will india join western alliance or remain neutral.
Also, as Jane’s Intelligence Digest pointed out last week, a new triangular alliance may well be evolving among the United States, Israel and India - three countries that share not just a common enemy in Islamist suicide bombers, but also common traditions of democracy and the rule of law.
If this does come about, it will have powerful repercussions from the South China Sea to the Mediterranean.
Already, the prospect of a closer India-U.S. relationship seems to have frightened Pakistan’s President Pervez Musharraf into becoming more obviously cooperative with American foreign policy - he’s even raised the possibility of sending Pakistani troops to help stabilize liberated Iraq.
here is another view from the Cato institute. I do not agree that $3B is a large amount when it is spread across five years. Although fungibility is an issue.
Uncooperative Pakistan Rates Less U.S. Aid
Email this story
Printer friendly format
By Ted Galen Carpenter
Ted Galen Carpenter, vice president for defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute, is the author of “Peace & Freedom: Foreign Policy for a Constitutional Republic.” Sheryl McCarthy
July 10, 2003
During Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf’s recent visit to Washington, George W. Bush announced an economic development and defense-aid package of $3 billion over the next five years. While it may be necessary to compensate Pakistan for its aid in capturing al-Qaida, the administration needs to realize that the country has not been a consistent and enthusiastic ally in Washington’s war against terror. And it should not risk damaging America’s important relationship with India.
Let’s remember that Pakistan was the chief political and financial sponsor of the Taliban in Afghanistan from the beginning. Without Islamabad’s help, it is unlikely the Taliban would have come to power. And without a Taliban regime in Kabul, Afghanistan never would have become a safe haven for al-Qaida. Pakistan was, therefore, more than a little responsible for Sept. 11.
Even after that attack, Islamabad turned against the Taliban only in response to intense pressure from the United States. Pakistani forces were ineffectual in sealing the border with Afghanistan when U.S. troops had Taliban and al-Qaida fighters on the run in late 2001, yet the Musharraf government refused to give the United States the right of hot pursuit into Pakistani territory. As a result, terrorist units regrouped in Pakistan’s border provinces and to this day continue to harass U.S. forces in Afghanistan.
Worse, there were credible reports that rogue elements of Pakistan’s intelligence service, the ISI, helped evacuate Taliban and al-Qaida personnel from Afghanistan. Such behavior underscores another key point about Pakistan. Even though the Musharraf government may now be reasonably cooperative with the United States, the country as a whole appears to be drifting toward a radical Islamic orientation. The ISI is riddled with radical Islamic sympathizers, two of the country’s provinces are controlled by Islamist political forces and a radical Islamist party leads in the national parliament.
The Musharraf government itself continues to play a double game on the terrorism issue. True, the regime has arrested a number of high-profile al-Qaida operatives, as well as the suspected killers of journalist Daniel Pearl. At the same time, however, Islamabad continues to support terrorist organizations in Kashmir that are allied with al-Qaida. That is hardly the conduct of a reliable ally in the war on terror.
Washington must be cautious about subsidizing the Musharraf government. Money is fungible, and funds intended for Pakistan’s economic development can easily be siphoned off for other purposes, including aiding allies of al-Qaida. Given the dubious record of the ISI, that is not an irrational concern. Ultimately, Pakistan needs greater will more than it does greater financial resources to confront the forces of terrorism.
The Bush administration also should keep broader U.S. security in mind when it considers aid to Pakistan. America’s long-term interests in Asia require a partnership with India, not Pakistan. India is not only the leading power in South Asia; it is a rising great power with a reach beyond that region. India can be a stabilizing force in the Persian Gulf as well as a strategic counterweight to China. Both of those developments would benefit the United States.
It is imperative that Washington not jeopardize the embryonic strategic partnership with India. Fortunately, Bush declined to approve one item on Musharraf’s wish list: the long-delayed purchase of 60 F-16 fighters. The delivery of such planes to Pakistan would strengthen its military position against India.
Even without that sale, India is nervous about the rapprochement between the United States and Pakistan. Washington needs to be sensitive to those concerns. Pakistan’s cooperation may be necessary in the short term to disrupt al-Qaida’s remaining infrastructure. Given the realities of international politics, that cooperation will not come free. But the United States must be careful not to sacrifice its more important long-term relationship with India.
On balance, a $3-billion aid package seems overly generous. A smaller sum would have been more appropriate to compensate a temporary, and not terribly reliable, ally.
Is $3 billion a lot or a little? My own feeling is that it is generous but not overly so. Part of the problem, as noted in the article above, is Pakistan presents a lot of unknowns in terms of its political future. We need to do enough that moderate elements like Musharref see a real benefit from strengthening the US/Pakistan alliance and, perhaps more importantly, are given enough amunition to persuade the sceptical but willing to listen ones that a strong US alliance will be beneficial long term. Throwing huge amounts Pakistan's way now only to see the present government disappear and be replaced by a militant anti-American one would ultimately harm US interests. It's a real delicate balance right now. If real progress is made toward strengthening the relationship then I would expect that the money faucet will be opened a little further.
Let the US go after India. Who cares. India will blow up one of these days, and the US will have its hands full. Pakistan should continue to pursue relationships with East Asia, Middle East and European countries. Once Pakistan starts to develop economically, just watch, the USA will be begging to be friends with Pakistan.
Right now, the USA perceives India to be the ally because of all the Indians in the IT field here in the USA. Once they realize how freindly these fundo BJP indians can be they will have their hands full.
Pakistan just needs to take care of itself and stay out of any major conflict and stick to developing economically and industrially. It is one of the largest Muslim countries and strategically placed. It's importance will always be there. We just need to have leverage when dealing with countries like USA.
what? why you saying India blowup etc? India very good country so no blowup ok?
USA India like becase peapul democrasy..not miltry guvermet like Mushraf. you also do democrasy then USA India liking you also. but furst you do democrasy also good election, ok?
you saying pakistan peapul take care. is good I think. becase why keep keep look care at India? India peapul look care about India. you peapul look care pakistan. that way no Kashmir lafda etc. also put oh 420 bludy terorism mulla peapul in jail 10 years only lunch. then no violance Kashmir also no sunni sheat lafda I think
rule of law! what a joke. have a break have kit kat. first one kill anyone without any law! second one kill innocent civillians and occupying other countrys land shared in all !
india has to go a long way to be at same level law and order situation to compare with US domestically.
they may have common enemies relegious wise. but india has friendly relations with many muslim counteries on the other hand that is not shared with Israel.
India will also refrain from tying up with US at the cost of Russia. cause russia will not like it one way or the other.
even this goes ahead. Pakistan -china group will get more closer to Russia.
last but not least, these kind of strategic alliances doesnt require any kind of democracies, as long as it satisfy eachothers interests!
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Matsui: *
Let's remember that Pakistan was the chief political and financial sponsor of the Taliban in Afghanistan from the beginning.
[/quote]
How does Mr Carpenter define 'beginning' ? The 90's? Or the 80's? Funny also how Mr Carpenter conveniently forgot the fact that till the late 90's the Americans were striking billion dollar deals with the Taliban to build an oil pipeline across Afghanistan that would give US access to the much unexploited $3 Trillion worth of gas in the Caspian Sea.
Both articles are BS. Pakistan is moving in a focused direction for the first time in a long while and all this scare-mongering is pretty futile, Musharraf is just too savvy to let things slip back now.
The prophecies are coming true. Surely there will be a march on Muslims, under 80 banners. The kafirs are surely joining hands and it won’t be long before they march upon the Muslims. Their fanaticism knows no bounds. Even kafirs like Marx and Lenin realized the power of greed and wrote books on how to contain it. Their treatises are full of explanations on how a man be made into a machine, leading itself to a golden path to destruction. Communism fell against its might. Do you all wish to be an example like that?
And this time, it will be like the last time. When the crusaders marched against Jerusalem in their zeal to capture it, they laid waste to the city and slaughtered 40,000 inhabitants of that city. Muslims, Jews and even Christians by some accounts. You call that fundamentalist? That’s not fundamentalist. That’s not what Jesus taught. It was pure and simple hatred and jealousy that drove that crusader horde to such bloodlust.
If you believe they are not capable to do that again, or they won’t is naive thinking. To a race of people for which 1million+ kids dying of starvation is ‘acceptable’, anything is possible. Even dropping Uranium-depleted weapons on those same starving children. Causing not just death, but a wasting, slow lingering death. And they call it liberation. They are possible of each and any crime you can think of.
True there are among them, that understand what is going on. They wish to retain peace and extend it. But how effective are they? Labelled as anti-semitic, unamerican or unpatriotic, they are subdued in a hail of social sanctions which alienates them. Of course, stand on the pulpit and insult a Muslim’s faith and you get a standing ovation and invitation to lead the presidential committees in praising the lord.
Someone posted something about the Harvard Divinity school, returning 2.5 million dollar donation which was meant to create a seat for an Islamic scholar to preside over it. It was met by many with criticisms and appeals to stop it. Why? A seat in the Harvard Divinity school of law, would provide insight into the Islamic legal system for many of the State’s top lawyers.
Many believe, that if we ‘bend’ or ‘soften’ or try to be like them, the kuffar will think, “hey, he’s one of us.” Unfortunately, this is not so. It has been proclaimed, they will never be happy, unless you become just like them. By that time unfortunately, it will be too late.
As for the answer to the post… Kay sera sera and the famous Punjabi slogan, “Jako rakhay saiyyaan, maar sake na koi…”
Indians on GupShup would be so happy. Nothing like a little attention from Uncle Sam to brighten up the day. India should realise though, that if the US ‘support’ is half of what it promised Pakistan in the two wars, it should consider itself lucky.
We don’t need US, Chinese or any other support
We have our own atomic powered support and 150 million people.
The stregnth of nuclear power and the aid of Allah is enough for us
This only means that Pakistan has to become more involved in the region... We need stronger ties with China, and countries like Iran, and Turkey. I dont think the Indians will have many friends in the Muslim world if the get closer to Israel.
I agree that both articles are BS!! Resolution of the palestinian problem is now only a matter of time and is needed for Israel's longevity. As soon as that is done, Israel will be accepted by all muslim countries inc pakistan so there will be no need of hostility with the muslim regimes. The triangular theory is too confrontational with no long term gain for US or Israel. The enemy is a hidden one this time (Extremism) and US & Israel will not want to piss off the only regimes that can help them fight this new enemy. Interest in India is purely economical (emerging large market) whereas for pakistan it is political.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PaKpatriot1: *
This only means that Pakistan has to become more involved in the region... We need stronger ties with China, and countries like Iran, and Turkey. I dont think the Indians will have many friends in the Muslim world if the get closer to Israel.
[/QUOTE]
Iran is already in the Indiam camp both economically and militarily.
What Pakistan needs is a detante with India, opening of relations with Israel and furthering economic ties with the US.
Let's not get so caught up in the jingoism that we forget the fact that India, the US, and Israel are economic powers before we start talking about their military prowess.
If develop economically, the military end will benefit as well. The added revenue expenditures can certainly be pipelined to defense needs.
.... that we forget the fact that India, the US, and Israel are economic powers before we start talking about their military prowess.
....
[/QUOTE]
Israel is not a "economic" power, only a military power. Mangay ke paisay se koi ameer nahi ho jata.... Israel receives billions of $$ in aid from America every year.
I recall reading somewhere, the total direct US aid to Israel over a 50 year period is about $90B. It's a lot of money from a 3rd world view but for the principals, not much. I also thought the per capita income in Israel was quite high.
Israel is not a "economic" power, only a military power. Mangay ke paisay se koi ameer nahi ho jata.... Israel receives billions of $$ in aid from America every year.
[/QUOTE]
Doesnt matter...
Look at their per capita, standards of living, manufacturing output and you will see their economic muscle...Lets compare that to the country that receives the 2nd most aid from the US, Eygpt...lets see how their doing?
Look up the facts..mangay ke paiso se Israel ne kya kiya then compare it with Egypt.
....On balance, a $3-billion aid package seems overly generous. A smaller sum would have been more appropriate to compensate a temporary, and not terribly reliable, ally.
Apparently, the writer likes to be selective with the history of US-Pakistan relationship. If it were the 80's, this crackpot would be all praises for Pakistan for helping US fend off the invading Soviets in Afghanistan with support for the mujahideens and all the while absorbing millions of war-stricken refugees.
MV, sometimes you amaze me with your lack of valuation prowess.
Why? A seat in the Harvard Divinity school of law, would provide insight into the Islamic legal system for many of the State’s top lawyers.
Kay sera sera and the famous Punjabi slogan, “Jako rakhay saiyyaan, maar sake na koi…”