What's new

US withdraws negotiators from Pakistan, no supply deal

U.S.-Pakistan Talks Hit Snag

By ADAM ENTOUS And SIOBHAN GORMAN

WASHINGTON—U.S. and Pakistani officials have held secret exploratory talks on a new counterterrorism partnership, but that initiative and others are held up by the impasse over an American apology for the deaths last year of 24 Pakistani troops, both countries said.

The dispute over an apology for the Nov. 26 deaths—which Pakistan has demanded but which the White House has refused to give—has widening implications. It is delaying a deal to reopen critical supply routes for U.S. and North Atlantic Treaty Organization troops in neighboring Afghanistan, U.S. and Pakistani officials say.

The dispute also makes reaching a deal on counterterrorism cooperation that much harder.

Senior U.S. officials in recent months have quietly sounded out their Pakistani counterparts about negotiating a broad accord intended to give Islamabad a greater role in what has largely been a unilateral U.S. drone campaign against Pakistan-based militants, participants in the preliminary talks say.

The proposals call for a joint military campaign against militants that would incorporate U.S. drones as well as Pakistani F-16s and ground forces, these officials say.

The Central Intelligence Agency, which pilots the hunter-killer drones in Pakistan, invited the new head of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency, Lt. Gen. Zaheerul Islam, to Washington last month to discuss counterterrorism cooperation, but the visit was postponed, reflecting the two countries' fraught relations.

A partnership with Pakistan on counterterrorism operations is critical, advocates say, to ensure that the U.S. can keep the pressure on al Qaeda and its allies as American and international forces gradually pull out of Afghanistan. Without a deal, they say, Pakistan could move to block CIA drone flights.

Islamabad has publicly called for the U.S. spy agency to halt all drone attacks on its territory but it hasn't taken any tangible steps to stop the flights.

The Pakistanis have in recent months grown so frustrated that they have explored options to counter the drones, including shooting them down and mounting a legal challenge to the program in the World Court as a violation of international law and of the United Nations Charter, say people familiar with the matter.


Senior U.S. and Pakistani officials acknowledge the difficulty of forging a real counterterrorism partnership given deep-seated Pakistani public opposition to U.S. drone operations.

Reflecting its frustration with Pakistan, the White House has authorized stepped-up CIA strikes in tribal areas bordering Afghanistan in recent weeks.

The hurdles to any deal are great, both sides acknowledge.

Vali Nasr, a former top Obama administration adviser on Pakistan, said the current U.S. strategy of "pressure, pressure and more pressure" is unlikely to lead to a "grand bargain" on the drone program and counterterrorism. "We can't even get out of the gate with an apology."

Moreover, officials say talks on a counterterrorism deal setting out the roles of U.S. and Pakistani forces would be complicated by disagreements between the countries over which militant groups should be targeted, officials say.

While U.S. officials believe Pakistan would consent to U.S. drone strikes targeting top al Qaeda leaders and Tehrik-e Taliban Pakistan, which is battling the Pakistani government, Islamabad has so far balked at strikes against the Haqqani network, which American officials say has long-standing ties to Pakistan's intelligence agency and is responsible for attacks against U.S. forces in Afghanistan.

To try to address Pakistanis' concerns that the drone strikes impinge on their sovereignty, U.S. officials have raised the possibility of a more collaborative approach under which U.S. drone operations could be conducted in concert with strikes from Pakistan's fleet of F-16s.

The U.S. would, in turn, share more intelligence with Pakistan to support operations by its air and ground forces, officials say. Intelligence sharing has been hampered in the past because of U.S. concerns that Pakistan will tip off wanted militants before the strikes take place.

The Obama administration has made clear that drone strikes will continue to target what remains of al Qaeda's network in the tribal areas of Pakistan, whether Islamabad agrees or not. But U.S. officials involved in the preliminary discussions believe the Pakistani government would be more receptive to cooperating if those operations were seen as part of a broader campaign supporting Pakistani forces. Officials said such a strategy could allow the Pakistanis to argue that the drone attacks aren't an affront to their sovereignty because they directly benefit Islamabad.

Advocates of such an arrangement acknowledge that reaching a deal may be a "long shot" in the near-term, but they want negotiations to begin.

U.S. officials said President Barack Obama was wary of apologizing to a country that continues to harbor militants. Such an apology at the height of a presidential campaign could expose him to criticism from Republicans.

The U.S. officials say they believe Pakistan postponed Lt. Gen. Zahir's visit to Washington because the government wants to settle other outstanding differences, including over the reopening of NATO supply routes into Afghanistan, before tackling thorny counter-terrorism issues, encompassing the drone program. The Pentagon said this week that it pulled U.S. negotiators.

Pakistan's ambassador to the U.S., Sherry Rehman, said the lack of an apology is holding up counterterrorism discussions. "We are committed to working with the international community to bring stability to the region, and this includes the U.S., of course," she said.

"The apology is holding up important discussions in many areas, including a broader conversation on counterterrorism cooperation. I hope we resume productive cooperation in many areas, but all of it will have to pass the test of transparency. Drone attacks need to cease, especially since most of al Qaeda has been destroyed, that too with our active cooperation."


A U.S. official said there "there's always room for discussion" with the Pakistanis on ways they can partner with the U.S. and "get more involved in the defense of their own country from terrorists." But the official said progress in this area tends to "happen incrementally" and that there were no active negotiations "when it comes to conducting the counterterrorism operations needed to protect the U.S. and its interests."

A Pakistani official said that a counterterrorism program using Islamabad's F-16s and the U.S.'s drones would only be acceptable if the Pakistanis were involved with the operations of both. The F-16s could be used in relatively unpopulated areas.

Among the proposals that were floated were a joint program run out of the Pakistani military's headquarters in Rawalpindi and a joint program run out of one of the border patrol outposts along Pakistan's border with Afghanistan, according to a person familiar with the discussions.


The Pakistani official said Lt. Gen. Zahir will visit the U.S. when his schedule allows, and that a visit is expected in the near future.

A U.S. official said: "The ball's in their court. We're ready to have him back."

Ripple EffectsFrayed U.S.-Pakistan ties continue to reverberate

May 2, 2011 U.S. raid kills Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad. No notice was given to Pakistan.

Nov. 26, 2011 U.S. airstrikes kill 24 Pakistani troops in strikes along the border along and between Afghanistan's Kunar Province and the Pakistani tribal area of Mohmand. Hours later, Pakistan closes the Afghan-Pakistan border crossing at Jamrud, in the Khyber tribal region near the city of Peshawar, to NATO supply convoys. It also closes the crossing at Chaman in Baluchistan province.

November Washington halts drone strikes in Pakistan's Federally Administered Tribal Areas, resuming them Jan. 10.

Dec. 11 Pakistan says U.S. completed pullout from air base in Shamsi, Pakistan, once used for drone operations. U.S. said it had curtailed use of the base months earlier.

U.S.-Pakistan Talks Hit Snag - WSJ.com
 
... They couldnt do anything over the last 6 months and wont be able to do much if Pakistan keeps the supply line shut...

They aren't doing anything stupid simply because they need our cooperation in Afghanistan. Once they decide to leave then it's going to be time for sanctions again. They'd done this when we were working on our nuclear program. When they didn't need our support they suddenly felt that our program is a threat to "world peace" and opted to put us under sanctions. The US and several other countries forgot why we had to develop the bomb in the first place.
 
U.S.-Pakistan Talks Hit Snag

By ADAM ENTOUS And SIOBHAN GORMAN

WASHINGTON—U.S. and Pakistani officials have held secret exploratory talks on a new counterterrorism partnership, but that initiative and others are held up by the impasse over an American apology for the deaths last year of 24 Pakistani troops, both countries said.

U.S.-Pakistan Talks Hit Snag - WSJ.com

few days before I argued to few people that Pakistan would be more willing to supply daily products to Taliban in Afghan as compare to maintaining supply line for NATO. as, its the Taliban who is going to win in Afghan not US? and Pakistan will have to live with Taliban not US :undecided:
 
Such rude comments from USA wont help...
They are no more the omnipotenrt power they used to be until recently and its time for them to step down from their high chair and treat people with respect...
They couldnt do anything over the last 6 months and wont be able to do much if Pakistan keeps the supply line shut...

Well, our operations in Afghanistan have not stopped or slowed down. Yes, its costing us more by about a billion dollars every year to keep our troops supplied, but that can be made up just by the additional business USA gets from India for keeping Pakistan at an arm's length. So really, while we want to save that billion dollars, and hence the multiple visits by our defense officials, its really not that much.
 
Well, our operations in Afghanistan have not stopped or slowed down. Yes, its costing us more by about a billion dollars every year to keep our troops supplied, but that can be made up just by the additional business USA gets from India for keeping Pakistan at an arm's length. So really, while we want to save that billion dollars, and hence the multiple visits by our defense officials, its really not that much.

your operations? dont you mean American operations?
do you think your Indian army will do a better job than the Americans if it takes over the "peace" duties.
the multiple visits by American defence officials must be negotiating the price with your Indian government.
 
from: Nato supply talks | DAWN.COM

Nato supply talks

Is this really a new low for US-Pakistan ties? Or simply the return home of a technical team that has done what it can, and must now wait for political decisions that are beyond its pay grade? The departure of American officials who spent six weeks in Pakistan trying to hammer out an agreement on the reopening of Nato supply routes has been positioned both ways in the domestic and western media, despite the fact that Pakistani and American officials have, in public and private conversations with various media outlets, insisted on the latter explanation. What the attention the news has received does reflect is the level of anxiety and frustration in both countries about the lack of significant improvement in the relationship as a whole. Some technical progress on supply lines does seem to have been made. But important aspects of the agreement still remain pending, as does the issue of the Salala apology. Meanwhile, American officials have been making aggressive public statements and the deadlock over drone attacks is playing out in plain view.

The Pakistani administration now needs to move things along. If a direct apology for Salala is still not forthcoming, work around it. If there are good reasons for not going after the Haqqani network, explain them convincingly or take action. Yes, there are political pressures. And the administration can’t stray too far from the principles parliament has recommended. But it does need to get bolder and more creative, and find ways to work out compromises and sell them to opposition politicians, the security establishment and the public. Digging in our heels may have looked good at home for a few weeks, but it has grown counterproductive, especially given the country’s deteriorating external accounts position — which coalition support fund reimbursements would help ease — and its possible need for an IMF programme, which several experts think is simply a matter of time. Meanwhile, provocative public statements from American officials don’t help. The reality everyone agrees on is that both countries need this relationship. So let’s get on with it.
 
your operations? dont you mean American operations?
do you think your Indian army will do a better job than the Americans if it takes over the "peace" duties.
the multiple visits by American defence officials must be negotiating the price with your Indian government.

Weird mindset.. Does everyone who disagrees with Pakistani Point of view automatically become an Indian here?
 
Weird mindset.. Does everyone who disagrees with Pakistani Point of view automatically become an Indian here?

na

ever heard chor ki dari may dang?

we dont confuse Gambit, American Eagle and Solomon2 as Indians.
its just the way you guys post gives away who you really are :rofl:
 
Stay isolated and poor. I don't care.

But please keep those terrorists that you are breeding within Pakistan.




Who wanted us to join WOT? The entire World
Who killed our soldiers in several occasions? That would be the Taliban and Al Qaeda terrorists
Who kills our people in FATA and dubs it as collateral damage? That would be the Taliban and Al Qaeda terrorists
Who accuses us of every BS happenin in A"stan? USA and they have every right to since the entire Taliban leadership is in Pakistan. And OBL was found living in Pakistan.
Who vacates their posts when operations are being done in FATA n lets TTP escape? No proof of that. And no proof what os over of America supporting TTP. Total and utter nonsense.
Who lets hundreds of talib fighters cross into Pak and attack our posts? Arent they your supposed allies?
Who has a discriminatory policy towards Pak? I think the whole world does
Who doesnt apologize for martyring our soldiers? Friendly fire situations happen all over. In World War II, Americans shot down several of their own planes killing 700 soldiers.
Who kills Pakistanis in our own cities? That would be the Taliban Terrorists
Who cares heavy weapons in fake number plated SUVs ? Could be anyone. Corruption is rampant in Pakistan.

you talk of proof? you're making claims i'd be keen to get the sources of as well.


i seek your entertainment
 
Stay isolated and poor. I don't care.

But please keep those terrorists that you are breeding within Pakistan.




Who wanted us to join WOT? The entire World
Who killed our soldiers in several occasions? That would be the Taliban and Al Qaeda terrorists
Who kills our people in FATA and dubs it as collateral damage? That would be the Taliban and Al Qaeda terrorists
Who accuses us of every BS happenin in A"stan? USA and they have every right to since the entire Taliban leadership is in Pakistan. And OBL was found living in Pakistan.
Who vacates their posts when operations are being done in FATA n lets TTP escape? No proof of that. And no proof what os over of America supporting TTP. Total and utter nonsense.
Who lets hundreds of talib fighters cross into Pak and attack our posts? Arent they your supposed allies?
Who has a discriminatory policy towards Pak? I think the whole world does
Who doesnt apologize for martyring our soldiers? Friendly fire situations happen all over. In World War II, Americans shot down several of their own planes killing 700 soldiers.
Who kills Pakistanis in our own cities? That would be the Taliban Terrorists
Who cares heavy weapons in fake number plated SUVs ? Could be anyone. Corruption is rampant in Pakistan.

Thanks for entertaining us :cheesy:
 
I don't think they would change the outcome.
True
Perhaps it may not change the 'eventual' outcome, but it can definitely give them something to think about, if they are willing to push us that far and in the process accept annihilation of their military bases within our reach.

The only question is the casualty cost to the US
Population of most of GCC states is expat, it's a beautiful little payback right in our own backyard.
Not really, we would use precise attack weapons with pin point accuracy that will ensure minimal collateral damage, if at all. Only the US military bases would be hit.....and that too only if, and that is a big 'if', the Arab countries allow the US military use against Pakistan from their lands.

Whether it would be deemed acceptable in their preliminary analysis
Of course, it's acceptable. US is king of Collateral (acceptable in their lingo) damage!
You never know, we are no pushovers (once determination and self respect kicks in) like Afghanistan or Iraq. We are a country of 200 million strong with Strategic weapons and delivery systems that can eventually cripple US military might within our reach (regardless of the amount of punishment we receive in return). And never to forget, we are a Nuclear power as well and our strike range is highly classified......I seriously doubt the US would be willing to push us that far. I wouldn't want to push a Nuclear country to the point of no return.

That said, I know and I am sure everybody else does too that these drones strikes are allowed by the Government and the Military. They don't care if the attacks kill some Pashtun in those areas! They really don't care.


will pakistan open the supply routes after the apology ?

Well, apology is not important really.....$$/truck is :)
 
And what Sovereignty is that?

Where every god damn terrorist on the planet can come to Pakistan, live there and plan terrorist attacks from there and openly fight the Pakistani Army?

that sovereignty?

Pakistan abdicated its sovereignty.

Look at Sri Lanka, who fought a bloody civil war and re-captured its territory from Tamil terrorists.

Or Mexico fighting a bloody drug war, or Jordan during Black September, or Colombia against FARC, or the United States defeated the Confederate Armies during the civil war, etc.

The difference is that those countries didn't see the opposing groups as some sort of strategic ally.

They cared more for their countries to destroy these internal threats.

Learn the difference.

We did learn the difference.....the terrorists fighting our forces, bombing our citizens are armed, trained, brainwashed and unleashed by CIA & RAW. That is the sole purpose of CIA in Pakistan and RAW in India!

The worst we are doing, is giving you a tit for tat response. You first need to stop supporting Terrorism in Pakistan, be it BLA or TTP, then you must accept that Pakistan is a key ingredient in any future stability of Afghanistan and finally you should start differentiating b/w terrorists that plan to attack the US (if any) and those who are fighting an invading, occupying force as the former is a terrorist and later a freedom fighter.
 
Stay isolated and poor. I don't care.

But please keep those terrorists that you are breeding within Pakistan.




Who wanted us to join WOT? The entire World
Who killed our soldiers in several occasions? That would be the Taliban and Al Qaeda terrorists
Who kills our people in FATA and dubs it as collateral damage? That would be the Taliban and Al Qaeda terrorists
Who accuses us of every BS happenin in A"stan? USA and they have every right to since the entire Taliban leadership is in Pakistan. And OBL was found living in Pakistan.
Who vacates their posts when operations are being done in FATA n lets TTP escape? No proof of that. And no proof what os over of America supporting TTP. Total and utter nonsense.
Who lets hundreds of talib fighters cross into Pak and attack our posts? Arent they your supposed allies?
Who has a discriminatory policy towards Pak? I think the whole world does
Who doesnt apologize for martyring our soldiers? Friendly fire situations happen all over. In World War II, Americans shot down several of their own planes killing 700 soldiers.
Who kills Pakistanis in our own cities? That would be the Taliban Terrorists
Who cares heavy weapons in fake number plated SUVs ? Could be anyone. Corruption is rampant in Pakistan.

1) Only the US forced us to join the terror war that it unleashed in Afghanistan.....other countries merely supported the idea as they always do.
2) Our soldiers have been killed by US forces directly or indirectly. Directly with their own military and indirectly through their terrorist outfits such as BLA/TTP.
3) Same as above
4) According to the top leadership of your country, the Talibaan are not your enemy so WTF do you mean???
5) The US ofcourse, they evacuated hundreds of their border positions to push their militant fighters in to Pakistan, to engage PakMil.
6) Only the US
7) Well since US is the only country that has martyred our soldiers, I don't really know what to say.
8) If you consider Raymond Davis and his TTP/BLA buddies to be Talibaan terrorists, then fine.
9) The US mercenaries hiding in the guise of contractors ofcourse. And they all have diplomatic immunity, thousands of them!!
 
We did learn the difference.....the terrorists fighting our forces, bombing our citizens are armed, trained, brainwashed and unleashed by CIA & RAW. That is the sole purpose of CIA in Pakistan and RAW in India!

The worst we are doing, is giving you a tit for tat response. You first need to stop supporting Terrorism in Pakistan, be it BLA or TTP, then you must accept that Pakistan is a key ingredient in any future stability of Afghanistan and finally you should start differentiating b/w terrorists that plan to attack the US (if any) and those who are fighting an invading, occupying force as the former is a terrorist and later a freedom fighter.

many Indians here are just kids and other nationals here are also less competent on the current political activities of world. just to tell you, right now India is on the target of the terrorism being organized by MI6/CIA in India. India and Pakistan came on the position of war in late 2008 while we finally found the main handler of Mumbai attack was a CIA's double agent, David Headily. Maoist killed 20 military personal in India in April 2012 and within weeks, 10 french nationals were deported for having link with those Moist. Italian marines intentionally killed our two fishermen to create political disputes between India and West. India is on the target from West by all means, terrorist attacks, funding Maoists, including how US have infused heavy money to buy our every system of India by buying corrupt politicians/officials of our country :sniper:. US is as cruel to drop bomb bombs on the residential areas of Afghan in chase of just 1-2 Taliban fighters, and similarly they are with other developing countries like India.........

on the other hand, Taliban is now no more as backward as they were in 80s and 90s. now Taliban representatives are very fluent in english and put their stand with full political attitude. even if Taliban comes in power in Afghan, they will hardly impose Sharia Laws in Afghan, nothing else will be changed there. as, even if Al Qaeda still exists in Afghan then its NATO who failed there while fighting in Afghan by all means, including dropping bombs on the civilians in hunt of just 1-2? India doesnt believe anymore that Taliban rule will now infuse militants in Kashmir as it happened in 90s, as they are simply not as backward as they were in 80s and 90s. but the Afghan ruled by NATO's men will give a military base to NATO there which will keep our allies like Iran and other Central Asian nations on gun point which we dont want :sniper:. India wants a trade route to Central Asia and ready to pay for transit fee and only Taliban is the power there who may help us get our interests done. :agree:

at the same time we are more worried for the way US's men are buying our corrupt political/ government's officials which has threatened our sovereignty. they first have hands in different bomb blasts in India in 2008 till Mumbai Attack through IM, as, even if attackers of Mumbai attack were hired from Pakistan, their handler was David Headley who was found a double agent of CIA/MI6. and at the same time they have imposed a question on the State of India, how long will it stand as it is if one day US will have bought its all the top officers/politicians? :angry: do they want to use India as an arm of Christianity against Islam as Taliban does have good support from the civilians of Muslim nations? :undecided:

we want someone who may engage US/West as much that we may get enough time for the progress of our nation. we now want Taliban, and we dont want NATO's men like H Karzai in Afghan anymore. also, Taliban may do our few works in Australia which is located in Asia, as, if we may drop just 20,000 Talibanis there by our military ships, they may control over there................. India now wants Taliban :meeting:
 
Back
Top Bottom