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

[mirage 5000]

US cuts military aid, Pak says don't need your money



Updated: July 11, 2011 09:49 IST




Islamabad: Pakistan has hit back at the US for suspending military aid to Pakistan. In a statement, DG, Inter-Services Public Relations, told Pakistan media, "Pak does not need foreign aid for anti-terror operations. We conducted SWAT and Waziristan operations without any aid."

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

This comes a day after the US decided cut backits military aid to Pakistan following Islamabad's request for a "significant cutback" of American military trainers on its soil. (Read: US to suspend millions in aid to the Pakistani military)

"A series of events over the last eight months have affected our bilateral relations. As a result, the Pakistan Army has requested a 'significant cutback' of US military trainers, and limited our ability to obtain visas," Pentagon spokesman Col Dave Lapan said.


"While the Pakistani military leadership tells us this is a temporary step, the reduced presence of our trainers and other personnel means we can't deliver the assistance that requires training and support to be effective," Lapan said.

He, however, refrained from discussing any specific figure of aid suspension to Pakistan.

The White House Chief of Staff, Tom Donilon, however, confirmed that the figure was indeed US $800 million as reported by The New York Times.








Read more at: US cuts military aid, Pak says don't need your money

 

[VCheng]

On what basis is your confidence? You and I live in the U.S., but to TaimiKhan, who lives in Pakistan itself, current politicians are in the game only for themselves and barriers to entry in Pakistani politics are very high. link

I have learned this confidence from PDF.

Really, it is very easy to ignore all tangible evidence and logical thought, and just hope and pray for miraculous success. After all, USA did not become a superpower through generations of hard work, now did it?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Agreed. I am sure it will happen soon InshaAllah.

Whether the US gives aid or not, the underlying issues of poor governance, weak institutions and apathy from the electorate during the elections, will continue.

Better to cut the artificial 'safety net' of 'revenues from aid', and let Pakistanis figure out what they need to do to fix the structural problems in the country.

 

[American Pakistani]

Thats not the Aid US is paying us for using Pakistan's land for NATOs supply. If US is not paying us the compansation we should immediately stop supply route of NATO like Pakistan did a couple of months back.

But that will be called aid, as US had suspend/cut it, Pakistan must use it's brain & impliment heavy tax(that could create around 5billion$ yearly) on these NATO convoys & supplies. It will be win-win situation for Pakistan as Pakistan got indepandance from foriegn control(after aid cut) & also Pakistan will generate money honourably. But there should be brain, i doubt these corrupt zardari will act because his aid is not stop.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I have learned this confidence from PDF.

Really, it is very easy to ignore all tangible evidence and logical thought, and just hope and pray for miraculous success. After all, USA did not become a superpower through generations of hard work, now did it?

And continuing to receive aid resolve the underlying structural issues how?

You can be flippant about it, but I don't think anyone here has argued for some sort of 'miraculous' recovery for Pakistan after the end of US aid - however, if ending US aid results in an end to US influence over Pakistan's foreign policy, and increased support for the military, then I believe that strengthens the hands of the Military in both fighting against internal threats and external threats.

 

[VCheng]

Whether the US gives aid or not, the underlying issues of poor governance, weak institutions and apathy from the electorate during the elections, will continue.

Better to cut the artificial 'safety net' of 'revenues from aid', and let Pakistanis figure out what they need to do to fix the structural problems in the country.

I agree with you here, specially the bolded part above. I am very optimistic that InshaAllah lots of Pakistanis are about to rise up and begin fixing all these issues in short order.

 

[VCheng]

And continuing to receive aid resolve the underlying structural issues how?

You can be flippant about it, but I don't think anyone here has argued for some sort of 'miraculous' recovery for Pakistan after the end of US aid - however, if ending US aid results in an end to US influence over Pakistan's foreign policy, and increased support for the military, then I believe that strengthens the hands of the Military in both fighting against internal threats and external threats.

Oh I am not flippant about my change of thought processes. I am curious about your use of that critical "if" in the sentence above. I thought you were convinced that ending US aid results WILL in an end to US influence over Pakistan's foreign policy, and WILL increase support for the military.

Could you please clarify that for me?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I am very optimistic that InshaAllah lots of Pakistanis are about to rise up and begin fixing all these issues in short order.

Not sure about 'short order', under the current system, perhaps a couple of election cycles.

Imran Khan's election, unlikely given the parliamentary form of government we have, in the coming elections, may result in some improvement in governance - we'll have to wait and see.

 

[VCheng]

Not sure about 'short order', under the current system, perhaps a couple of election cycles.

Imran Khan's election, unlikely given the parliamentary form of government we have, in the coming elections, may result in some improvement in governance - we'll have to wait and see.

A couple of election cycles, given national history, would be quick and hence "short order".

I am waiting for the outcome of the next election in Pakistan eagerly for the reason you pointed out.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Oh I am not flippant about my change of thought processes. I am curious about your use of that critical "if" in the sentence above. I thought you were convinced that ending US aid results WILL in an end to US influence over Pakistan's foreign policy, and WILL increase support for the military.

Could you please clarify that for me?

'If' - since the military has made clear that any significant change in foreign policy (such as shooting down drones, escalation in the relationship with the US) needs to come from parliament, in order for the country to provide a unified front in coping with the results of such changes in foreign policy.

The 'if' then comes into play since the US has not indicated a 'suspension/end' to civilian aid, which means the pockets of Zardari and Co. are still being lined by the US, and therefore they will have little incentive to change Pakistan's foreign policy. IMO, we will have to wait for a change in government to see those changes, and I don't consider the Nawaz Sharif led PML-N as significantly different from the Zardari led PPP when it comes to foreign policy towards the US.

NS did after all go begging to the US during Kargil, and retains a strong anti-military bias. On top of all that he is also sympathetic to extremists, and the PML-N has not done much better at governing Punjab than the PPP in Sindh or at the Center, so his/PML-N election into power may be a 'lose lose' from all perspectives.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

A couple of election cycles, given national history, would be quick and hence "short order".

I am waiting for the outcome of the next election in Pakistan eagerly for the reason you pointed out.

Very little to suggest that the current PPP government will not complete its term.

There is no viable political alternative to the PPP at the moment, given that Nawas Sharif led PML-N will probably do even worse.

 

[Mo12]

Who knows, USA may announce next week, they will give Pakistan the aid, and this thread will be obsolete.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

If handled properly, the suspension of US Military aid (and continuation of US Civilian aid), coupled with the Pakistani Military's rhetoric on 'diverting the aid to the civilian side' and 'The Military does not need US aid' will end up strengthening the Pakistani Military and the military leadership, which will significantly damage the attempts by the US Establishment to weaken the Pakistani military through its propaganda and policies maligning the military.

 

[VCheng]

'If' - since the military has made clear that any significant change in foreign policy (such as shooting down drones, escalation in the relationship with the US) needs to come from parliament, in order for the country to provide a unified front in coping with the results of such changes in foreign policy.

It is excellent to hear that the military has stopped dictating foreign policy. Have they really?

The 'if' then comes into play since the US has not indicated a 'suspension/end' to civilian aid, which means the pockets of Zardari and Co. are still being lined by the US, and therefore they will have little incentive to change Pakistan's foreign policy. IMO, we will have to wait for a change in government to see those changes, and I don't consider the Nawaz Sharif led PML-N as significantly different from the Zardari led PPP when it comes to foreign policy towards the US.

So either large political party will continue to undermine the military at US's behest? That would be a strong argument to temporarily suspend the political process to protect Pakistan, similar to several previous instances, no?

NS did after all go begging to the US during Kargil, and retains a strong anti-military bias. On top of all that he is also sympathetic to extremists, and the PML-N has not done much better at governing Punjab than the PPP in Sindh or at the Center, so his/PML-N election into power may be a 'lose lose' from all perspectives.

The results of the elections are always up to the people in Pakistan, but may be some suitable "encouragement" to protect the greater national interests will help.

Very little to suggest that the current PPP government will not complete its term.

There is no viable political alternative to the PPP at the moment, given that Nawas Sharif led PML-N will probably do even worse.

There is still some time for the people to make up their minds as to whether they want to re-elect a government with a economic record as that over its first term. May be another option such as the PTI may storm the elections in a wave of popular uprising.

If handled properly, the suspension of US Military aid (and continuation of US Civilian aid), coupled with the Pakistani Military's rhetoric on 'diverting the aid to the civilian side' and 'The Military does not need US aid' will end up strengthening the Pakistani Military and the military leadership, which will significantly damage the attempts by the US Establishment to weaken the Pakistani military through its propaganda and policies maligning the military.

I don't understand this point, given that above you also indicate that both PPP and PML(N) are likely to pursue policies that are not favorable to the military. Diverting more funds to line the politician's pockets will, in your own words above, " .....and therefore they will have little incentive to change Pakistan's foreign policy" so i am not how the military's rhetoric to encourage such diversion will help. Unless, you mean between the lines that is is only "rhetoric" meant for public consumption and nothing substantive.

I think I will request another explanation of what you mean by "If handled properly...". Who, the US or Pakistan handling the suspension properly? What would that mean in terms of concrete steps by one, or the other, or both sides?

 

[Tinu]

The best thing that happened after post Soviet withdrawal American impositions of sanctions on Pakistan was efforts by Pak Army in Self Sustenance and generation of alternative support. In addition to institutional efforts by Pak Army, Chinese also readily came forward and helped Pakistan in this regard. At this stage the Americans think that by pressurizing the Army in Pakistan they will be able to attain their objectives - they'd not be able to do that. Earlier experience of Pak Army and Gov't of Pakistan would come in handy and they would be able to sustain this American Betrayal as well.

The Americans think that they can buy many Pakistanis most of the time, but they would certainly not be able to purchase all Pakistanis all the time. This is not that time and our national interests would not become subservient to dollar paying foreigners. The Americans would have to compromise and moderate their interests and come to term with our interests as well.