- RSS
- Today's Paper
- Subscribe
- beta 2.1
Alerts
NATO strikes exit deal with three Central Asian states
A reverse transit agreement reached with three Central Asian partners: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan.
"We reached agreement on reverse transit from Afghanistan with three Central Asian partners: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan." PHOTO: AFP
BRUSSELS: NATO has struck a deal with Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan to remove equipment through their territories as it winds down the Afghan operation, NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen said Monday.
“We reached agreement on reverse transit from Afghanistan with three Central Asian partners: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan,” Rasmussen said at a news conference.
“These agreements will give us a range of new options and the robust and flexible transport network we need,” he added, without offering more detail on the accords.
The US is due to withdraw 23000 of its 130,000 troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2012. France, a Nato partner, is also due to withdraw its 4000 troops from the country.
Transit routes for the withdrawal are proving a major headache for the US-led ISAF operation in Afghanistan, with massive amounts of materiel dispatched in the decade-long war to be pulled out by the end-2014 deadline from a country ringed by high mountain passes.
The Brussels-headquartered alliance is also discussing with Russia the possibility of using Vostochny airport near Ulyanovsk, 900 kilometres (560 miles) east of Moscow, as a transit centre for non-lethal equipment from Afghanistan.
Washington meanwhile continues to press Pakistan to reopen routes blocked six months ago in retaliation for the deaths of 24 Pakistani soldiers killed by mistake by US strikes on a border post.
“I still hope that a solution can be found in the very near future,” Rasmussen said.
Meanwhile, a Department of Defense spokesperson said that discussions with Pakistan on reopening the Ground Lines of Communications (GLOCs) continue. Speaking to The Express Tribune, Commander Bill Speaks said, “we assess these talks will take time. We hope we are able to work collaboratively toward a resolution on reopening the GLOCs, which is important to our NATO partners as well as to us.”
Reader Comments (48)
World Latest Stories
Taliban Qatar office hints at possibility of ceasefire
Senior White House officials say US will engage in direct negotiations with the Taliban in Qatar next week.
Afghanistan suspends security pact talks with US amid Taliban peace process
Karzai blames inconsistent US strategy.
Rohani once spoke approvingly of hiding Iran atomic work
Ultimate decisions on Iran's nuclear program will remain in the hands of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Pakistan's refugee population 1.6 million: UNHCR report
The largest share of Pakistan’s refugees comes from Afghanistan.
LoC violation: Indian shelling leaves 2 students injured
The injured were taken to a local hospital for medical aid.
Turkey PM claims victory after protest crackdown
Confident he has weathered the storm, he warned against any resurgence of the protests.
Rousseff salutes Brazil protests, cities cut bus fares
Monday's demonstrations were the latest in a flurry of protests in the past two weeks.
Pakistan pushed Afghan insurgents to the table: Experts
Experts say move comes from the newly-elected government which faces its own battle with extremists at home.
Welcoming negotiations: Freeing Taliban prisoners was crucial for Qatar talks
Taliban commanders released by Pakistan will be part of negotiations.
China’s advice to Pakistan: peaceful development
Vice President Li Yuanchao says South Asia capable of rapid growth.
Recent Slideshows
More in World
As crisis bites, Spanish Church pressed on taxes
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, redistributed or derived from.
Unless otherwise stated, all content is copyrighted © 2013 The Express Tribune News Network.
Technical feedback? [email protected]
LOL…..exit deal or escape route ??
Recommend
So much for the “trump card” that many rightwing analysts had claimed Pakistan had over NATO supply lines.
Recommend
Great news for the nation but a sad day for the govt. Dream of securing $5000 per truck is shattered.
Recommend
these deals are meaningless given the condition of transport infrastructure in Afghanistan…. read this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/03/world/asia/us-pakistan-dispute-chokes-an-afghan-supply-route.html
Recommend
Hain?
We had US by neck.. at least we thought like that… How can we make it like Russia now?
This is cheating .. we tell you….
Recommend
@Aamir
The day they killed Osama they won the war.They came, chased away the taliban, ruled afghanistan for ten years while the Taliban hid in caves afraid to come out. Did you expect them to settle in Afghanistan? Maybe you have mixed up victory and defeatRecommend
@Fahad. Not for the Govt but for those who run NLC and who control Chaman and Torkham transit points…….and i doubt you know who run those Exit/Entry points. But Nato……..good punch.
Recommend
Pakistan is holding a check with a depreciating value and expiry date.
So Pakistan better try to get whatever money it can because it has lost last few months of transit fees.
Recommend
@KiJ:
You are absolutely right. The Salang Pass is a one-truck road, narrow with max height of 16 feet. Hence large items on trailers cannot pass through it. There is a 1 month wait per truck at the Pass to ferry materials into Afghanistan. Therefore, Pakistan is the only route to ferry out military hardware. Most commentators on this site are unaware of this fact and the advantage Pakistan enjoys. Rasmussen is full of Hot Air and his verbosity is to pressurize Pakistan. Hang in there. We have them by the …..
Recommend
LOL.. they know most of their equipment will not reach to Sindh even.
Recommend
H
Yeah Reverse transit is a nice way of saying retreat and defeat. I’m sure Uzbekistan charged more than the $14,000 they currently charge per truck .
It also is one way traffic out of AfghanistanRecommend
@All Indian trolls:
Be happy with Northern route…
Recommend
@Babloo: Gandhiji had used similar words to the Cripps mission. He had described their offer as ‘post-dated cheque on a crashing bank”
Recommend
That is good news. If this is all what had to matter in the end, they wouldn’t have beaten the bush about it so hard. Just hang in there. They need these routes and they need to pay a handsome amount this time.
Recommend
REVERSE TRANSIT aka retreat and defeat and even that Uzbekistan is charging, more than the $14,000 per truck they already charge . I hope they took into account damage to roads and bridges.
For reverse transit, Uzbekistan is prob going to get $20,000 per truck and also has no responsibility or insurance for it
NATO doesnt have that money Lmao
Recommend
@Wtf?:
Al Qaeda has been degraded to the point where not a single attack on NATO nations in the last 7 years. Afghan Taliban have been hiding in caves for over 10 years. OBL has been killed. Drones continue to do the rest. US has achieved their objectives. An orderly withdrawal makes sense to prevent civil war like it had occurred last time.
Recommend
Breaking a relationship can be done with a lot of dignity. What is playing out right now is very crass, very cheap. People saying NATO cannot pay for stuff is laughable. They can afford to blow up all of the military equipment in place and leave without breaking a sweat. US can generate $100 Billion by typing in a computer. It takes 5 seconds at best.
Recommend
I think Nato man, is trying to bargain. This is a bargaining card. It’s simple game theory guys, they’re portraying alternatives as “viable” so Pakistan prices its routes down. But I guess, in this information game we all know what is misinformation, and what is real buck for the bang for the bucky balls are nanotubes, and nano tubes are expensive. Pakistan’s $5000 demand is so cheap, I mean the Nato guys should consider this: $5000 is the amount I paid to viatnamese cleaner in Manhattan to clean a 400 sqr ft studio apartment?
Recommend
@Sinclair….only $100bn!!! They have the printing press running on full steam. I bet they can generate $1Trillion by typing in a computer. Its just paper. After all it is the American tax payer who paid for all the equipment. Blowing it all up would not be in the best interest of the tax payer.
Recommend
@Sinclair:
Like MLK said: I want to be the white man’s brother, not his brother-in-law….
Dignity is a two way highway… not a one way street!
What is $100 billion good for when America’s economy is tanking, irrespective…
Recommend
just smoking the eyes….. believe me, they will use pakistan’s supply routes…. just faking with pakistani public… all set with generals n politicians
Recommend
@gp65
I agree with the thrust of your comment – but would observe that the strategic focus of the USA has switched from civilian to pure military and avoiding “civil war” isn’t a priority. Leaving a cost effective small footprint with emphasis on special forces, drones and fighter bombers will prevent Afghan or Pakistan militants from seizing control while reducing/eliminating any reliance on Pakistan.
Recommend
@Cautious @Sinclair @gp65
US has lost the war. Nothing can be realized without Pakistan cooperation, and Pakistan aint cooperating. Double game has stopped being double game.
US economy is trillions of trillions in debt. They can not print money out of thin air without tanking the economy even further. Lose-lose situation. China is selling off US treasury bonds.Recommend
@GP65 i assure you taliban are expected to come back the minute NATO leaves..
@Sinclair There is no peace in Afghanistan after 11 years. NATO burning all their equipment before leaving is a sign of ‘accepting defeat’.Just carefully read again what you typed above.Recommend
It’s no secret that the regrettable Salala incident has left our relationship severely strained. The aftermath of the Salala incident has resulted in a big setback to our efforts in combating terrorism. You can be rest assured that we are making every effort to move forward, while patiently hoping for Pakistan to agree upon a resolution. The patience with which our government has been waiting for our nations to come to an agreement proves that we fully respect Pakistan’s sovereignty and its decision to review the terms of our relationship. While the window remains open for the doubters to exploit our situation, it must be noted that both nations are making strong efforts to iron out the differences. The series of meetings between our highest officials prove that our governments are committed to finding a resolution. We’ve seen our relationship overcome many obstacles for the sake of staying united against our common enemies. And we remain hopeful of coming out of this debacle for the sake of achieving our common objectives.
Recommend
@US Centcom:
I like the way you address it even though i am convinced salala was not a mistake. Unfortunately, the language behind closed doors from US officials is not the same as yours. You guys never took adequate action against the people who did this ‘mistake’.CIA is waging an unjust war on our nationals through an unjust drone war that you nor your lawyers can defend.The level of mistrust for us in your ranks is depicted when they refuse to transfer us the drone tech and let us target the rogue elements in the tribal areas and when they dont make a joint operation with us on Abbottabad. The region is more volatile than it was 12 years back and one day your VP calls Talib a friend and the next day you order us not to negotiate with the militants..Your double standards are way beyond any comprehension and would make you lose an ally sooner or later.
Recommend
It’s trap NATO should not fall into – Europe Misslle Defence strategy will be compromised – Russia will get a tactical advantage?!
Recommend
@US Centcom:
What happens once our common objectives are met? you’ll forget Pakistan like you always did just like in the late 80s when a civil war started in Afghanistan.Our relationship has always been transactional since 1953..It was NEVER a strategic relationship because of our close ties with China and enmity with India.Mr. Leon Panetta has problems gulping the deal of 5 grands per truck which shows the true picture of our relationship.You want to eat your cake and have it too.
proves that we fully respect Pakistan’s sovereignty
all i can say to that is LOL
Recommend
If Zardari and liberal elite class is included in the NATO retreat/escape, all of Pakistani nation will double Uzbekistan’s asking price and instead pay NATO and transport them all ourselves.
Recommend
@Drake:
and yet US is hammering away drone missiles on your land and you do nothing…
Recommend
blackmailing didnt work..so who will feed you now..????hahhahaahha
Recommend
In my opinion victory in war is related to achievement of objective. US has been successful in containing Al-Qaeda, but it should also be kept in mind that despite 10 years of war, US has hold just in kabul and some adjoining areas. If they leave now, the country will most probably be taken over by taliban again, and Al-Qaida may regroup. So I dont think objective has been achieved. It seems a defeat for sure.
Recommend
@Drake:
And the debt is largely due to healthcare expenses. What does that have to do with Pakistan? Besides these days NATO is replacing soldiers with drones that will continue to operfatty free 2014.
Recommend
@Drake:
Raymond Davis, drone attacks, air transport through Pakistan, Pakistan is not cooperating?
Recommend
I dont think anyone even with an IQ of an ordinary American can believe in this nonsense that NATO has other viable options. If they had any good alternative they would have gone for it overnight, why are they still going an and on and on about opening Pakistani routes?. They are stuck and keep bluffing. As for the optimistic guy who feels that NATO can explode the stuff and walk away and US can generate billions , just like that , I wonder what planet is he from?
Recommend
You guys DO NOT want to leave this region.
Recommend
@bangash: If they want to spend five times the amount of money to exit through Central Asian states that is the perogative of NATO. We all know the economic difficulties of the European Union and the lack of funds to keep bailing out bankrupt South European nations. If they want to put themselves in more economic trouble that is their right. It think it would be wiser for them to work together with Pakistan on fairer terms and agree to compensate Pakistan for the hundreds of billions loss they have suffered due to defeating the Soviets and now helping in the current war.
Recommend
This is what I had anticipated. I feared that Pakistan would drag on the question for so long and would prescribe so many conditions – apology for Salala, 24 times higher tariff for each truck passing Pakistani territory, stoppage of drone strikes, none of which the US would be prepared to accept – that the US would explore other possibilities and when those other possibilities materialized, then Pakistan would sink into sheer irrelevance for the US and Allies. It is a question of time before Pakistan discovers further that it has no further value for Nato operations in Afghanistan.
Besides, if Pakistan persists in working against Afghanistan’s interests after December 2014, then it is possible that the US may be driven to conclude that Pakistan had indeed crossed the Rubicon and that now it stood on the other side of the line.
Let’s see how the future unfolds.
V. C. Bhutani, Delhi, India, 5 Jun 2012, 0505 IST
Recommend
Whatever may be the tactics being played now, the end result remains the same: The day USA leaves Afghanistan countdown for Pakistan starts.
Recommend
This is bad news for Pakistan. Valuable loss of money for the fragile economy.
Recommend
This is such a joke NATO is going to partner with central asian countries and ignore their terrible human rights record.
Recommend
@bangash:
One always wins when one is negotiating with themselves as Pakistanis continue to doRecommend
@Aamir:
Amir maybe you and your buddies can now give Paksitan the dollars that it needsRecommend
A. Pakistanis want US/NATO out of Afghanistan.
B. Pakistanis do not want their territory to be used.
Ergo, Pakistanis should be happy with this development. Apparently they are not.
Why?
Recommend
@Shyam: The day they killed Osama they won the war.They came, chased away the taliban, ruled afghanistan for ten years while the Taliban hid in caves afraid to come out. Did you expect them to settle in Afghanistan? Maybe you have mixed up victory and defeat
Buddy I think you have it mixed up. its actually the US which is hiding in fortified bases around kabul with the thousands of troops deployed to actually end the insurgency protecting their barriers. The Taliban are now stronger than ever which is why the US is now looking towards holding peace talks and dialogues with them because they know that they have lost the war on terror. The US is spending roughly 800 million dollars a month on troop sustainment in Afghanistan and Iraq against a bunch of “people hidden in the caves afraid to come out.” The US can no longer afford the war on terror which is why they are cowering and trying to plan exit strategies. Kindly get your facts straight before making such statements
Recommend
@Shyam:
Yes definitely US won the war but only media war and on the ground realities the facts are different and this is reality that now US’ and NATO’s forces are searching for escaping ways because they no longer want to stay in Afghanistan to avoid from more and more damages and losses of $$$$$,military’ accessories/vehicles/equipments and troops’ lives and “The US is due to withdraw 23000 of its 130,000 troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2012. France, a Nato partner, is also due to withdraw its 4000 troops from the country.” this statement is the proof of it whereas your deadline was 2014.
Recommend
Pakistan kept supporting US during the war but when US decided to pull out Pakistan soured it relations with its major ally. Not a wise thing to do.
Recommend
The US would like to pay 14000USD per truck to Uzbeks rather than paying 5000USD per truck to Pakistanis…so would I. The Americans know Pakistanis are just a bunch of opportunists.
Recommend