US tells Delhi to back off Pakistan and lay low in Afghanistan

[Neo]

Washington wants to concentrate and does not want any distractions from it focus on Afghanistan. Everything else is a distraction. Delhi’s bickering is more than a distraction, it is a nuisance. Washington wants it stopped.Why the US gave up India as a Strategic partner? The answer to this complex question can be summed up in a Clintonian cliche “its the economy stupid”. The Obama Administration has taken a page out of the Nixon playbook–build a relationship with China at the expense of India.

The Bush administration had tried to build up India as a counterweight to China with a strategic partnership with India “as a natural ally”. This report in the New York Times is a poignant reminder of where the world of US-China relationship is headed. One never thought that we would see a US Secretary of State in Beijing literally begging the Chinese for “loans” (actually buying Treasury bonds). Its a new world–let the begging and groveling begin.

US tells Delhi to back off Pakistan and lay low in Afghanistan ​

24 March, 2009

WASHINGTON (AFP) — The United States called Monday on India to support rival Pakistan in rooting out extremism as Washington drafts a new “war on terror” strategy in South Asia.

Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg also said the United States backed a global role for India and hailed New Delhi’s reconstruction assistance in Afghanistan, the source of unease in mutual neighbor Pakistan.

Steinberg delivered the first substantive remarks on India by President Barack Obama’s administration which is expected this week to unveil a new strategy on fighting Islamic extremists in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

“I think it will be important for India to make clear that as Pakistan takes steps to deal with extremists on its own territory that India will be supportive of that,” Steinberg said at the Brookings Institution.

He said India should “look for ways to contribute to an overall environment which can then lead to further efforts to root out extremists.

“There is obviously a complex history between the two countries but we will encourage India to see that it has a big stake in the efforts that we will be advocating to work both with Afghanistan and Pakistan,” he said.

He did not go into specifics, but the US Defense Department has said that the Pakistan, suspicious of New Delhi, was sending troops to the Indian border that would be better used fighting extremists in areas bordering Afghanistan.

Tensions between India and Pakistan shot up after Islamic militants went on a bloody three-day rampage in Mumbai in November, killing 165 people. Pakistan has conceded the attacks were partly planned by extremists on its soil.

India and Pakistan, which both are nuclear armed, have fought three full-fledged wars since their separation at birth on independence from Britain in 1947. AFP. US asks India to support Pakistan on extremists.

The relationship between the “worlds largest democracies” has been sacrificed once again for the sake of the almighty Dollar and the other small irritant in West Asia–aka “defeat in Afghanistan”. India finds itself on the wrong side of history once again. For the first half century of its existence Bharat supported the Evil Empire.

Then in the 80s when the USSR imploded and Yogoslavia imploded, the Indian policy makers worked overtime to come up with a strategy of survival on this third planet from the sun. Egged on by a Democratic Congress, Mr. Clinton encouraged India to explode a nuclear device.

The Pokran explosions had a affect on India like the world has never seen. It allowed the youthful nation to being thinking big–beyond the confines of reality and beyond the realm of imagination. Within a decade of meager growth, Indian had not only proclaimed themselves a Superpower, but also convinced themselves of the death of Pakistan, the subservience of Bangladesh, the destruction of Lanka and the erosion of Nepal as a political entity.

In this dream world, Bollywood stopped filming movies in India and brought world capitals, skyscrapers and modern amenities into the theatres and homes of ordinary Indians.

Pretty soon a fog enveloped the nation–they actually started believing the Bollywood baloney and got swollen heads. Like the Michelins man full of air, the Superpower began to think of its borders beyond Uzbekistan and its Navy beyond the Pacific and Atlantic.

 

[afriend]

Washington wants to concentrate and does not want any distractions from it focus on Afghanistan. Everything else is a distraction. Delhi’s bickering is more than a distraction, it is a nuisance. Washington wants it stopped.Why the US gave up India as a Strategic partner? The answer to this complex question can be summed up in a Clintonian cliche “its the economy stupid”. The Obama Administration has taken a page out of the Nixon playbook–build a relationship with China at the expense of India.

The Bush administration had tried to build up India as a counterweight to China with a strategic partnership with India “as a natural ally”. This report in the New York Times is a poignant reminder of where the world of US-China relationship is headed. One never thought that we would see a US Secretary of State in Beijing literally begging the Chinese for “loans” (actually buying Treasury bonds). Its a new world–let the begging and groveling begin.

US tells Delhi to back off Pakistan and lay low in Afghanistan ​

24 March, 2009

WASHINGTON (AFP) — The United States called Monday on India to support rival Pakistan in rooting out extremism as Washington drafts a new “war on terror” strategy in South Asia.

Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg also said the United States backed a global role for India and hailed New Delhi’s reconstruction assistance in Afghanistan, the source of unease in mutual neighbor Pakistan.

Steinberg delivered the first substantive remarks on India by President Barack Obama’s administration which is expected this week to unveil a new strategy on fighting Islamic extremists in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

“I think it will be important for India to make clear that as Pakistan takes steps to deal with extremists on its own territory that India will be supportive of that,” Steinberg said at the Brookings Institution.

He said India should “look for ways to contribute to an overall environment which can then lead to further efforts to root out extremists.

“There is obviously a complex history between the two countries but we will encourage India to see that it has a big stake in the efforts that we will be advocating to work both with Afghanistan and Pakistan,” he said.

He did not go into specifics, but the US Defense Department has said that the Pakistan, suspicious of New Delhi, was sending troops to the Indian border that would be better used fighting extremists in areas bordering Afghanistan.

Tensions between India and Pakistan shot up after Islamic militants went on a bloody three-day rampage in Mumbai in November, killing 165 people. Pakistan has conceded the attacks were partly planned by extremists on its soil.

India and Pakistan, which both are nuclear armed, have fought three full-fledged wars since their separation at birth on independence from Britain in 1947. AFP. US asks India to support Pakistan on extremists.

The relationship between the “worlds largest democracies” has been sacrificed once again for the sake of the almighty Dollar and the other small irritant in West Asia–aka “defeat in Afghanistan”. India finds itself on the wrong side of history once again. For the first half century of its existence Bharat supported the Evil Empire.

Then in the 80s when the USSR imploded and Yogoslavia imploded, the Indian policy makers worked overtime to come up with a strategy of survival on this third planet from the sun. Egged on by a Democratic Congress, Mr. Clinton encouraged India to explode a nuclear device.

The Pokran explosions had a affect on India like the world has never seen. It allowed the youthful nation to being thinking big–beyond the confines of reality and beyond the realm of imagination. Within a decade of meager growth, Indian had not only proclaimed themselves a Superpower, but also convinced themselves of the death of Pakistan, the subservience of Bangladesh, the destruction of Lanka and the erosion of Nepal as a political entity.

In this dream world, Bollywood stopped filming movies in India and brought world capitals, skyscrapers and modern amenities into the theatres and homes of ordinary Indians.

Pretty soon a fog enveloped the nation–they actually started believing the Bollywood baloney and got swollen heads. Like the Michelins man full of air, the Superpower began to think of its borders beyond Uzbekistan and its Navy beyond the Pacific and Atlantic.

Neo, could you please provide the source...!!!!

The below just changed the tone of the article from a neutral view to a biased one. Not good enough.

The Pokran explosions had a affect on India like the world has never seen. It allowed the youthful nation to being thinking big–beyond the confines of reality and beyond the realm of imagination. Within a decade of meager growth, Indian had not only proclaimed themselves a Superpower, but also convinced themselves of the death of Pakistan, the subservience of Bangladesh, the destruction of Lanka and the erosion of Nepal as a political entity.

In this dream world, Bollywood stopped filming movies in India and brought world capitals, skyscrapers and modern amenities into the theatres and homes of ordinary Indians.

Pretty soon a fog enveloped the nation–they actually started believing the Bollywood baloney and got swollen heads. Like the Michelins man full of air, the Superpower began to think of its borders beyond Uzbekistan and its Navy beyond the Pacific and Atlantic.

But it seems that Pakistan is succeeding in convincing US that india is supporting pakistani militants... Or is it that US is issuing statements just to satisfy pakistan... Lets wait and watch..!!!

 

[godsavetheworld]

I think you should demarcate in the news story which are your views and which actually form the part of the news article.

Here is the news article in the original form.

Both the title and the latter part of the article are self created.

 

[Neo]

Both the title and the latter part of the article are self created.

I quoted from "TheCurrentAffairs.Com - Delivers The Latest News And Information" without altering the title.

 

[Neo]

US asks India to support Pakistan on extremists​

Mon Mar 23

WASHINGTON (AFP) – The United States called Monday on India to support rival Pakistan in rooting out extremism as Washington drafts a new "war on terror" strategy in South Asia.

Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg also said the United States backed a global role for India and hailed New Delhi's reconstruction assistance in Afghanistan, the source of unease in mutual neighbor Pakistan.

Steinberg delivered the first substantive remarks on India by President Barack Obama's administration which is expected this week to unveil a new strategy on fighting Islamic extremists in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

"I think it will be important for India to make clear that as Pakistan takes steps to deal with extremists on its own territory that India will be supportive of that," Steinberg said at the Brookings Institution.

He said India should "look for ways to contribute to an overall environment which can then lead to further efforts to root out extremists.

"There is obviously a complex history between the two countries but we will encourage India to see that it has a big stake in the efforts that we will be advocating to work both with Afghanistan and Pakistan," he said.

He did not go into specifics, but the US Defense Department has said that the Pakistan, suspicious of New Delhi, was sending troops to the Indian border that would be better used fighting extremists in areas bordering Afghanistan.

Tensions between India and Pakistan shot up after Islamic militants went on a bloody three-day rampage in Mumbai in November, killing 165 people. Pakistan has conceded the attacks were partly planned by extremists on its soil.

India and Pakistan, which both are nuclear armed, have fought three full-fledged wars since their separation at birth on independence from Britain in 1947.

 

[Neo]

U.S. plans to boost civilian aid to Pakistan​

The assistance would rise to $1.5 billion or more as part of a new Afghanistan strategy aimed at curbing support for insurgents.​

By Julian E. Barnes and Paul Richter
March 23, 2009

Reporting from Washington -- The Obama administration plans to dramatically increase civilian aid to Pakistan as part of its new strategy on Afghanistan and the surrounding region, hoping the overture will lead to more effective steps by the Pakistani military to shut down insurgent sanctuaries, U.S. officials said.

A threefold increase in civilian aid would come on top of more than $10 billion in mostly military assistance since 2001. In addition to the aid, the administration will seek similar contributions from other nations, the officials said, describing the conclusions of a strategy review on condition of anonymity because it has not been made public.

The administration is expected this week to unveil the new strategy on Afghanistan, where commanders have said that 70,000 U.S. and NATO troops are unable to prevent Taliban fighters and other extremists from expanding their influence.

Top administration aides have briefed European counterparts on the strategy, and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton will attend an international conference on the war next week in the Netherlands. President Obama, who will soon meet with NATO allies, has sketched a new approach that lowers U.S. objectives and fixes an exit strategy.

The focus on Pakistan in the administration's new strategy reflects both frustration over years of cross-border attacks against U.S. and allied forces in Afghanistan and the view that extremism, violence and instability have roots across the region.

It also underscores concerns among U.S. and allied officials about the stability of the government in Islamabad, the Pakistani capital. Clinton and other U.S. officials brokered a compromise this month to defuse a political standoff over the country's judiciary, but they remain fearful that the country is deeply unstable.

Under the plan, the administration would boost Pakistani civilian aid to $1.5 billion a year or more, a move first proposed by Vice President Joe Biden when he was chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

In addition, the administration will seek major increases from China, Saudi Arabia and other Arab states in the Persian Gulf, according to an administration official.

A dramatic boost in aid could help stabilize the civilian government and improve governance, the justice system and, importantly, schools, the officials said.

Officials also believe an increase in civilian aid will help the administration gain greater influence over the Pakistani military and its operations against Al Qaeda and the Taliban in the border areas. The country's military now views any American threat to cut off military aid as empty, because the U.S. is so dependent on cooperation from Islamabad, officials said.

"All our military aid right now is unleveraged," said a government official. "Right now the Pakistan military thinks any threat to withdraw aid is a bluff."

Significant amounts of nonmilitary aid could encourage pro-Western public sentiment and increase pressure on the Pakistani military to act rather than risk a public backlash over the possible loss of the civilian aid, administration officials believe.

Besides sending aid to Pakistan, officials have said they will use the 17,000 new U.S. troops being sent to Afghanistan to undermine extremist leaders by strengthening local groups and district governments, and will expand the Afghan armed forces.

Some analysts doubt that enlarging the flow of U.S. aid would overcome deeply rooted anti-Americanism in Pakistan, but they agreed that a different approach is needed.

The new money might strengthen American influence with the Pakistani armed forces but is unlikely to curtail the military's focus on rival India, said Arif Rafiq of the New York-based Pakistan Policy Blog. Because of that, the new aid "is not a game changer in itself," he said.

Nonetheless, the West must find ways to encourage the Pakistani public to become enthusiastic about government action against extremists.

"Yes, we need to make the money flow, but it is not as if our money is the deciding factor," said Frederick Barton, a scholar at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "What is really deciding is: Do we have relationships beyond the military? Are we showing we are in touch with what the Pakistani people need and want?"

 

[godsavetheworld]

US asks India to support Pakistan on extremists​

Mon Mar 23

WASHINGTON (AFP) – The United States called Monday on India to support rival Pakistan in rooting out extremism as Washington drafts a new "war on terror" strategy in South Asia.

Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg also said the United States backed a global role for India and hailed New Delhi's reconstruction assistance in Afghanistan, the source of unease in mutual neighbor Pakistan.

Steinberg delivered the first substantive remarks on India by President Barack Obama's administration which is expected this week to unveil a new strategy on fighting Islamic extremists in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

"I think it will be important for India to make clear that as Pakistan takes steps to deal with extremists on its own territory that India will be supportive of that," Steinberg said at the Brookings Institution.

He said India should "look for ways to contribute to an overall environment which can then lead to further efforts to root out extremists.

"There is obviously a complex history between the two countries but we will encourage India to see that it has a big stake in the efforts that we will be advocating to work both with Afghanistan and Pakistan," he said.

He did not go into specifics, but the US Defense Department has said that the Pakistan, suspicious of New Delhi, was sending troops to the Indian border that would be better used fighting extremists in areas bordering Afghanistan.

Tensions between India and Pakistan shot up after Islamic militants went on a bloody three-day rampage in Mumbai in November, killing 165 people. Pakistan has conceded the attacks were partly planned by extremists on its soil.

India and Pakistan, which both are nuclear armed, have fought three full-fledged wars since their separation at birth on independence from Britain in 1947.

So much different from the first article you posted.

 

[Bull]

The title says 'India being told to lay low in Afghanistan' but that is not seen nowwhere in the article.

 

[godsavetheworld]

The title says 'India being told to lay low in Afghanistan' but that is not seen nowwhere in the article.

On the contrary, the article says that US appreciates India's role in Afghanistan.

Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg also said the United States backed a global role for India and hailed New Delhi's reconstruction assistance in Afghanistan, the source of unease in mutual neighbor Pakistan.

 

[Neo]

The title says 'India being told to lay low in Afghanistan' but that is not seen nowwhere in the article.

Agreed on that.

Btw, what do you make of "US asks India to support Pakistan on extremists".
From our point of view it means that India has to back off from Balochistan and halt clandestine RAW/DIA activities.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I think the key part in the US message is this:

"The United States called Monday on India to support rival Pakistan in rooting out extremism as Washington drafts a new “war on terror” strategy in South Asia.

"I think it will be important for India to make clear that as Pakistan takes steps to deal with extremists on its own territory that India will be supportive of that,""

Perhaps the US believes India is not being supportive of Pakistani efforts, and perhaps deliberately hindering them as well, otherwise there would be no point in making the above statement.

Others might interpret it differently, but that was the impression I got from reading it.

Whatever the reason, its an important point to make - the histrionics from the Indian side post Mumbai have been nothing but unhelpful.

 

[Bull]

Agreed on that.

Btw, what do you make of "US asks India to support Pakistan on extremists".
From our point of view it means that India has to back off from Balochistan and halt clandestine RAW/DIA activities.

Baluchistan is a non issue as far as Pakistan is concerned. Most of the unrest comes from NWFp of which Baluchistan is not a part (?).

What US expects of India is lowering the guard on our westernborders and thus releasing PA to concentrate on the east.

Obama administration blew the lid away of a well thought out plan to solve kashmir and thus have a 100% committed PA to tackle taliban and other extremism.

And at present the trust is low between both nations especially from the Indian side. You admin can flipflop depending on who has the political cards in I'bad.

 

[nitesh]

Perhaps the US believes India is not being supportive of Pakistani efforts, and perhaps deliberately hindering them as well, otherwise there would be no point in making the above statement.

Others might interpret it differently, but that was the impression I got from reading it.

Whatever the reason, its an important point to make - the histrionics from the Indian side post Mumbai have been nothing but unhelpful.

AM boss,

Would like to know how exactly India sjould "help". And please don't start the Balochistan here. the problem is Taliban.

And please explain how exactly India should have "helped" after 26/11.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Baluchistan is a non issue as far as Pakistan is concerned. Most of the unrest comes from NWFp of which Baluchistan is not a part (?).

What US expects of India is lowering the guard on our westernborders and thus releasing PA to concentrate on the east.

Obama administration blew the lid away of a well thought out plan to solve kashmir and thus have a 100% committed PA to tackle taliban and other extremism.

And at present the trust is low between both nations especially from the Indian side. You admin can flipflop depending on who has the political cards in I'bad.

I agree that the US would like to see a thaw in the East as a means of focusing PA efforts in the West, which would be to the advantage of everyone concerned, including India. Whether that comes to pass or not we shall see - the noise in India over the alleged suggestion of a redeployment away from the Pakistan border was not very positive.

On the Baluchistan issue, I think it is becoming an issue for the US NATO (see S-2's musings on this, with respect to a coming offensive in Helmand and districts bordering Baluchistan). If that Balochistan border is not sealed, we might see a repeat of Tora Bora, and another 'haven' set up on the Pakistani side in Baluchistan.

Reports out of the US have also indicated that the PREDATOR attacks may have also started pushing some elements into Baluchistan.

So Baluchistan is likely a potential future strategic area for the US to be concerned about for multiple reasons, least of all the fact that the PA/FC is distracted fighting a Baluch insurgency, instead of focusing on the Afghan-Pakistan border in Baluchistan.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

AM boss,

Would like to know how exactly India sjould "help". And please don't start the Balochistan here. the problem is Taliban.

And please explain how exactly India should have "helped" after 26/11.

Nitesh, surely you did not miss Chidambaram's allegation of having 'proof of Pakistani agencies involvement in Mumbai'.

That sort of rhetoric, 'all options on the table', refusal to engage with Pakistan until very late etc - all of that led to the current environment we see.

What should they have done? Issued official statements categorically refuting the speculation by the Indian media and various politicians of Pakistani institutional involvement, as Pakistan did after the attack on the Sri Lankan team. Engage with Pakistan on her offers of cooperation, joint investigation etc.

There was a lot that could have been done differently, and could still be done differently - the GoI continues to repeat the same, perhaps now because its election season.