off with republicans. As for Trump, we had good ways of establishing ties by bypassing their establishment; IK talking to Trump personally, reaching out to Washington via Jared Kushner and the Saudis etc.

However, the endgame in Afghanistan is still the same. Albeit delayed yet again, enough time for a new administration to learn what’s needed. In the end, we will have a sort of hybrid unity government in Afghanistan or civil war post withdrawal. US Pak ties will reach their long term equilibrium, which is a state of indifference. Pakistan’s future is with China and some regional partners.

 

[TheDarkKnight]

As I said, the new Biden administration would be quick to burst all our collective bubbles.
It's more "do more" for us in the scope of "Af-Pak" affairs, and "good friends" for India in the scope of "Indo-Pacific" matters.

I think Pakistan needs to distance itself as the thaikadaars of Afghanistan where all issues have a solution stemming out of Pakistan. I mean what responsibility Pakistan has that a certain Afghan group does something or not? I listened to Moeed Yusufs interview, and the impression I got was that Pakistans job was to make Taliban sit on table with US and the Afghan govt in a room - and after that walk away. Women rights, freedom of expression, gay pride festivals, right to dance on the street etc. in Afghanistan cannot be guarantied via Pakistan. If the mood in US admin is to kick start another cycle of violence and try to do what couldn’t be done in the last twenty years, then Pakistan should be neutral. Pakistan should just save itself from a negative response either from US side or the Afghan side. Keep providing transportation services but nothing more.

Pakistan should further control its borders and as areas have been cleared, there is nothing that Pakistan has to do - Taliban janay aur Northern Alliance warlords janay.

 

[Jungibaaz]

I think Pakistan needs to distance itself as the thaikadaars of Afghanistan where all issues have a solution stemming out of Pakistan. I mean what responsibility Pakistan has that a certain Afghan group does something or not? I listened to Moeed Yusufs interview, and the impression I got was that Pakistans job was to make Taliban sit on table with US and the Afghan govt in a room - and after that walk away. Women rights, freedom of expression, gay pride festivals, right to dance on the street etc. in Afghanistan cannot be guarantied via Pakistan. If the mood in US admin is to kick start another cycle of violence and try to do what couldn’t be done in the last twenty years, then Pakistan should be neutral. Pakistan should just save itself from a negative response either from US side or the Afghan side. Keep providing transportation services but nothing more.

Pakistan should further control its borders and as areas have been cleared, there is nothing that Pakistan has to do - Taliban janay aur Northern Alliance warlords janay.

This would be ideal, but even with a robust border fence you cannot rid yourself of involvement in Afghanistan. And our establishment decided long ago, that having to manage our interests in Afghanistan with all its costs is preferable to leaving it a vacuum, whence it may also be used to undermine us, one border with India is more than enough.

Also, part in bold IMO is the best thing our establishment has done wrt to Afghanistan. It has allowed us leverage, and a way out that doesn’t have to lead to a messy civil war (Najibullah style).

Our involvement reminds me of a quote of dear old Leon Trotsky:

“You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you.”

Feel free to swap the war bit with Afghanistan and so called “af-pak” affairs. We are peace makers now afterall.

 

[SD 10]

timesofislamabad.com

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken message for Pakistan
News Desk

3 minutes

Foreign Minister Makhdoom Shah Mehmood Qureshi has said that Pakistan is committed to establishing a comprehensive partnership with the United States on issues of mutual interest.

According to details, Foreign Minister Makhdoom Shah Mehmood Qureshi and US Secretary of State Antony Blinken had a telephone conversation in which the two Foreign Ministers agreed to make joint efforts to promote bilateral relations and important regional and global issues of mutual interest.

The two Foreign Ministers discussed issues of mutual interest, including bilateral relations and the promotion of bilateral cooperation in multilateral fields.



On the occasion, Foreign Minister Makhdoom Shah Mehmood Qureshi congratulated the US Secretary of State on assuming office.

The Foreign Minister said that Pakistan supports the establishment of economic partnership, peaceful neighbourliness and promotion of regional ties in line with the vision of Prime Minister Imran Khan.

Shah Mehmood Qureshi also said that Pakistan and the United States equally want a political solution to the Afghan problem through comprehensive dialogue, and Pakistan wants to participate in peace efforts with the United States.



The Foreign Minister said that there was a need to reduce the incidence of violence in Afghanistan in order to pave the way for a peaceful political solution to the Afghan problem and Pakistan played a conciliatory role in the Afghan peace process under shared responsibility and will continue to do so. Will continue to play the role.

Referring to the recent developments in the Daniel Pearl case, Shah Mehmood Qureshi said that full compliance with the legal requirements for the delivery of justice was in the interest of both the countries.



Foreign Minister Makhdoom Shah Mehmood Qureshi briefed his US counterpart on the sacrifices made by Pakistan in the war on terror and the steps taken to root out terrorism, on which the US Secretary of State called on Pakistan in the war on terror.

US Secretary of State Anthony Blanken, referring to the long-standing bilateral relationship between the United States and Pakistan, said that there are many opportunities to enhance bilateral cooperation in various fields between the two countries.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1355225195976544256

https://twitter.com/x/status/1355218003990863872

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The first result of the Indo-Pacific policy! New US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken tweeted about a telephone conversation with Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi and Indian Foreign Minister SJ Shankar. The conversation with Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi was taken up by US Secretary of State Anthony Blanken while tweeting about the Omar Saeed-Sheikh case. As the new Foreign Minister, it should have been the case between the two countries. Relationships are tweeted, but other issues are tweeted here like Terrorism issues are tweeted. On the other hand, in his conversation with Indian Foreign Minister SJ Shankar, Anthony Blinken called SJ Shankar a best friend and talked about the good and strong relations between India and the United States. This is the first scenario of Indo-Pacific policy that came to light very soon. This is a the fact that after the swearing-in of the new US President Joe Biden, implementing the US "Indo-Pacific Policy" for Asia, And trying to use India against China

how hard is it to understand that us and Pakistan have a different future ahead, we are in the opposite group... i don't know why people can`t comprehend this??? They still insist on buying f16s and other us defense product even though they will impose sanctions on us the moment they get the chance!

 

[araz]

As I said, the new Biden administration would be quick to burst all our collective bubbles.
It's more "do more" for us in the scope of "Af-Pak" affairs, and "good friends" for India in the scope of "Indo-Pacific" matters.

We should not cower before the United states in case of a Supreme Court ruling. OUR court has ruled and it should be respected by one and all. The US may not have had a decision in its favour and if it wants it can appeal in the Supreme Court of Pakistan for a reversal and present the grounds. Otherwise let the Courts ruling stand.
As to US India relationship It has the right to do what ever it sees fit to advance its national interests and India can respond in a fitting manner. No problems there from my end. When it comes to Afghanistan we will have the right to get a disicion that FAVOURS US AND THE REGION.
A

 

[xyx007]

how hard is it to understand that us and Pakistan have a different future ahead, we are in the opposite group... i don't know why people can`t comprehend this??? They still insist on buying f16s and other us defense product even though they will impose sanctions on us the moment they get the chance!

I can give my answer from different angle and lets see where US interest fit.
Pakistan and China mostly share common strategic and economic interests and hold similar viewpoints on the regional geostrategic environment. In the Chinese perspective, Pakistan is a significant regional ally which serves:

• A link to the strategic maritime outlet to Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf support 20 percent of the Global Oil trade.
• A bulwark against the Indian regional hegemonic ambitions.
• Achieving peace and stability in Afghanistan which is imperative for greater regional connectivity and also to impede its slipover effects towards fuelling militancy and extremism in Chinese Xinjiang province.
• Also, China favours a peaceful South Asian region aimed at Pakistan–India's economic partnership that would serve as more substantial economic connectivity.

India understands what the US wants in the region, but India may not become a sacrificial goat for the US interest and open a new door of war with China. I think they read our history very well, US-Pak friendship, that is why India still in partner status, not an ally. Let's see Biden's magic to break these Indian spells and not resist as an ally.

I am taking my notes on our foriegn policy and Pakistan-India relation from this lecture dated in 1994.

 

[saiyan0321]

It’s been this way historically, we’re always much better off with republicans. As for Trump, we had good ways of establishing ties by bypassing their establishment; IK talking to Trump personally, reaching out to Washington via Jared Kushner and the Saudis etc.

However, the endgame in Afghanistan is still the same. Albeit delayed yet again, enough time for a new administration to learn what’s needed. In the end, we will have a sort of hybrid unity government in Afghanistan or civil war post withdrawal. US Pak ties will reach their long term equilibrium, which is a state of indifference. Pakistan’s future is with China and some regional partners.

Another problem that we are most likely to face is the current status of democrat politics in the US and their reaction to trump policies. The democrats will revamp and turn back many of his policies including his policies regarding pakistan and taliban. Another aspect that I am thinking of is the human rights angle. Trump was far more lenient on violations that happened during his tenure and his policies were repeatedly pointed to be in contradiction to US human rights values and the democrats will try to show themselves as Human right guardians which means that they will be stricter with countries where human rights are violated. AF-PAk are the punching bag and pakistan especially. Pakistan and taliban will make their AF-PAk policy and the democrats will want to show that they are taking a harsher stance. Problem is with trump, we were able to get alot of heat off due to the entire taliban deal and AF-PAk peace however if the democrats want more assurances and a more compliant taliban and ate focused on rights violations and aren't willing to overlook them for any gain that nay or may not come, then we are in trouble.

While we may be entering the chinese sphere, the US influence won't wane even more so considering how our judicial, military, political and bureaucratic class has more contacts and plans with the US than with the chinese

This would be ideal, but even with a robust border fence you cannot rid yourself of involvement in Afghanistan. And our establishment decided long ago, that having to manage our interests in Afghanistan with all its costs is preferable to leaving it a vacuum, whence it may also be used to undermine us, one border with India is more than enough.

Also, part in bold IMO is the best thing our establishment has done wrt to Afghanistan. It has allowed us leverage, and a way out that doesn’t have to lead to a messy civil war (Najibullah style).

Our involvement reminds me of a quote of dear old Leon Trotsky:

“You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you.”

Feel free to swap the war bit with Afghanistan and so called “af-pak” affairs. We are peace makers now afterall.

The entire point of afghanistan strategic depth has always been the ability to create geographic and military depth to counter the indian push. Pakistan cannot ignore afghanistan so easily. Infact this would be doubled If afghanistan becomes a hostile nation with an average military since that would mean that pakistan would have to create military planning for it's western border. While we talk about the fence and the forts but we must remember that all of them are for COIN purposes and border patrol. They are not meant for any military defensiveness. If afghanistan ever gets a decent military than pakistan will be fighting in the two front and that is exactly the nightmare pakistan wishes to avoid. For pakistan the focus has been create border controls bit gain enough influence in afghanistan to avoid building of entire military setup for our western border which will include bunkers, bases, airfields, air defenses, ground defenses, ammunition dumps and so much more that is needed. So for this pakistan will always need to make sure there is some level of influence in afghanistan. Look at it from economic view. Which is more expensive? Doubling the size of the army, building and maintaining all the defense requirements and having a two point command focused in two fronts or giving a bunch of radicalized men in a foreign country some weapons and training to make sure there is always a condition of conflict. We see a form of status quo forming with 65 percent contested with 15 percent under taliban and the rest under government. Afghanistan cannot be abandoned so easily for us.

 

[khail007]

One more name bro

Raymond Davis .... no one cares about the pakistanis killed by this sob

Sir G, like your comments but alas! we as Pakistanis were instrumental in his release/transfer to USA. The relative of dead took money and later were found killing each other for the money - what a materialistic world ... !

 

[Tumba]

How many pakistani still think u guys will get F16V upgrades or Aim120?

I saw celebrations when demorats couped Trump

 

[W.11]

this

Well stated

regards

 

[SD 10]

I can give my answer from different angle and lets see where US interest fit.
Pakistan and China mostly share common strategic and economic interests and hold similar viewpoints on the regional geostrategic environment. In the Chinese perspective, Pakistan is a significant regional ally which serves:

• A link to the strategic maritime outlet to Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf support 20 percent of the Global Oil trade.
• A bulwark against the Indian regional hegemonic ambitions.
• Achieving peace and stability in Afghanistan which is imperative for greater regional connectivity and also to impede its slipover effects towards fuelling militancy and extremism in Chinese Xinjiang province.
• Also, China favours a peaceful South Asian region aimed at Pakistan–India's economic partnership that would serve as more substantial economic connectivity.

India understands what the US wants in the region, but India may not become a sacrificial goat for the US interest and open a new door of war with China. I think they read our history very well, US-Pak friendship, that is why India still in partner status, not an ally. Let's see Biden's magic to break these Indian spells and not resist as an ally.

I am taking my notes on our foriegn policy and Pakistan-India relation from this lecture dated in 1994.

sure but the thing is our national interest donot align with that of US so from now on no matter what out certain community begs from US we will be on their hitlist.

 

[Windjammer]

How many pakistani still think u guys will get F16V upgrades or Aim120?

I saw celebrations when demorats couped Trump

Your concern should be IF the Rafale will save your sorry A$$ or you intend on ruining some other jets image with coconut and lemons.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

It’s pretty simple containment policy for Pakistan and full support for India.

As I said, the new Biden administration would be quick to burst all our collective bubbles.
It's more "do more" for us in the scope of "Af-Pak" affairs, and "good friends" for India in the scope of "Indo-Pacific" matters.

I disagree in that I don't see the US approach towards Pakistan changing significantly from Trump to Biden. The US Establishment has continued to maintain a consistent position in terms of being stuck in a Cold War mindset and creating a bogeyman out of China, and in turn that has meant US courting of India in order to 'Contain China'.

Trump spent a good part of his first year or so in the Presidency attacking and smearing Pakistan. It was only when he realized that the US needed Pakistan's cooperation to exit Afghanistan that he calmed down, but the trajectory of the US relationship with India continued, especially as Trump made an even bigger enemy of China and started a trade war with them.

Much like the Establishment in Pakistan, the US Establishment has it's core foreign policy and national interests defined and institutional memory means that regardless of who comes to power, there is a degree of continuity and consistency in the broader direction of US/Pakistani foreign policy. In fact, the PMLN (Nawaz Sharif) has always been more of a 'Trump factor' in Pakistan in that they want to ignore the Establishment policy direction and try and take 'bold gestures' (never reciprocated to the same level by the Indians), which annoys everyone in the Establishment & institutions focused on proper analysis leading to policy formulation.

Back to US relations with Pakistan and India - the more important gauge here is the trajectory of the US-China relationship. Is Biden going to continue with the escalation Trump started or is the US going to calm down the rhetoric and try and build a more cooperative relationship with China, recognizing the inevitability of China's rise?

A more cooperative US-China relationship means that the US relationship with India will trend towards one that isn't going to give India any major strategic advantages, and will be more about mutual economic cooperation vs bolstering India militarily against China (and therefore Pakistan).