*Analysis: Is Pakistan right to say ‘no’ to joint operations with US? Muhammad S Alvi says: April 8th, 2009 at 2:25 pm Yes, get rid of the Barbarians (Taliban). But it seems that Pakistan alone cannot do it. US help under Pakistani control is necessary. Taliban are the greatest enemy of Pakistan.
US is offering plenty of civilian help for education and other civil uplift work in Pakistan. But most of it will go into corruption. When Zardari and company hears ‘no blank check’ they become disinterested. I believe that this is the reason why Pakistani government is taking a tough stand against US - they want US to soften its control on money. They want a ‘blank check’. (DTN Defense-Technology News)
(NSI News Source Info) ISLAMABAD - April 9, 2009: The visit by Richard Holbrooke, U.S. special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, and Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, to the region has, for the first time, exposed sharp differences between the United States and Pakistan with regard to anti-terror operations. 
Chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen (L) speaks as Richard Holbrooke, special U.S. envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, watches during a news conference in New Delhi April 8, 2009. Holbrooke will meet Indian officials on Wednesday amid concern in New Delhi that Washington's new regional strategy for Afghanistan is pandering to its old foe Pakistan.
"The stance of the Pakistan side came as a rude shock to Americans," Pakistani newspapers on Wednesday quoted a source in the U.S. delegation visiting Islamabad as saying after parleys between the two sides.
Differences between Washington and Islamabad with regard to their mutual cooperation in the war against terrorism, now called international contingency operations, had been simmering since long.
However, their 'trust deficit' has emerged more vividly in the wake of announcement of the new U.S. policy on Afghanistan and Pakistan, which has given a regional aspect to the Afghan problem. This trust deficit now seems to have changed into a full-grown standoff.
"Islamabad has flagged certain red lines that cannot be crossed by the United States," uttered a seemingly defiant Shah Mahmood Qureshi, the foreign minister of Pakistan, while addressing a joint conference with Richard Holbrooke and Mike Mullen, after their talks in Islamabad on Tuesday.
He categorically said: "Pakistan has made it clear to the United States that it would not accept any foreign boots on the Pakistani soil."
Islamabad has been criticizing the U.S. drone attacks in the tribal areas along the Afghan borders, ever since their commencement in August last year. However, Washington persistently says these attacks have proved effective and would be continued.
U.S. drones have so far made over 35 missile strikes in the tribal areas, killing more than 300 people, including a large number of foreign militants. U.S. officials claimed that 13 of the top 20 Al-Qaeda leaders have been eliminated in these drone attacks.
However, Pakistan said these attacks are hampering its efforts to eliminate terrorism.
Rather, Islamabad on Tuesday demanded drone technology and authority to itself carry out these attacks.
For its part, the United States - alleging links between ISI, Pakistan's top military intelligence agency and Taliban - does not seem to trust the Pakistani forces.
"There are challenges associated with the ISI," Admiral Mike Mullen explicitly said at a joint briefing in Islamabad, while addressing Pakistan's concern against U.S. allegations against the Pakistani spy network.
"There is support (in the ISI) for some (militant) organizations," he further asserted.
Perhaps that is the reason that General Asif Shuja Pasha, the ISI chief, reportedly refused to hold separate meeting with the visiting U.S. officials.
Besides the ISI issue, differences also surfaced during the talks on the issue of carrying out joint military operations against militants in the tribal agencies.
"Pakistan rejects the U.S. proposal for carrying out joint operations against militants," newspapers quoted Pakistan government sources as saying.
Last week, there were reports in British and American media that U.S. and Pakistani forces contemplated joint operations in South Waziristan tribal agency to eliminate Baitullah Mehsud, the chief of Pakistani Taliban, for whom Washington has fixed 50 million dollars bounty.
Earlier, while charting out the new war on terror policy of his administration, President Obama had said that the U.S. and Pakistani forces would continue cooperation to eliminate terrorism.
However, Yousuf Raza Gilani, the prime minister of Pakistan, rejected these reports the other day, saying they were mere speculations.
The new defiant posture of Pakistan is not an instant flare up of sentiments on the part of the Pakistani leaders.
There are reports that Pakistan's defiant mood came after a collective decision of the government and the security establishment to adopt a tough posture.
"The Pakistan Army chief, General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, expressed Pakistan's concern (to the U.S. delegation) without mincing his words," Pakistani government sources said.
Pakistan seems to be not bothered even about the tempting 1.5 billion dollar annual aid package, which Washington has promised in response to Islamabad's cooperation in the war on terror.
"Blank check policy should be for both sides," Shah Mahmood Qureshi said in his press briefing, referring to a last week report, which quoted U.S. officials as saying that while extending aid, Washington would not give any blank check to Pakistan and would rather 'hold Pakistan accountable' for the spending it makes on war on terror.
If the impression gathered from the joint press conference of Holbrooke and Qureshi and the ensuing media reports are some things to believe in, Islamabad appears determined not to 'do more,' at the call of Washington - as has always been alleged by the opponents - if not fully parting ways with its long-time ally.
Chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen (L) speaks as Richard Holbrooke, special U.S. envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, watches during a news conference in New Delhi April 8, 2009. Holbrooke will meet Indian officials on Wednesday amid concern in New Delhi that Washington's new regional strategy for Afghanistan is pandering to its old foe Pakistan.
"The stance of the Pakistan side came as a rude shock to Americans," Pakistani newspapers on Wednesday quoted a source in the U.S. delegation visiting Islamabad as saying after parleys between the two sides.
Differences between Washington and Islamabad with regard to their mutual cooperation in the war against terrorism, now called international contingency operations, had been simmering since long.
However, their 'trust deficit' has emerged more vividly in the wake of announcement of the new U.S. policy on Afghanistan and Pakistan, which has given a regional aspect to the Afghan problem. This trust deficit now seems to have changed into a full-grown standoff.
"Islamabad has flagged certain red lines that cannot be crossed by the United States," uttered a seemingly defiant Shah Mahmood Qureshi, the foreign minister of Pakistan, while addressing a joint conference with Richard Holbrooke and Mike Mullen, after their talks in Islamabad on Tuesday.
He categorically said: "Pakistan has made it clear to the United States that it would not accept any foreign boots on the Pakistani soil."
Islamabad has been criticizing the U.S. drone attacks in the tribal areas along the Afghan borders, ever since their commencement in August last year. However, Washington persistently says these attacks have proved effective and would be continued.
U.S. drones have so far made over 35 missile strikes in the tribal areas, killing more than 300 people, including a large number of foreign militants. U.S. officials claimed that 13 of the top 20 Al-Qaeda leaders have been eliminated in these drone attacks.
However, Pakistan said these attacks are hampering its efforts to eliminate terrorism.
Rather, Islamabad on Tuesday demanded drone technology and authority to itself carry out these attacks.
For its part, the United States - alleging links between ISI, Pakistan's top military intelligence agency and Taliban - does not seem to trust the Pakistani forces.
"There are challenges associated with the ISI," Admiral Mike Mullen explicitly said at a joint briefing in Islamabad, while addressing Pakistan's concern against U.S. allegations against the Pakistani spy network.
"There is support (in the ISI) for some (militant) organizations," he further asserted.
Perhaps that is the reason that General Asif Shuja Pasha, the ISI chief, reportedly refused to hold separate meeting with the visiting U.S. officials.
Besides the ISI issue, differences also surfaced during the talks on the issue of carrying out joint military operations against militants in the tribal agencies.
"Pakistan rejects the U.S. proposal for carrying out joint operations against militants," newspapers quoted Pakistan government sources as saying.
Last week, there were reports in British and American media that U.S. and Pakistani forces contemplated joint operations in South Waziristan tribal agency to eliminate Baitullah Mehsud, the chief of Pakistani Taliban, for whom Washington has fixed 50 million dollars bounty.
Earlier, while charting out the new war on terror policy of his administration, President Obama had said that the U.S. and Pakistani forces would continue cooperation to eliminate terrorism.
However, Yousuf Raza Gilani, the prime minister of Pakistan, rejected these reports the other day, saying they were mere speculations.
The new defiant posture of Pakistan is not an instant flare up of sentiments on the part of the Pakistani leaders.
There are reports that Pakistan's defiant mood came after a collective decision of the government and the security establishment to adopt a tough posture.
"The Pakistan Army chief, General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, expressed Pakistan's concern (to the U.S. delegation) without mincing his words," Pakistani government sources said.
Pakistan seems to be not bothered even about the tempting 1.5 billion dollar annual aid package, which Washington has promised in response to Islamabad's cooperation in the war on terror.
"Blank check policy should be for both sides," Shah Mahmood Qureshi said in his press briefing, referring to a last week report, which quoted U.S. officials as saying that while extending aid, Washington would not give any blank check to Pakistan and would rather 'hold Pakistan accountable' for the spending it makes on war on terror.
If the impression gathered from the joint press conference of Holbrooke and Qureshi and the ensuing media reports are some things to believe in, Islamabad appears determined not to 'do more,' at the call of Washington - as has always been alleged by the opponents - if not fully parting ways with its long-time ally. 
No comments:
Post a Comment