Pakistan - America Relations

Re: Pakistan - America Relations

First they give visas to CIA agents to roam around the country, then they demand NOC from them when they try to move around.

http://www.dawn.com/2011/07/20/security-officials-impede-foreigners-entering-peshawar.html

**PESHAWAR: Seven US citizens were stopped by security officials from crossing the Peshawar toll plaza without a No Objection Certificate on Wednesday, DawnNews reported.

**
The US embassy has expressed serious concern over the incident, DawnNews reported.

Security officials said the foreigners were traveling in three cars and it was the second time they had attempted to enter without a NOC.

They are required to obtain a NOC from the relevant ministry before entering into Peshawar, said security officials.
%between%

Re: Pakistan - America Relations

Carrot and stick. Kill them and destroy their areas in drone attacks and then spend amount in rebuilding them, an effective and tested method in Iraq and Afghanistan.

http://www.dawn.com/2011/07/20/us-steps-up-push-for-aid-recognition-in-pakistan.html

**ISLAMABAD: Desperate to win hearts and minds in Pakistan, the US has begun pushing aid organizations working in the country’s most dangerous region along the Afghan border to advertise that they receive American assistance.

**
The new requirement has disturbed aid groups, which fear their workers providing food, water, shelter and other basic needs to Pakistanis will come under militant attack if they proclaim their US connection.

This fear exists throughout Pakistan but is especially acute in the tribal region, which is the main sanctuary for Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters in the country.

But US officials in Pakistan are under increasing pressure from Washington to increase the visibility of the country’s aid effort to counter rampant anti-American sentiment that can feed support for militants targeting the West.

The focus on b*****ng has become even more intense in the wake of the US Navy SEAL raid that killed Osama bin Laden in a Pakistani garrison town on May 2. The covert operation infuriated Pakistanis and strained the relationship so much that the US decided to suspend $800 million in military aid to Pakistan.

The decision does not affect civilian aid and makes the effort to win hearts and minds through that assistance even more important. The US has earmarked $7.5 billion in civilian aid for Pakistan over five years, but it will do little to sway public opinion if Pakistanis don’t know where the money is coming from. And there are growing questions in Congress about what US aid in Pakistan is achieving.

“Our mandate is to make sure people here know that they are receiving American assistance,” said one US official in Pakistan. “It’s always a struggle, especially in a country like this with security considerations.”

Previously, because of the militant threat, groups working in the semiautonomous tribal region were exempted from having to brand their projects, a requirement for groups distributing American aid elsewhere in the country.

The US quietly changed its policy toward the tribal region in the fall, and now evaluates each project on a case by case basis, said US officials in Pakistan.

The US has also become less willing to grant waivers to the requirement that it often gave in other parts of the country that have experienced militant violence, such as northwest Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province and central Punjab province, said the officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.

Militants have targeted aid groups in the past. The Pakistani Taliban killed five UN staffers in a suicide attack in 2009 at the office of the World Food Program in Islamabad.

In 2010, militants attacked World Vision, a US-based Christian aid group helping survivors from the 2005 earthquake in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, killing six Pakistani employees.

Eleven prominent charities signed a letter last fall asking the US Agency for International Development not to require aid in Pakistan to be branded with the group’s red, white and blue logo. The letter was sent by InterAction, an alliance of US-based NGOs.

Joel Charny, vice president for humanitarian policy and practice at InterAction, said it has been frustrating to have US officials sitting in a fortified embassy in Islamabad argue that NGO concerns about safety in Pakistan are overblown.

“There was just a complete contradiction between the US’s own security protocols for their employees and their staff and then the risks they were expecting the NGOs to take on in the name of b*ng and hearts and minds,” said Charny.

The international humanitarian aid group CARE turned down American funding to help people in south Punjab cope with last year’s devastating floods because of the US government’s b*****ng requirements, the organization said.

Other non-government organizations working in Pakistan that receive American funding declined to comment on the new b*****ng policy, saying the issue was too sensitive and talking about it could put their employees at risk.

Not only does the US require many NGOs to brand their projects with a logo that says “USAID: From the American People,” but US Ambassador to Pakistan Cameron Munter decided a few months ago to add the American flag as well to make sure illiterate Pakistanis would know the aid came from the US, said US officials.

Examples of projects in dangerous areas that were branded in this manner include a dam in the South Waziristan tribal area, a teacher’s college in the Khyber tribal area and 150 schools in the Malakand area of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, said US officials. All three areas experience frequent Taliban attacks.

Another initiative handed out livestock to conflict-affected families in the Swat Valley, which was controlled by the Taliban until an army offensive in 2009 and still experiences periodic violence. The livestock all had USAID tags around their necks, including one that read “This goat is from the people of America.”
%between%

Re: Pakistan - America Relations

so what “agreements” did he sign?

Re: Pakistan - America Relations

^ they have kept everything under the wraps this time, the only things that have come out in the media uptil now is that:

1) The relationship between Pakistan and America are getting on track after the meet
2) Pakistan has issued visas to 87 or so CIA agents to enter Pakistan
3) Pakistan wants CIA to do a written agreement for operations within the country
4) US will release the military aid soon

Re: Pakistan - America Relations

oh i just read ... this joker says :Representative Dana Rohrabacher, **“The time has come for us to stop subsidising those who actively oppose us.Pakistan has shown itself not to be America’s ally,”

**we have showed that we are not their ally?? i mean like seriously??

more blah blah ...

“I believe it’s very unfortunate that Pakistan years ago made a decision to go down a very risky road of using proxy groups to carry out some of its desires to protect what it views as its own national interest,” he said.
**
**“I think we need to keep continued pressure on Pakistan, using all elements of pressure that we are able to apply to what really should be a friend, to get them to realize that the Haqqani network poses a threat to their own country and to take the steps that we’ve asked them to take,”
he said.

some reader wrote this that kinda makes sense:
"it is all clear the US and Nato need Pakistan in their war against terrorism. Let us
help them but not free as did Turkey in the frist gulf war in 1990.
Pakistan should not ask for aid for helping them instead charge as per international standards for using its infrastructure and provision of security facilities in order to transport weapons, goods, etc to Afghanistan."

Re: Pakistan - America Relations

**http://www.dawn.com/2011/07/21/used-and-disposed-repeatedly.html

Following the announcement of the withdrawal of its troops from Afghanistan, the United States has devised a counter terrorism strategy that involves deploying troops on the eastern border of Afghanistan adjoining Pakistan’s FATA.
**
**The strategy involves a hundred percent increase in drone attacks inside FATA as well as action by US Special Forces to decapitate the al Qaeda leadership hiding there. This is the pattern used in Cambodia by the US during the Nixon era at the end of war in Vietnam and can have serious repercussions for Pakistan.
**
**Like the Taliban and al Qaeda are based in FATA, during the Vietnam War in 1970, the People’s Army of Vietnam (PAVN) and the National Front for the Liberation of South Vietnam, also known as Viet Cong, carried out cross border attacks inside Vietnam against the US and the Vietnamese army targets from bases in eastern Cambodia. Following the ignonimous retreat of the US from Vietnam, US president Richard Nixon ordered the invasion of the eastern border regions of Cambodia to defeat troops of the PAVN and the Viet Cong. As a massive military assault rolled out, the US’s political manipulations in Cambodia also led to severe destabilisation causing Prince Norodom Sihanouk to be deposed.
**
**Against this backdrop, it is a foregone conclusion that Islamabad’s protests, if any, of drones or unilateral actions like the Abbottabad raid violating sovereignty would carry any weight with Washington. The US is convinced of going ahead independently with its decapitation policy against al Qaeda and Taliban leadership without Pakistan’s consent no matter how many time Islamabad states otherwise. All this does not bode well for Pakistan but calls for reviewing its policies.
**
**While the overall Pakistan’s Afghan policy of “strategic depth” is questionable, the obsession with pampering the “good Taliban” should be abandoned. Pakistan is towing a soft line against the Haqqani network who has remained involved in bloodshed in the country. Unlike his father, Jalauddin Haqqani, Sirajuddin Haqqani, leader of the Haqqani faction in North Waziristan, always took an anti-Pakistan Army approach in support of his large Punjabi Taliban following. Hundreds of activists of Jaish-e-Mohammad, Harkatul Mujahideen and Harkatul Jehad-e-Islami wanted by the government of Pakistan for large scale terrorism are taking refuge in North Waziristan and using that area for actions against NATO as well as Pakistan.
**
**In his book: “Inside al Qaeda and the Taliban,” late Saleem Shahzad profiles some of Sirajudin Haqqani’s anti Pakistan actions. “During the Shia-Sunni riots in Kurram Agency in 2008-2009, Siraj sent his men comprising non-Pashtun Pakistani fighters to support the Sunnis. In 2009, Sirajuddin Haqqani provided sanctuary and help to TTP (Tehrike-e-Taliban Pakistan) fighting the Pakistan Army. Siraj also developed strong relationship with anti-Pakistan Taliban commander Baitullah Mehsud.”
**
Against this backdrop, what is the guarantee that the Taliban group we are backing will now safeguard our interests in Afghanistan when during Mullah Omar’s regime they refused to extradite sectarian terrorists taking refuge in Afghanistan. They also refused to declare the Durand Line a border with Pakistan after an earnest demand from Islamabad.

While we are always in the habit of shooting at our own feet, the US has also dealt Pakistan shabbily and treated Islamabad like a client state and not as an ally. The unilateral actions of drone attacks and the mantra of “do more” has exposed the vulnerabilities of Islamabad. Besides, the US is not backing a pro-Pakistan or at least a friendly dispensation in Afghanistan, further heightening anxiety in Islamabad. The post Abbottabad fall out including the intelligence cold war, ‘pausing’ of $ 800 million aid package is a new twist in the roller coaster of Pak-US ties calling for a revisit of relations.

There is a lot common between the two allies and the differences are of practical nature. The strategic dialogue must focus on differences. The red lines of national objectives should not be crossed. While drafting a policy, the military should give Parliament the chance to craft a foreign policy rather than passing the buck… a la give directives to destroy US drones by the PAF deputy air chief in briefing to the parliament. The policy should be drafted in consultation with the cross section of political forces of the country.

**But the policy should neither be of confrontation nor capitulation, in fact it should be of a middle ground. Following 9/11 during the Musharraf regime, US Secretary of State Collin Powell gave a list of demands to Pakistan. Powell said “he was surprised when Islamabad complied with all the demands, many of which he did not expect any country to comply with”.
**
While China is a reliable ally, but certainly it is in no position to replace the US in the larger world affairs. The move to embrace Iran for a regional Afghan solution is certainly a thumbs up move unless of course it is being used as a tactical negotiating leverage vis-à-vis the US. The new warmth in ties with Tehran however should balance relations with erstwhile friends like Saudi Arabia that has shown considerable consternation over the development.

Keeping Cambodia in mind, the present scenario should not serve to scare the people of Pakistan. Rather, let this be an opportunity to learn from history and not save ourselves from further self-destruction.

Re: Pakistan - America Relations

love and hate relationship!! ...

its funny majority in America ... dont want to give us aid and and nobody in Pakistan wants their kheiraat either ... ... yet this entire drama just goes on and on!! ... keb jaago gey humare mulk k hukmuraan??? jeb paani ser se se unncha hojaye ga??

Re: Pakistan - America Relations

Ali last article is quite scary!! ... :(

Re: Pakistan - America Relations

Yes I know but there are stark similarities, it doesnt seem that the Americans have learnt anything from history, south cambodia's and fata's circumstances seem to be very similar.

Re: Pakistan - America Relations

true that ... they havent learnt any lessons from vietnam war!! ... drones attacks will most likely rise .. and then they will try to sneak in FATA!! i guess we can do something abt it beforehand .. if we change our policies!! but i highly doubt that our leaders will take this matter seriously and bring new changes!!

Re: Pakistan - America Relations

Pakistan American relationship cannot be a good long lasting relationship, unless Pakistan does not accept Israel as a legitimate country.

Pakistan wants to implement UN resolution in Kashmir valley. But what about the UN resolutons in which Israel was formed as an independent country. lol

Re: Pakistan - America Relations

accepting Isreal ... over our dead bodies!! ...

Re: Pakistan - America Relations

Pakistan and Israel are twin brothers:

Pakistan and Israel share the unique heritage of having been created in the aftermath of World War II as religiously defined states. In each case, the new state emerged as the result of a twentieth-century ideological movement, came into existence accompanied by violence, and attracted a large immigrant population. Both met with initial rejection from religious elements who more recently, on second thought, aspired to gain political power.

Re: Pakistan - America Relations

you just made me laugh dude .... keep it up

Re: Pakistan - America Relations

Actually no. Israel was not created as a Jewish state. It was created by the UN as a place for the jewish people to have homeland. None of the original documentation mentions religion as a reason for the state rather the notion after the Holocaust something must be done. That is why the Congo and Argentina were also locations for the Jewish state.

****ing Indian public education system.

Re: Pakistan - America Relations

Pakistan and Israel were both created for people of specific religion. It is up to those people to make it secular, democratic, or taliban like. I dont know what are you trying to say by cursing India.

Re: Pakistan - America Relations

I have always believed that Pakistan should accept Israel as a legitimate country -- our policies are misguided in the believing that ignoring Israel is a matter for principle or support for the Palestinians. Besides, I don't even see why Pakistan is involved in a Middle Eastern conflict when we have been left high and dry on the Kashmir issue.

As to your second point, I agree that we can not selectively use UN resolutions: So yes to plebiscite in Kashmir and yes to recognition of Israel.

Re: Pakistan - America Relations

what nonsense

how are pakistan related to israel they sworn enemies if these animals IDF shoot your sister or brother in the head what will you do turn blind eye and shake israeli hand?

as muslim we never accept the discrimination of muslims in palestine the theft of there land and wealth all done by the coward illegal israeli state.

As a muslim We never judge our relationship on benefit but only on what we allowed to do i.e halal and avoid the haram.

Re: Pakistan - America Relations

There is a news about 1978, I am sorry but I could not find in English.

Re: Pakistan - America Relations

http://www.dawn.com/2011/08/02/cia-in-pakistan-fiction-that-mirrors-reality.html

CIA in Pakistan: fiction that mirrors reality

WASHINGTON: The ISI chief asks CIA’s station manager in Islamabad to leave Pakistan because he thinks the American spy agency is running a clandestine network in his country.

“Let me state the question as clearly as I can, sir: Is the United States sending intelligence officers into Pakistan outside the normal CIA cover channels? Is your agency doing it? Or is some other agency doing it? That is what I want to know: Are you running a new game against us?” asks the ISI chief in a meeting with the station manager at the ISI headquarters.

“You know I can’t answer a question like that. I mean, hell, we run all sorts of operations, declared and undeclared, just like you do,” replies the CIA’s local boss, Homer Barkin.

“If I told you that we had no other presence in Pakistan, and no non-official officers, you know I’d be lying. But that’s business, right? We don’t look up your skirt, and we don’t expect you to start looking up ours.”

The quotes are from a novel, “Bloodmoney”, by The Washington Post’s associate editor David Ignatius.

Commenting on Mr Ignatius’s disclaimer that his was “a work of fiction”, another author, Dan Fesperman, writes: “Plenty of readers will react to that claim with a nudge and a wink.”

“For better and for worse, you emerge from its pages as if from a top-level security briefing — confident that you have been let in on the deepest secrets,” says Mr Fesperman, an author of seven novels.

**And there are plenty of reasons for this claim. Mr Ignatius is perhaps the only American journalist who has access to the higher echelons of both the ISI and CIA.

He has visited the ISI headquarters more than once and with its help also visited Waziristan. The CIA too has given Mr Ignatius similar access to its sources and assets. So nobody is better qualified than him to talk about clandestine CIA operations in Pakistan.

“When I wrote the book, I knew that there were unauthorised, undisclosed CIA operations in Pakistan,” says Mr Ignatius.

“Anybody who spends any time covering this beat as I do finds that out.”
**
Mr Ignatius says that the more he thought about these clandestine operations, the more it seemed like a metaphor for the relationship between the US and Pakistan:** “Each of us sneaking up on the other. The US not trusting the Pakistanis, they not trusting us. Each having good reason for the mistrust.”**

In ‘Bloodmoney’, Mr Ignatius imagines that the CIA, unable to carry out clandestine operations around the globe, creates a whole new secret wing — hiding behind a Los Angeles entertainment front called “Hit Parade”. Its aim is to buy peace in Fata, “warlord by warlord”.

And to cover its expenses the Hit Parade fudges with the stocks market, making billions. Mr Ignatius says the case of CIA contractor Raymond Davis — who was arrested and released after a payment of blood money — eerily paralleled some of the plotlines of his book. In January, Mr Davis shot and killed two Pakistanis on the street in Lahore.

“Here’s this real-life CIA contractor,” Mr Ignatius says, “who is arrested by the Pakistanis, who it turns out is part of a whole capability not known to the American public (and) not known previously to Pakistan. At the end of the day, he’s released through a payment of blood money.”

In an interview to the National Public Radio, America’s largest radio network, Mr Ignatius defines how the CIA and the ISI work with each other. **“The ISI is always playing both sides of the fence,” he says. But “it’s not really very different from the way the United States behaves. We conduct joint operations with the ISI but there’s a lot that we don’t tell them” — or don’t tell them until it’s too late. Take, for example, the policy of concurrent notification, he says. “Concurrent meaning after the missile has been fired, and the target has been incinerated on the ground,” Mr Ignatius says, “we’re telling (Pakistan) what we just did”.
**
**The CIA, he adds, “has the authority to conduct operations that the government will then deny ever took place”.

But the book is not just about the CIA-ISI relationship. The motivating force behind the book seems to be the author’s desire to have a closer look at another clandestine operation: the drone strikes in Fata.
**
In another interview to the Dian Rehm Show, one of the most popular radio programmes in the US, Mr Ignatius says the question that whether the drone strikes were morally right has been haunting him over the past several years, and is one of his main reasons for writing this book. “[The drones] allow you to kill people from 10,000 feet, which seems, to our public, I think wrongly, less bloody than if we did it right up close standing next to someone with a gun,” he says.

**Mr Ignatius’s main character, Omar al-Wazir, is a modern, well-educated and well-travelled Pakistani from Waziristan. He sees his whole family killed as the result of a Predator drone attack. “This is a book about revenge — it’s about his revenge against the people who killed his family, it’s about our revenge against the people who killed so many of our fellow citizens on September 11, 2001. It’s about this cycle of revenge that we’ve gotten caught up in,” he said.

After seeing his family killed in such a brutal way, Mr al-Wazir’s life changes dramatically, and his quest for revenge encourages him to devise and execute a plan that leads to the deaths of half a dozen clandestine CIA operatives.
**
One of Mr Ignatius’s challenges that he set for himself in writing the book is to try to “see this war from the eyes of the people under our bombs, which is not something we normally do”