what will happen to USA-Pakistan Relationship if Kerry Wins the Election

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
1

If John Kerry happens to be next USA president what are possible changes one may expect to take place between USA –Pakistan relationship in particular. And what do you guys think about overall USA policy towards sub-continent, if john Kerry is the next elected president.

In my opinion we should not expect any major change in USA – Pakistan relationship in beginning. Given that USA will be tied up in Afghanistan and Iraq for a while, it would not be possible for USA to ignore Pakistan. However, on a long-term basis (3-5 years from now), I am really scared of having a democratic president. Historically, democratic president has to take more stern position on nuclear weapons. Right now, Americans have turned a blind eye on Dr. Qadeer issue which itself is a time bomb for Pakistan. It is just a matter of time before this time bomb will blast. I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that American will bring Dr Qadeer’s issue back to life once they do not need Pakistan anymore. Can you guys imagine how easy it is to plot a case against Pakistan if Americans decide to do so…. Your top scientist himself admitted his connections to the underworld and we r talking about exporting nuclear knowledge…. whether Qadeer’s confession was factual or it was baseless, the fact remains that he confessed. American media can go crazy about it…….If nothing else, USA will definetely force pakistan to open up his nuclear labs for international monitoring.

However if Bush wins election and given his hawkish mind setup, I am sure he will be involved more and more into Iraq and Afghanistan mess. As a matter of fact he will start Syria and Iran mess too. I have no doubt in my mind that pak will have an easy ride for next 4 years with a lot more aid and even military weapons, if bush wins the election.

Any thoughts… and what do guys think of american role in resolving sub-continent issues if kerry wins the election..

2

I think it will be a disaster for Pakistan if Kerry wins.

3

same thing that happened to Imran-Jemima.

4

As long as Pakistan continues to accomodate US interests in the region why would Kerry be hostile? Strategically we are in a position which is very important in the area and I can't see that changing in 3-5 years.

5

It will be good if someone quote Kerry's stand on Pakistan. Some of his wordings are very strong and thus it is concerning. But I wouldn't go as far as to say that it will be a “disaster”, mainly because in most democratic countries with highly bureaucratic state offices foreign policies does not change over night. [A good example will be Carter and his liberal view on Cuba]

There will be no private Camp David visits of Mushraff or a non-Nato ally status but other than that things will pretty much stay the same. There will probably be more pressure to forget about Kashmir and move towards democracy. If Osama is still on the lose, there will be extra criticism of Pakistan as if it’s all their fault.

Now, if Mushraff gets assassinated and Kerry is in office, things will get really interesting.

The Republican lean towards Pakistan is not on some higher moral grounds or some idealistic vision, it’s just that they go by the philosophy of ‘best interest’ and it’s easier for them to manipulate dictators than to worry about democratic governments that might change every few years.

6

See this for some of Kerry’s views:

Transcript of the Democratic candidates debate - January 6, 2004

CONAN: Senator Kerry, Pakistani officials are accused of trading nuclear weapons technology to other countries, including Iran, North Korea and, as we heard today, possibly to Libya as well. Pakistan is also an essential American ally in the war on terrorism, and you look at the map, it’s crucial to any continuing operations in Afghanistan.

How do you balance those two issues?

KERRY: It’s complicated, but you have to balance them and it’s even more complicated than that. There have been two attempts on the life of President Musharraf. **The specter of an Islamic radical state with nuclear weapons is unacceptable for the world. **

KERRY: And that is what is at risk in Pakistan today.

**Pakistan has, frankly, misled the United States and the world with respect to its proliferation responsibilities for years. I remember meeting in Washington with President Zia, and he lied to my face about what they were doing with respect to nuclear weapons. And that’s when we put sanctions in place on Pakistan as a consequence.

I believe that you have to walk a very fine line, but I am convinced we can be tougher with Pakistan. There are steps that we could take now to deal with the northwest component where Osama bin Laden is. We know he’s up there. We have not pushed hard enough.

And I think there are combinations of initiatives we could take with India that would also help us resolve the tensions in that area. **

-snip-

KERRY: Well, at the end of my comment, when I ran out of time, I raised the India issue.

KERRY: The United States, this administration, has been negligent, absent from the effort to put on the global agenda proliferation as a whole.

We should have purchased all of the loose nuclear material, fissionable material in Russia today. **We should have taken the initiative long ago, recognizing the Islamic realities in Pakistan, to have worked with India to create a nuclear oversight capacity, so that if there were an assassination or there were an overthrow, we know that the nuclear weapons can’t fall in the hands of terrorists. **

:slight_smile:

7

Boy…kerry could be tough cookie…

8

Yes Kerry has harsh views on Pakistan, and Faisal is absolutely right, it will be nothing short of a disaster for the Musharraf Administration if he wins the election.

9

Hypocrisy of american people never fails to amaze me. US can give weapons of any kind to Isarel, but no Pakistan cannot do that. He states that they should have worked with India to over see the nuclear weapons do not afll in the hands of terrorists. I am convinced that this man is as stupid and he comes across. Does he need some history lesson? He thinks that Pakistani's will just lay down and give up there nuclear weapons? huh.... There is still time folks, wake up, do not vote for this joker.

10

^ I agree with Kaleem Bhai. And you better not vote for the other bigger joker Bush. He makes Kerry look like a smart man. Instead, vote Green! :biggthumb

11

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ahmadjee: *
^ I agree with Kaleem Bhai. And you better not vote for the other bigger joker Bush. He makes Kerry look like a smart man. Instead, vote Green! :biggthumb
[/QUOTE]

At this point I am left with no choice but to agree with ahmadjee and vote for Nader.

12

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Kaleem: *
Hypocrisy of american people never fails to amaze me. US can give weapons of any kind to Isarel, but no Pakistan cannot do that. He states that they should have worked with India to over see the nuclear weapons do not afll in the hands of terrorists. I am convinced that this man is as stupid and he comes across. Does he need some history lesson? He thinks that Pakistani's will just lay down and give up there nuclear weapons? huh.... There is still time folks, wake up, do not vote for this joker.
[/QUOTE]
Stupid because he acknowledges the real possibility of a radical government coming to power in Pakistan that will have nuclear capability or because he condemns Pakistan for providing nuclear technology to rogue states or because he says more needs to be done to flush out the terrorists hiding in Pakistan or because he said Zia lied to his face with respect to nuclear weapons? Nah, none of that makes him stupid, it makes him a realist that's not afraid to speak his mind and call a spade a spade. GO KERRY!

13

^ Oh now I get it. Not only does Kerry claim to be a fortune teller but he also gets to determine who is not "radical" and who is "fit" to handle nuclear weapons. Not to forget who is the highest bidder.

14

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Seminole: *
Stupid because he acknowledges the real possibility of a radical government coming to power in Pakistan that will have nuclear capability or because he condemns Pakistan for providing nuclear technology to rogue states or because he says more needs to be done to flush out the terrorists hiding in Pakistan or because he said Zia lied to his face with respect to nuclear weapons? Nah, none of that makes him stupid, it makes him a realist that's not afraid to speak his mind and call a spade a spade. GO KERRY!
[/QUOTE]

Semi, who gave him the right to dictate to pakistan what is wrong and what is right? Did Pakistan ask for his opinion? Spade a spade, you say where is his rebuke about India. You have to understand, if India has a nuclear weapon, Pakistan has to have it. No questions asked. That is how it is. Is US candidates really going to teach the world how to speak the truth? sounds pretty holow if you ask me....and pelase do not insult your own intelligence by asking me the reasons.

P.S. Has kerry decided yet if he is/was for war? Does he still change his stance on that with the change in the wind direction?

15

Pakistan will have no problem with Kerry as long as they are deeply commited to fighting terror. A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush, don't fool yourself.

16

Nobody would have a problem with Pakistan having nukes IF:

  1. Pakistan does not have radical jihadis and Al Qaeda infected military

  2. Pakistan did not trade nukes with Iran,Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Syria, Saudi Arabia etc.

With nukes, you must be responsible.

17

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Talwar: *
Nobody would have a problem with Pakistan having nukes IF:

  1. Pakistan does not have radical jihadis and Al Qaeda infected military

[/QUOTE]

Show me one instance where the word Al-Qaeda is even mentioned BEFORE 11th Sept 2001. There are jihadis and freedom fighters, yes, but there is no such thing as an elite terrorist organization Al Qaeda. Its something the US pulled out of its ass as a convenient scapegoat.

18

[QUOTE]
^ I agree with Kaleem Bhai. And you better not vote for the other bigger joker Bush. He makes Kerry look like a smart man. Instead, vote Green!
[/QUOTE]

Someone isn't staying up on their current events... the Green party nominated someone other than Nader. I don't know who, nor do I care.

19

[QUOTE]
w me one instance where the word Al-Qaeda is even mentioned BEFORE 11th Sept 2001.
[/QUOTE]

To those of us in the educated world, Al-Qaeda and OBL were widely known for the embassy bombings as well as the pre-millenium terrorist scare.

20

Stu Bhaijaan, you can't go greener than Nadar!