US should dump Islamabad-HussainHaqqani

[Abu Zolfiqar]

So Haqqani has finally converted and become a Yank! His love for Amreeka is so great that he could even become a Christian sooner than later and start the usual Islam bashing!

Can't he be extradited back to Pakistan?

No, he can't. His assets in Pakistan could be frozen

 

[acid rain]

LOL, no surprises there, in comparison to the memo this just seems ordinary. The memo was a piece of art - sell out at a whole new level.

 

[muse]

From this piece I think H.H. has gauged that there is a lot of life left in this US policy in central/South Asia and that he can position himself as a spokesperson for a particular point of view - if this is so then some bumpy days are ahead of us -- what if Nawaz does not garner a majority and PTI form a government -- and PTI not only does not negotiate with the TTP but instead fights and defeats TTP and cleans up the sectarian outfits? Where would that leave the US? The US would want Pakistan to isolate Iran, it would want Pakistani mercenaries in Bahrain and most of all it would wt Pakistan to distance itself from China and assist the US with it's efforts to isolate China -- but then people in hell want ice water, it's dang sure they are not going to get that -- but seriously consider if the PTI are able to ofr the armed forces the kind of support they seek and are willing to own the effort against TTP and sectarianism, would the points H.H. is making be even worth spit??

 

[Imran Khan]

look like US puppy barking on walking islamabad

 

[acid rain]

From this piece I think H.H. has gauged that there is a lot of life left in this US policy in central/South Asia and that he can position himself as a spokesperson for a particular point of view - if this is so then some bumpy days are ahead of us -- what if Nawaz does not garner a majority and PTI form a government -- and PTI not only does not negotiate with the TTP but instead fights and defeats TTP and cleans up the sectarian outfits? Where would that leave the US? The US would want Pakistan to isolate Iran, it would want Pakistani mercenaries in Bahrain and most of all it would wt Pakistan to distance itself from China and assist the US with it's efforts to isolate China -- but then people in hell want ice water, it's dang sure they are not going to get that -- but seriously consider if the PTI are able to ofr the armed forces the kind of support they seek and are willing to own the effort against TTP and sectarianism, would the points H.H. is making be even worth spit??

Dont think the Americans take him seriously or for that matter anyone else. Gone are the days when voices from Pakistan made a difference in American polity, now its just their agenda in the region and the Pakistani army which the Americans know has some say.

 

[muse]

And then there is this :


Marc Grossman urges US to expand trade and investment ties with Pakistan
Wednesday, 20 March 2013

marc-grossmanWASHINGTON: Advocating the importance of closer US-Pakistan relations, former American envoy to the region Marc Grossman has called upon Washington to strengthen its trade and investment ties with the key South Asian country.

Grossman, who left the Obama Administration in December 2012 after serving for about two years as US special representative for Pakistan and Afghanistan, noted though the ties between the two anti-terror partners have improved from a plunge in 2011, still "there is a huge amount to be done," in the vital relationship.

"Very importantly from my perspective, (the US should focus on) moving from assistance-based relations with Pakistan to something based on the private sector and foreign direct investment in Pakistan," he stated at a Washington think tank, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Speaking in his first public event since stepping down as special representative, Grossman said as the two countries re-engaged after a spate of crisis in 2011, they recognized that it was time to make the relationship more trade-focused.

He also underlined that the United States "should continue to take steps with Pakistan to promote further counterterrorism cooperation and support for peace in Afghanistan."

Grossman said one of the important developments in the last year has been Pakistan's open expression of its commitment to support an Afghan-led peace process.

The career diplomat discussed the United States' relations with neighbors Pakistan and Afghanistan as Washington worked to meet the 2014 military drawdown deadline in cooperation with Islamabad and other international partners.

On Afghanistan, Grossman said the United States should make use of all elements of its power simultaneously to ensure that the country is able to carry forward the progress it has made since 2001.

The international community, he said, should translate its Tokyo and Chicago conferences pledges and assist Afghanistan's development in the years ahead while Kabul, for its part, should ensure accountability and work for women's rights.

 

[Developereo]

Be fair, he signed on as a govt official, had the highest of clearances and this is not the way to express disagreement - all disagreements in govt and even out of govt are not handled by going to foreign govt and bad mouth a important and influential organ of the state -- when was the last time a US offcial has done that ? or a UK or a French official?

Let's be honest. This is a national disease in Pakistan.

Whether it's Musharraf or A.Q.Khan or Haqqani -- all these clowns will contract verbal diarrhea if you just put a camera in front of them.

 

[muse]

I think for Mr. Haqqani, as a journalist and analyst, this is more than a disease, it's a career move -- Mr. Kerry is to travel to Asia next moth, lets see if he's been listening to Mr. H.

 

[Spring Onion]

why he is wasting his own ours and US time everytime by playing broken record

 

[Rig Vedic]

Do you really mean to imply that we have the necessary unity of national purpose to achieve what you have said above? On what basis are you concluding that we can put our house in order independently? While you are correct in saying that US interests would not be served by a collapsing Pakistan, please do remember that holds true only if we toe the US lines largely, if not completely.

Yes, we do need a new line of thinking, but what you are suggesting is certainly premature at this point in our national history, given our disjointed society and economy.

This is an extremely delicate and interesting point.

We have in India a somewhat eccentric former Supreme Court judge named Katju, who has been annoying a lot of people with his undiplomatic views. Let me look at the situation from his standpoint -

He would say that because the idea of Pakistan is fundamentally flawed, perpetual instability is inevitable. And it is this instability that forces Pakistanis to remain clutching at western coat-tails. Thus, by creating an unstable entity in South Asia, the west has secured for itself a permanently dependent ally.

 

[Developereo]

why he is wasting his own ours and US time everytime by playing broken record

What muse said.

I think for Mr. Haqqani, [...] it's a career move

You are right. The US (and Western) media loves these traitors.

Whether it's Iranians, Arabs, Russians, Chinese, Latinos or us, the Western media loves putting on these people, who look outwardly like the "other side" but spout the pro-West viewpoint on demand. The better ones throw in a bone or two to give the fake impression of representing the other viewpoint, and the Western media can gloat about being fair and balanced in their coverage.

the idea of Pakistan is fundamentally flawed

The "idea" of Pakistan isn't flawed, but the "implementation" so far has certainly been.

 

[muse]

This notion tht Pakistan as an idea is somehow "fundamentally flawed" - it's curious how popular this idea is among our Indian friends - but lets get their help, what would convince you otherwise?

 

[Rig Vedic]

This notion tht Pakistan as an idea is somehow "fundamentally flawed" - it's curious how popular this idea is among our Indian friends - but lets get their help, what would convince you otherwise?

Well, the creation of Pakistan was justified on the basis of the Islamic identity, which was supposed to be in opposition to a "Hindu" identity.

I would suggest that the natural, ethnic identities - Punjabi, Sindhi, Baloch and Pashtun, should be given their due place. The Sanskrit roots of the Punjabi and Sindhi languages should be recognized, and that part of Pakistani heritage should be given its due. This does not mean that Pakistan should not remain united. But it would mean that the nation would no longer be defined in terms of an "invader" identity opposed to a "native" identity.

 

[muse]

Easy there - Pakistan was sought because Muslims did nt think they would get a fair deal in Hindu dominated secular India - native Identity? All idenioty is a creation, why ought an identity at odds with ones confession be chosen? had Muslims in India not feared that they would not get a fair deal, perhaps their choice of "identity may have been different - but it's difficult and even impossible to ggest that diverse peoples be trapped in a single identity

 

[acid rain]

This notion tht Pakistan as an idea is somehow "fundamentally flawed" - it's curious how popular this idea is among our Indian friends - but lets get their help, what would convince you otherwise?

Muslims cannot co exist with Hindus...while on the contrary our ancestors did just that for centuries. Plus the revision of history based on foreign ethnicity while we all came from the same gene pool but different religions.