US suspends military aid to Pakistan. Military says it doesn't need it.

[53fd]

If it's one-off 'You expelled our trainers so we cut your aid' thing then probably Pakistan will manage but if this continues and Pakistan keeps on needling US then Pakistan will be in a real tight spot in the near future. Expect increase drone strike, expect no IMF support hence defaulting on loans, expect increase needling in Pakistan by US through Afghanistan or otherwise

Pakistan US relations will not be cut off, as the US needs Pakistan to resolve Afghanistan. It can't solve Afghanistan by its own self, or with the Karzai government. Which is why only $800 million of the aid has been withdrawn, while the rest is intact. However, the US are putting themselves in a difficult position, because Pakistan is looking at closing its supply routes, as well as dismantling the CIA network inside Pakistan. As a result, the US won't be able to exert as much influence as it's had over the Pakistan military & the ISI, which will result in adverse results inside Afghanistan. Besides that, with the supply routes coming from Central Asia, the costs for sending supplies to Afghanistan will increase by about 4 times, the time to route these supplies will increased by almost 2 times, which will adversely effect the WOT. As the US won't be able to use the cheap supply routes of Pakistan, the cost for the WOT will increase. Drone strikes costs about $1 million per strike, & they can go upto $60 million per strike for high value, highly accurate strikes. With the US looking to cut the costs for the war, & without Pakistan's help, they could find themselves trapped badly in Afghanistan, financially & militarily/strategically.

 

[Developereo]

With the US looking to cut the costs for the war, & without Pakistan's help, they could find themselves trapped badly in Afghanistan.

The US will find that working with Pakistan was a breeze compared to what Putin will demand.

The basic problem is that the US had mixed two major foreign policy objectives (i.e., China and the WOT) and they are working at cross purposes in Afghanistan

In order to contain China, the US wants to weaken and marginalize Pakistan, and promote India. Chinese containment will be the centerpiece of US foreign policy in the coming decades.

However, in the process, they managed to derail the war on terror. The Afghanistan situation could have been handled much better if the US had worked with Pakistan by acknowledging and accomodating Pakistan's national interests. Instead they have done exactly the opposite in line with their Chinese obsession.

 

[Awesome]

America is quoting an inflated 800Mn figure. In reality they are eating away the 300 Mn we have spent in costs to them which should be repaid, as that has nothing to do with aid.

 

[majesticpankaj]

America is quoting an inflated 800Mn figure. In reality they are eating away the 300 Mn we have spent in costs to them which should be repaid, as that has nothing to do with aid.

which cost u are talking about ??? 1 lakh army at the border area ??

 

[Awesome]

which cost u are talking about ??? 1 lakh army at the border area ??

That too and the logistical support they provide.

Pakistan has a lot of plays if this amount is not paid. Block Nato supplies or as a bigger step block over head flights over our airspace. Let the planes go from Russia too.

 

[foxbat]

That too and the logistical support they provide.

Pakistan has a lot of plays if this amount is not paid. Block Nato supplies or as a bigger step block over head flights over our airspace. Let the planes go from Russia too.

Pakistan really doesnt have the muscle to do that at this time.. I mean if Pakistan can not do all these things on the daily (almost) deaths of its citizens due to drone strikes (and lets not go into the implicit agreement of pak govt on drones) and multiple attacks on Pak security forces at the border, it wont be able to do this for 800 million dollars..

 

[Ghareeb_Da_Baal]

An interesting comment on the news report on yahoo:

"We need to borrow the $800 million from China to give it to Pakistan; now they will simply get the money directly from China. Is this a good thing? Perhaps."

LOL.....................

 

[ashokdeiva]

Form what i see, Pakistan should by themself relinquish the aid from US and start acting like a country that has its own interest in growth and properity.
[Bbilalhaider[/B] is saying that you are going to make the war on terror by US more dificult but in actual and long term this will damage Pakistan more than the US. GoP is already having set backs in wiping out the terror networks operation from and inside Pakistan and its establishment which has a few percentage of jihadi support. with this the diplomats in Pakistan should comeup with a fool-proof plan to relinquish US aid.

 

[S.M.R]

Withholding of aid not to affect Pakistan army operations - spokesman

The US decision to withhold near USD800 million of aid to Pakistan, will not affect ongoing military operations against militants in the bordering tribal belt, said the military spokesman.

The suspension of nearly 800 million, including military assistance, to the country, will not hamper the ongoing offensives by the security forces against militants in the tribal areas, military spokesman Ather Abbas was quoted as saying by media on Monday.

White House Chief of Staff Bill Daley told ABC television on Sunday that Pakistan had "taken some steps that have given us reason to pause on some of the aid".

"We have been doing these operations on our own in the tribal areas and we have sufficient resources to continue them," said Major-General Athar Abbas. However, he added, the US had not yet "informed us in writing about the withholding of military assistance".

"We have achieved success in the past against al Qaeda in South Waziristan, Bajur and other tribal regions without any external assistance," he said while emphasizing that the ongoing operations against Al-Qaeda in the tribal regions were not only in the interests of Pakistan but also the US and the world at large.

"Al Qaeda is a common enemy of both Pakistan and the US," said the spokesman.

Some newspapers citing military sources said that the announcement was not 'unexpected'. The sources termed the development as "pressure tactics" and said that the US "may temporarily suspend our aid but in the long-run they cannot". Pakistan has come under pressure to do more since US killed Osama Bin Laden in a unilateral operation in May in Abbottabad city.

Withholding of aid not to affect Pakistan army operations - spokesman | Pakistan | News | Newspaper | Daily | English | Online


'Hum Lanat bhejtay hain US aid par'........Spokesman.

 

[Riseup]

US suspends military aid to Pakistan

WASHINGTON - The Obama administration's decision to suspend $800 million in aid to the Pakistan's military signals a tougher US line with a critical but sometimes unreliable partner in the fight against terrorism.

President Barack Obama's chief of staff, William Daley, said in a broadcast interview Sunday that the estranged relationship between the United States and Pakistan must be made "to work over time," but until it does, "we'll hold back some of the money that the American taxpayers are committed to give" to the country's powerful military forces.

The suspension of US aid, first reported by The New York Times, followed a statement last week by Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, that Pakistan's security services may have sanctioned the killing of Pakistani journalist Saleem Shahzad, who wrote about infiltration of the military by extremists. His battered body was found in June.

The allegation was rejected by Pakistan's powerful military establishment, including the Inter-Services Intelligence Agency, which has historic ties to the Taliban and other militant groups and which many Western analysts regard as a state-within-a-state.

George Perkovich, an expert on Pakistan with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, said Mullen's comments and the suspension of aid represent "the end of happy talk," where the US tries to paper over differences between the two nations.

Daley, interviewed on ABC's "This Week," suggested the decision to suspend military aid resulted from the increasing estrangement between the US and Pakistan. "Obviously there's still a lot of pain that the political system in Pakistan is feeling by virtue of the raid that we did to get Osama bin Laden," Daley said.

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told reporters traveling with him to Afghanistan on Saturday that the US would continue to press Pakistan in the fight against extremists, including al-Qaida's new leader, Ayman al-Zawahri.

"We have to continue to emphasize with the Pakistanis that in the end it's in their interest to be able to go after these targets as well," Panetta said. "And in the discussions I've had with them, I have to say that, you know, they're giving us cooperation in going after some of these targets. We've got to continue to push them to do that. That's key."

The US has long been unhappy with Pakistan's evident lack of enthusiasm for carrying the fight against terrorists to its tribal areas, as well as its covert support for the Taliban and anti-Indian extremist groups.

But tensions ratcheted up in January, when CIA security contractor Raymond Davis shot and killed two Pakistanis who he said were trying to rob him. They spiked in May, when US forces killed bin Laden during a covert raid on a home in Abbottabad, the location of Pakistan's military academy.

In the US, there was anger at the possibility that some Pakistan officials had harbored the terrorist leader. In Pakistan, there was outrage that the US operation had violated its sovereignty.

The $800 million in suspended aid represents 40 percent of the $2 billion in US military aid to Pakistan, and according to the Times includes money for counterterror operations.

The report said some of the money represented equipment that can't be set up for training because Pakistan won't give visas to the trainers. About $300 million was intended to reimburse Pakistan for the cost of deploying 100,000 troops along the Afghan border, the newspaper said.

A senior US official confirmed that the suspension came in response to the Pakistani army's decision to significantly reduce the number of visas for US military trainers. "We remain committed to helping Pakistan build its capabilities, but we have communicated to Pakistani officials on numerous occasions that we require certain support in order to provide certain assistance," a senior US official told The Associated Press. The official was not authorized to discuss the issue publicly and spoke only on condition of anonymity.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recently told senators that "when it comes to our military aid, we are not prepared to continue providing that at the pace we were providing it unless we see certain steps taken."

California Rep. Howard Berman, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said Sunday that he agreed with the administration's decision. "I have repeatedly expressed concern over sending assistance to Pakistan's military as elements of it actively undermine the country's democratically elected government and institutions, and I'm relieved the Pentagon shares my concerns," Berman said.

Pakistan army spokesman Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas declined comment on the suspension. He pointed to comments by Army Chief Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, who last month said US military aid should be diverted to civilian projects.

Hasan-Askari Rizvi, a Pakistani political and defense analyst, said the US decision to suspend aid is an attempt to increase pressure on Pakistan, but he believes it will suffer."

But Abbas, the Pakistani military spokesman, said the loss of aid would have no effect on military operations. "In the past, we have not been dependent on any external support for these operations, and they will continue," Abbas said.

Perkovich, the Carnegie Endowment expert, called the suspension of US aid "overdue."

"We've been trying for years to get, persuade, push the Pakistani army to conduct military operations on their border with Afghanistan, especially in North Waziristan, and they've said it's not in their interest, that they're overstretched already," Perkovich said in a telephone interview from Paris. "I think it's smart to say, 'We hear you.' ... If the army doesn't want the support, we hear them and we'll withdraw the support."

Perkovich said if billions in US financial aid didn't change the behavior of the Pakistan military, then withdrawing it probably wouldn't either. The shift in the administration's policy was prompted by recent tensions, he said. But it also grew out of the US decision to begin withdrawing troops from Afghanistan.

"That decision to withdraw from Afghanistan finally enables us to focus on Pakistan, and basically confront the reality that Pakistan's the bigger problem," he said.

Perkovich said he doesn't think Pakistan will shift its policies in order to restore US military aid. But he said the suspension could have some positive effect in the long run, by forcing Pakistan to take a hard look at the dominant role the security services play in Pakistan.

"Internally in Pakistan, there's going to be a muchStates and Pakistan must be made "to work over time," but until it does, "we'll hold back some of the money that the American taxpayers are committed to give" to the country's powerful military forces.

The suspension of US aid, first reported by The New York Times, followed a statement last week by Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, that Pakistan's security services may have sanctioned the killing of Pakistani journalist Saleem Shahzad, who wrote about infiltration of the military by extremists. His battered body was found in June.

The allegation was rejected by Pakistan's powerful military establishment, including the Inter-Services Iew leader, Ayman al-Zawahri.

"We have to continue to emphasize with the Pakistanis that in the end it's in their interest to be able to go after these targets as well," Panetta said. "And in the discussions I've had with them, I have to say that, you know, they're giving us cooperation in going after some of these targets. We've got to continue to push them to do that. That's key."

The US has long been unhappy with Pakistan's evident lack of enthusiasm for carrying the fight against terrorists to its tribal areas, as well as its covert support for the Taliban and anti-Indian extremist groups.

But tensions ratcheted up in January, when CIA security contractsuspension came in response to the Pakistani army's decision to significantly reduce the number of visas for US military trainers. "We remain committed to helping Pakistan build its capabilities, but we have communicated to Pakistani officials on numerous occasions that we require certain support in order to provide certain assistance," a senior US official told The Associated Press. The official was not authorized to discuss the issue publicly and spoke only on condition of anonymity.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recently told senators that "when it comes to our military aid, we are not prepared to continue providing that at the pace we were providing it unless we see certain steps taken."

California Rep. Howard Berman, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said Sunday that he agreed with the administration's decision. "I have repeatedly expressed concern over sending assistance to Pakistan's military as elements of it actively undermine the country's democratically elected government and institutions, and I'm relieved the Pentagon shares my concerns," Berman said.

Pakistan army spokesman Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas declined comment on the suspension. He pointed to comments by Army Chief Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, who last month said US military aid should be diverted to civilian projects.

Hasan-Askari Rizvi, a Pakistani political and defense analyst, said the US decision to suspend aid is an attempt to increase pressure on Pakistan, but he believes it could hurt both sides.

"The Pakistani military has been the major supporter of the US in the region because it needed weapons and money," said Rizvi. "Now, when the US builds pressure on the military, it will lose that support."

Rivzi said the move could make it harder for the US to push the Taliban into peace talks, in preparation for its withdrawal from Afghanistan. At the same time, he said, the Pakistani military relies on US aid in its fight against militant groups.

"This kind of public denunciation needs to stop, and they need to talk," Rivzi said. "They shouldn't go to the brink because both will suffer."



Link

 

[53fd]

Experts: US aid `snub' to Pakistan blow to America:

ISLAMABAD — The decision to suspend more than one-third of American military aid to Pakistan could end up hurting Washington more than Islamabad as the U.S. seeks to navigate an end to the Afghan war and defeat al-Qaida, former Pakistani officials and analysts warned Monday.
Holding back the $800 million in aid is unlikely to pressure Pakistan to increase cooperation with the U.S. and could strengthen those in the government who argue that Washington is a fickle ally who can't be trusted, they said.

"If you still need the relationship, which clearly the United States does, then it really doesn't make sense to take action at this time because it leaves the United States with less, not more, influence with the Pakistani military," said Maleeha Lodhi, a former Pakistani ambassador to the U.S. "Cooperation cannot be coerced by punitive actions."

Despite billions of dollars in American aid since the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, the relationship has long been tense because of Pakistan's reluctance to target Taliban militants on its territory who stage cross-border attacks against NATO troops in Afghanistan.

The relationship took a nose dive on May 2 when U.S. commandos staged a covert raid to kill al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden in a Pakistani garrison town not far from Islamabad. The raid humiliated the Pakistani military, which ordered U.S. trainers out of the country and reduced bilateral cooperation.

President Barack Obama's chief of staff, William Daley, said Sunday that the U.S. was suspending $800 million in aid to the Pakistani military until the two countries can patch up their relationship.

But Tariq Fatemi, another former Pakistani ambassador to the U.S., said he thought the American strategy to pressure Pakistan was destined for failure.
"I think it is unwise to expect the Pakistanis to buckle under what is a publicly delivered snub," said Fatemi. "It will strengthen those elements in the armed forces that have always had grave misgivings of the relationship with the United States."

Many Pakistanis have never forgiven the U.S. for slapping sanctions on the country in 1990 because of its work to develop a nuclear weapon. The decision came only a year after Pakistan and the U.S. were successful in a decade-long quest to drive the Soviets out of Afghanistan.

The sanctions left many Pakistanis with a sense that the U.S. was only interested in a "transactional" relationship that it could abandon once its interests were served.

Fatemi, the former ambassador, said the U.S. decision appeared to undercut claims by Obama administration officials that the U.S. was interested in a long-term relationship that encompassed much more than counterterrorism cooperation.

Pakistan army spokesman Maj. Gen. Abbas said Sunday that the military had received no official notice from the U.S. that aid was being suspended. He also said that the loss of aid would have no effect on military operations against Islamist militants in the country because they were being conducted with Pakistan's own resources.

"I think it hurts Washington more than it hurts Islamabad," said Lodhi, the former ambassador. "Assistance is influence, and when you withhold it or suspend it, you deprive yourself of influence."

Pakistan army chief Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani seemed to pre-empt the effect of the aid cut in a speech after the bin Laden raid - saying all U.S. military assistance now should be diverted to improve the country's economy and help common Pakistanis.

"They want to end any impression that they are some kind of hired help," said Lodhi.

Some analysts have predicted that the suspension of military aid could hurt the military's war against the Pakistani Taliban over the long run, especially since the country is suffering an economic slump.

But Ayesha Siddiqa, a Pakistani defense analyst, said that Pakistan's close relationship with China could offset the impact. Pakistan has long purchased military equipment and missiles from China at lower-cost rates and bought fighter aircraft from the country last year, she said.

The Pakistani military is "trying to go the Chinese way," said Siddiqa.

It is unclear what other actions Pakistan will take in response to the suspension of U.S. military aid. It could be less helpful in targeting al-Qaida fighters within the country and in pushing Afghan Taliban militants with whom it has historical ties to negotiate an end to the Afghan war.

Pakistan is also believed to secretly support U.S. drone strikes against militants in the country's mountainous tribal region. That support has been shaken in the wake of the bin Laden raid and could be further imperiled by the suspension of aid.

One of the most high-profile points of leverage that the Pakistanis have with the U.S. is the shipment of a large percentage of non-lethal supplies through the country to NATO troops in Afghanistan. Pakistan temporarily closed the border to NATO supplies last year after an accidental U.S. helicopter strike killed two Pakistani troops. It is unclear if the suspension of aid could provoke a similar response.

"When you take this kind of action, you reinforce the transactional nature of the relationship," said Lodhi. "The moment you do that all bets are off because the response will not be a very positive one."

But Lodhi also noted that Pakistan and the U.S. do share common interests in combatting terrorism and fostering a stable Afghanistan - even if the details don't always match up.

"The common interest is there, but the question is can we walk back from the brink and find common ground to rebuild trust step by step?"

Experts: US aid `snub' to Pakistan blow to America - World - TheState.com

 

[Mani2020]

lol i knew it, its going to happen soon , so called trust worthy americans did it again. where those promises are gone when they were assuring us that they did mistakes in the past and they are not going to repeat it by leaving Pakistan alone or by stopping aid programs haha typical US frndshp. our stupid democrats and and Generals will still not learn

US is not frnd of anyone they are jst frnds of themselves and their own benefits, they will use you in name of frndshp and then will back-stab you when the purpose is fulfilled and then they are done with you but our politicians will not learn it even if the are going to get stick 1000 times

 

[T-Rex]

The New York Times is reporting that the Obama administration is upset with Pakistan for expelling American military trainers and wants tougher action against the Taliban and others fighting American soldiers in Afghanistan.

Report: US could suspend hundreds of millions in aid unless Pakistan fights militants tougher - The Washington Post

The Washington Post.

The same report also says that the PA has requested to divert all military aid to the civillian sector. That is a very significant step for the PA. The implication of this step is profound.

 

[53fd]

The same report also says that the PA has requested to divert all military aid to the civillian sector. That is a very significant step for the PA. The implication of this step is profound.

Yes, it means that the civilian sector will get much more funds for developing the country, which is needed badly. Could be a masterstroke by the Army.

 

[Vibs]

Yes, it means that the civilian sector will get much more funds for developing the country, which is needed badly. Could be a masterstroke by the Army.

If true could be good for Pakistan. High time to reshape the economy and build a better society.