Presidential debate: One thing Obama, Romney agree on — Pakistan

Republican hopeful supports drone campaign, aid conditions.

WASHINGTON DC/ FLORIDA/ BOCA RATON:

The US presidential candidates wrapped up the final debate before the November 6 elections on Tuesday with more cohesion than expected on Pakistan.

Following the third and final presidential debate at the Lynn University, moderated by US journalist Bob Schieffer, it was apparent that Washington’s foreign policy towards Islamabad is likely to remain the same.

Republican candidate Mitt Romney largely embraced President Barack Obama’s position on Pakistan and, in a departure from his frequent criticism, said he did not blame Obama for troubled ties between the nations.

The White House hopeful said Pakistan was important to the region as well as to the US, and cautioned against Pakistan falling apart which would, in his opinion, become of “extraordinary danger”.

“It’s not time to divorce a nation that has 100 nuclear weapons and is on the way to double that at some point, a nation that has serious threats from terrorist groups within its nation,” Romney said.

“The aid we provide to Pakistan must be conditioned to certain benchmarks being met,” he said.

The governor further said that they have to work with people in Pakistan to move towards a “more responsible course”. “Pakistan is technically an ally, and they’re not acting very much like an ally right now,” he said.

“It’s a nation that’s not like others and it does not have a civilian leadership that is calling the shots there,” he added, while also voicing concern about the Haqqani network, and worried over the power of the Inter-Services Intelligence agency.

Romney also said he supports the use of drones in Pakistan. “It’s widely reported that drones are being used in drone strikes, and I support that ... entirely and feel the president was right to up the usage of that technology.”

He said he believed the US should “continue to go after the people that represent a threat to this nation and to our friends.” But added: “We’re going to have to do more than just going after leaders and killing bad guys, important as that is.”

Meanwhile, analyst Ejaz Haider told The Express Tribune that he felt Republicans do not really have a clear-cut policy on Af-Pak issues, and Romney, therefore, has to agree with Obama on many issues. “He can’t say they’ll keep troops past 2014 [because of] Nato’s pressure… This is campaign mode. Of course Pakistan is of importance. Of course, you can’t divorce Pakistan. There is no real ideological difference between the two when it comes to this,” he added.

During the foreign policy debate, President Obama said that the US created partnerships throughout the region to deal with extremists in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia.

He also presented as a certainty the risk that Osama bin Laden could have escaped had the US sought Pakistan’s permission ahead of the 2011 raid in Abbottabad.

“… If we had asked Pakistan for permission, we would not have gotten him. And it was worth moving heaven and earth to get him,” he said.

Obama administration officials have previously justified the decision not to involve Islamabad by citing the risk that Bin Laden might somehow be tipped off and flee his compound before the team of Navy SEALs arrived.

Romney said he also would have ordered the raid. “We had to go into Pakistan. We had to go in there to get Osama bin Laden. That was the right thing to do,” he said.

(Read: Run-up to the US elections)

(WITH ADDITIONAL INPUT FROM AGENCIES AND NEWS DESK)


Published in The Express Tribune, October 24^th, 2012.