<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" version="2.0"><channel>
                        <title>The Express Tribune</title>
                        <atom:link href="https://tribune.com.pk/feed/uspakrift" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
                        <link>https://tribune.com.pk/feed/uspakrift</link>
                        <description>The Express Tribune keeps you up to date with all the latest happenings from Pakistan and across the world!</description>
                        <lastBuildDate>Sun, 31 May 26 05:37:03 +0500</lastBuildDate>
                        <language>en-US</language>
                        <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
                        <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
                        <generator>https://laravel.com/</generator><item>
			<title>Djokovic and Alcaraz set for Wimbledon showdown in thrilling 2023 rematch</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2479274/djokovic-and-alcaraz-set-for-wimbledon-showdown-in-thrilling-2023-rematch</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2479274/djokovic-and-alcaraz-set-for-wimbledon-showdown-in-thrilling-2023-rematch#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 12 Jul 24 21:27:56 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Reuters/News Desk]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Sports]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2479274</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[&quot;Wimbledon has been a childhood dream&quot;: Djokovic reflects on journey to 10th final]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Seven-time champion Novak Djokovic showcased some of his finest tennis to outclass Italian 25th seed Lorenzo Musetti 6-4, 7-6(2), 6-4 on Friday, securing his spot in a 10th Wimbledon final. Djokovic will face current holder Carlos Alcaraz in a highly anticipated rematch of the 2023 final.

Sunday&rsquo;s blockbuster meeting marks the first time since 2014-15 that the same pair will compete for the gilded Challenge Cup in consecutive years, reminiscent of Djokovic&#39;s previous duels with great Roger Federer.

Carlos Alcaraz advanced to the 2024 Wimbledon men&rsquo;s singles final by defeating Russia&rsquo;s Daniil Medvedev with 6-7(1-7), 6-3, 6-4, 6-4 sets on Friday. The reigning champion eliminated Medvedev in the Wimbledon semifinal for the second consecutive year.

In his post-match speech, the 21-year-old Spanish player admitted he did not start the game well but gradually gained the upper hand against the 2021 US Open winner as the match progressed.

&ldquo;Wimbledon has been a childhood dream to play and to win... I was a seven-year-old boy watching bombs fly over my head and dreaming of being on the most important court in the world,&rdquo; Djokovic told the Centre Court crowd. &ldquo;I was constructing Wimbledon trophies out of any material in the room. It&#39;s been an incredible journey. I try not to take it for granted every time I find myself on this unique court.&rdquo;

With the arena still filling up after Alcaraz&#39;s victory over fifth seed Daniil Medvedev, second seed Djokovic broke after a breathtaking 26-shot rally in the sixth game of the opening set. The 37-year-old, who had lashed out at Centre Court fans after his fourth-round victory over Holger Rune, raised his arms to demand more from the crowd, drawing some boos.

Fans rallied behind Musetti, who broke back to make it 4-5 with a fiery forehand, but the 22-year-old gifted the set to Djokovic after a shaky service game. Musetti quickly made amends in the second set, producing a stunning backhand pass for a 3-1 lead. However, Djokovic remained unperturbed, clawing his way back to clinch the tiebreak.

With a sixth straight All England Club final and his first of an unusually patchy season in sight, the 24-time Grand Slam champion secured a break in the opening game of the third set with a backhand crosscourt winner. Djokovic mixed up his game by serving and volleying, leaving Musetti on the ropes. The Italian&#39;s late comeback attempt was thwarted as Djokovic saved a break point and prevailed on his fourth match point when Musetti sent a shot long.

Celebrating the win, Djokovic imitated playing the violin with his racket &mdash; a nod to his daughter in the stands who is learning the instrument &mdash; though the gesture drew more boos from the fans. Despite the mixed reception, Djokovic remains focused on winning a men&rsquo;s record-equalling eighth Wimbledon trophy, especially significant given that his participation had been in doubt following knee surgery just five weeks ago.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Bill on US Senate calendar: Counterinsurgency fund to come with strings attached</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/472557/bill-on-us-senate-calendar-counterinsurgency-fund-to-come-with-strings-attached</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/472557/bill-on-us-senate-calendar-counterinsurgency-fund-to-come-with-strings-attached#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Thu, 29 Nov 12 04:41:32 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[huma.imtiaz]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[World]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=472557</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Defence secretary has to certify Pakistan is taking action against Haqqanis, Quetta Shura.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The US Senate has included in its calendar the hearing of the National Defence Authorisation Act 2013 (NDAA), which seeks to place Pakistan under the spotlight for action against terror groups operating inside its territory.


The text of the bill states that the US secretary of defence has to certify to congressional defence committees that Pakistan is taking action against terrorist groups including the Haqqani Network, the Quetta Shura and against improvised explosive device manufacturers.

The bill also stipulates the conditions associated with the Pakistan Counterinsurgency Fund. It asserts that no reimbursements can be made to Pakistan that were claimed by the country during the period when the ground lines of supply through Pakistan to Afghanistan were closed.

Additionally, the bill says that no more than $1,750,000,000 can be given to Pakistan in the fiscal year 2013 — this figure does not include reimbursements made to Pakistan during fiscal year 2013 from previous funds.

The bill text states that the US secretary of defence has to certify to congressional defence committees that Pakistan has opened and is maintaining security along the ground lines of supply to Afghanistan for the Pakistan counterinsurgency.



The certification requirements include that Pakistan is not providing support to militant extremist groups including the Haqqani Network and the Afghan Taliban Quetta Shura present in Pakistan that are carrying out cross-border attacks against the US, Afghan or coalition forces. The requirements state that “Pakistan is demonstrably cooperating with US counterterrorism efforts, including by not detaining, prosecuting, or imprisoning citizens of Pakistan as a result of their cooperation with such efforts, including Dr Shakil Afridi”.

Additionally, the US secretary of defence has to certify that Pakistan is demonstrating “a continuing commitment, and is making significant efforts toward the implementation of a strategy, to counter improvised explosive devices, including efforts to attack improvised explosive device networks, monitor known precursors used in improvised explosive devices, and develop and implement a strict protocol for the manufacture of explosive materials (including calcium ammonium nitrate) and accessories and for their supply to legitimate end users.”

The secretary of defence is also allowed to waive these limitations if he testifies that the waiver is in the US’ national security interests, along with justifications for the waiver.

The bill was added to the Senate’s calendar after a motion was moved; however, no date has yet been set for hearing the bill. Previously, the NDAA 2012 bill froze $700 million in the Pakistan Counterinsurgency Fund.

Published in The Express Tribune, November 29th, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Unmanned war: Pakistan hopes for ‘acceptable’ deal</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/425979/unmanned-war-pakistan-hopes-for-%e2%80%98acceptable%e2%80%99-deal</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/425979/unmanned-war-pakistan-hopes-for-%e2%80%98acceptable%e2%80%99-deal#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 24 Aug 12 23:00:25 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[kamran.yousaf]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=425979</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[The two countries are discussing a slew of proposals to find a solution to the CIA-led drones.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Pakistan has said that it hopes to cut a “mutually acceptable” deal with the United States on its contentious drone campaign in the tribal belt.


The two countries are discussing a slew of proposals to find a solution to the CIA-led campaign, which has been a major irritant in their troubled diplomatic relations.

“We hope to come up with a mutually acceptable solution to this issue,” Foreign Office spokesperson Moazzam Ali Khan told a weekly press briefing in Islamabad on Friday. He did not elaborate.

Khan’s statement came a day after the Foreign Office summoned a senior US diplomat to protest the recent surge in drone attacks.

In the past, Pakistan offered to carry out surgical strikes against “high-value” targets using its F-16 fighter jets as an alternative to drone strikes.

The United States showed little interest in the offer, mainly due to a trust deficit between the two countries and their intelligence agencies.

When asked, Khan said Islamabad had other options available to convince the US administration into ceasing unilateral strikes on Pakistani territory. At the moment, the government is trying to resolve the issue at a bilateral level.

The US appears to have no immediate plans to cease drone strikes, as it considers the campaign crucial for eliminating high-profile al Qaeda and Taliban militants.

Responding to a question regarding former ambassador Hussain Haqqani’s comments at a Washington think tank on Thursday, the spokesperson differed with the assessment that Pakistan and the US should “stop pretending they are allies and amicably divorce”.

“We think there is a desire on both sides to have this relationship moved forward on the basis of mutual respect and mutual interest,” he added.

‘Assam unrest’

The spokesperson rejected India’s allegations that Pakistan was using social media to stoke communal tension in the volatile region of Assam.

“We reject such insinuations and we find them baseless and unfounded. We have asked them that if they have any credible information ... they are most welcome to share it with us,” he said.

Last week, Indian Home Secretary R K Singh blamed Pakistan-based elements for uploading inflammatory and objectionable content on the Internet that painted an exaggerated picture of the recent violence in Assam.

Published in The Express Tribune, August 25th, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Islamabad, Washington must ‘divorce’ as allies: Haqqani</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/425540/islamabad-washington-must-%e2%80%98divorce%e2%80%99-as-allies-haqqani</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/425540/islamabad-washington-must-%e2%80%98divorce%e2%80%99-as-allies-haqqani#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 24 Aug 12 04:54:47 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[reuters]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=425540</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Says a post-alliance future would allow them to hold more realistic expectations of each other.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The United States and Pakistan should stop pretending they are allies and amicably “divorce,” Pakistan’s former ambassador to Washington has said — citing unrealistic expectations in both countries that include US hopes that Islamabad will sever its links to extremists.


“If in 65 years, you haven’t been able to find sufficient common ground to live together, and you had three separations and four reaffirmations of marriage, then maybe the better way is to find friendship outside of the marital bond,” Husain Haqqani said, addressing the Centre for the National Interest, a Washington think tank.

Haqqani’s recommendation that the US and Pakistan essentially downgrade their status was based on the premise that it may be the only way to break from what has been a dysfunctional relationship.

A post-alliance future would allow both countries to hold more realistic expectations of each other, cooperating where possible but perhaps without the sense of betrayal, which has become acute in Pakistan.

He cited a survey by the Pew Research Centre released in June showing roughly three-in-four Pakistanis consider the US an enemy, even though Washington pours billions of dollars of aid into the country.

“If this was an election campaign ... you would advise the senator with these kinds of favourability ratings to pull out of the race, instead of spending more money,” said Haqqani, who plans to publish a book entitled “Magnificent Delusions” next year about the US-Pakistan relationship.

His candid remarks represented Haqqani’s first address in Washington since he resigned as Pakistan’s envoy last year after, he says, being framed for drafting a memo that accused the army of plotting a coup — allegations he defended himself against before the Supreme Court.

He said that the military needed to be under greater civilian control, adding Pakistan’s national interests are defined “by generals, not by civilian leaders.”

But he also doled out criticism of US policymaking, saying it was too often short-sighted, lacking the necessary historic perspective needed to appreciate realistically what Pakistan might do in return for aid and cooperation.

He repeatedly said someone in Pakistan knew of Osama bin Laden’s presence, even though he stopped far short of blaming the Inter-Services Intelligence directorate (ISI).

“I still think a full proper investigation on the Pakistani side is needed to find out how Bin Laden lived in Pakistan and who supported him — within or outside the government,” he said. “I really do not know (who helped Bin Laden). All I am saying is that somebody knew.”

Unrealistic expectations

Haqqani said it was just as unrealistic for Pakistanis to think that the US would side with Pakistan by launching war on India as it was for the US to think Pakistan would give up its nuclear weapons or sever ties with extremists.

“Equally unrealistic is that Pakistan ... will give up support for jihadi groups that it deems to be a sub-conventional force multiplier for regional influence.”

Describing his vision for a post-alliance future for the US and Pakistan, Haqqani appeared to downplay US security concerns. Regarding drone strikes, he believed the US would press ahead with the campaign even in a post-alliance future.

“I have no realistic expectation of the US ending the drone campaign and (no realistic expectation of) Pakistan accepting it,” he said.

Published in The Express Tribune, August 24th, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Resumption of strategic dialogue to boost Pak-US ties</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/424354/resumption-of-strategic-dialogue-to-boost-pak-us-ties</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/424354/resumption-of-strategic-dialogue-to-boost-pak-us-ties#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 20 Aug 12 06:13:01 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[sumera.khan]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=424354</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Goodwill gestures expected in aftermath of cessation of ban on ground lines of communication through Pakistan.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[A revival of strategic dialogue between Pakistan and the United States next month, recent important visits from US military officials and various other acts of goodwill can be expected from the US in the near future, sources in Pakistan’s embassy in Washington, DC have told The Express Tribune.


The goodwill gestures are being expected in the aftermath of the cessation of a ban on the ground lines of communication through Pakistan that had lasted for 7 months.

Sources from both sides confirmed that top officials from both countries have agreed to take advantage of the 67th United Nations General Assembly session, falling next month in New York, to give a fresh start to the strategic dialogue between both countries.

Sources stationed at the Presidency in Islamabad informed The Express Tribune: “President Asif Ali Zardari will attend the United Nations General Assembly this time as all preparations indicate that there are bright chances to have bilateral meetings with different heads of states but a meeting with the US president is also on the cards”.

Regarding the process of the revival of bilateral ties between the two allies, the US initiated a goodwill message to Pakistan through diplomatic channels stating that “the US is serious in rejuvenation of the torn relations with Pakistan as the Salala incident had brought great damage not only to the existing strong relationship (with Pakistan) but also to the war efforts against terror.”

Similar views were surfacing at Pakistan’s Foreign Office (FO) regarding the expected talks: “We also want to give a fresh start to the ties with the US as there is no use of lingering on issues that have already been settled by both of us, therefore, an agenda for the revival of strategic dialogue is being chalked out in both countries as of now,” an FO official said.

“Keeping in view the tension that erupted between Pakistan and the US since the Raymond Davis issue, Osama bin Laden’s killing and the Salala episode, we hope that the US will have a realistic approach in addressing all issues,” the official went on to say.

During the next strategic dialogue rounds, he said, Pakistan’s tentative focus will be mainly on the social sector and non-security related areas specifically. As many as 11 core groups are part of the strategic dialogue process, including economy and trade, energy, defence, security, strategic stability and non-proliferation, law enforcement and counter-terrorism, science and technology, education, agriculture, water, health and communication, and public diplomacy.

It was learnt that Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar, along with Foreign Secretary Jalil Abbas Jilani, is likely to visit Washington in September to finalise the agenda and to discuss other pending issues for the fourth ministerial session of the strategic dialogue.

Published in The Express Tribune, August 20th, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Pakistan military plans to open new front: Panetta</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/422240/pakistan-military-plans-to-open-new-front-panetta</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/422240/pakistan-military-plans-to-open-new-front-panetta#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Wed, 15 Aug 12 04:00:59 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[agencies]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[World]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=422240</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Says Gen Kayani discussed operation in recent talks with Isaf commander.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta has said that Pakistan was prepared to launch combat operations against Taliban militants in North Waziristan Agency, which also serves as a haven for the al Qaeda-affiliated Haqqani network.


According to Panetta, Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani discussed the planned operation in recent conversations with the top American commander in Afghanistan, Gen John Allen.

The defence secretary told a news agency he did not know when the Pakistani operation would start, but he understands it will be in the “near future,” and that the main target will be the Pakistani Taliban, rather than the Haqqani network.  He welcomed Gen Kayani’s initiative, even though the main target may not be the Haqqani leadership.

“They’ve talked about it for a long time. Frankly, I’d lost hope that they were going to do anything about it. But it does appear that they in fact are going to take that step.”

The US has long been frustrated by Islamabad’s refusal to target Afghan Taliban militants and their allies.

However, speculations about the possibility of an operation in North Waziristan have been rife, especially in the wake of Director-General Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI) Lt Gen Zaheerul Islam’s visit to the US. Many analysts believe Pakistan is reluctant to target groups with which it has strong historical ties and could be useful allies after foreign forces withdraw from Afghanistan.

On Monday, while addressing the Azadi Parade in Kakul, Gen Kayani renewed the military’s commitment to fighting against terrorism.

“We realise that the most difficult task for any army is to fight against its own people. But this happens as a last resort. Our real objective is to restore peace in these areas so that people can lead normal lives,” he said, adding, “No state can afford a parallel system or a militant force.”

No joint operation: security officials

Senior security officials have dismissed speculations about a joint Pak-US operation in North Waziristan as ‘baseless’ and ‘absurd’.

One of the senior security officials, requesting anonymity, vehemently rejected the possibility of any ISI-CIA joint operation codenamed ‘Tight Screw’ in North Waziristan through which boots on ground has been accepted by Islamabad.

Sharing further details regarding ISI chief Lt Gen Zaheerul Islam’s visit to the US, the officer said, “Pakistan does not support the Haqqani network for their operations inside Afghanistan”.

With additional reporting by asad kharal in lahore

Published in The Express Tribune, August 15th, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Moving beyond a thaw</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/422056/moving-beyond-a-thaw</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/422056/moving-beyond-a-thaw#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Tue, 14 Aug 12 18:32:03 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[tariq.fatemi]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=422056</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Pakistan's relationship with US will be determined by American perception of its cooperation on Afghanistan.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The signing of the Pakistan-US memorandum of understanding (MoU) governing supplies to US troops in Afghanistan has paved the way for the release of $1.8 billion in Coalition Support Fund, held up for two years. More importantly, it has permitted tentative moves towards a thaw in the frozen relations between the two countries.

The injection of nearly two billion dollars in Pakistan’s treasury was important, given the gradual decline in the country’s foreign exchange reserves. But of greater import is the expectation that the MoU has brought closure to the worrying decline in bilateral relations that began with the Raymond Davis affair and culminated with the Salala incident. What ensued was a bitter campaign of accusations and recriminations, in which the Pakistanis saw everything in terms of  ‘national honour’, while the Americans viewed everything as proof of Pakistan’s ‘duplicity’.

The aroused passions threatened to irretrievably damage their bilateral ties, increasingly critical to the successful conclusion of Afghanistan’s ‘endgame’. The MoU was followed by the newly appointed DG ISI’s first visit to the US. One can only hope that his talks with senior US officials were “productive” as claimed, because of the ISI’s traditionally pivotal role on both combating extremists at home and determining Pakistan’s policy on Afghanistan. In fact, even though Pakistan and the US have been close friends for many years, it has been their military and intelligence agencies that have been primary drivers of this partnership. This became much more pronounced after 9/11, when Pakistan chose close partnership with the US, in its global war on terror. Even after General (retd) Pervez Musharraf’s departure and President Barack Obama’s entry into the White House, there was little change in the substance of their ties, notwithstanding Secretary Hillary Clinton’s claims of a “strategic” relationship having been achieved.

Recent developments have confirmed that for the foreseeable future, whether Pakistan likes it or not, its relationship with the US will be determined by American perception of its cooperation on Afghanistan. This was highlighted in Senator John Kerry’s remark during confirmation hearings for Ambassadors-designate to Kabul and Islamabad that Pakistan remains central to what happens in Afghanistan. Latest reports indicating some “understanding” on the Haqqani network, with Pakistan willing to initiate a scaled down operation — provided the US assures it of sealing the border — should remove a major irritant. In fact, this network has acquired a stature far beyond anything its founders had envisaged, because it is not only the US but India and Afghanistan, too, that view it with special concern. And now, reports to the effect that Pakistan has facilitated the long-sought meeting between Afghan officials and Mullah Omar’s deputy, Mullah Baradar, should help in reducing Kabul’s (and America’s) misgivings about Pakistan’s attitude to the reconciliation efforts in Afghanistan. Moreover, if this is indicative of a gradual shift away from a desire to be the preeminent player in Afghanistan, it could help promote genuine understanding between Islamabad and Kabul. It is in this context that reports that Pakistan has been rethinking its  ‘doctrine of strategic depth’ vis-a-vis Afghanistan, is also a welcome step. This was alluded to by Ambassador Richard Olson in his Senate testimony. Recent initiatives to improve relations with India are also a step in the right direction, and not only because it finds favour with Washington, but on its own merits.

These events do indicate a thaw in Pakistan-US relations. But for bilateral ties to acquire a degree of predictability and permanence, we will have to work on multiple fronts that should include enhanced trade, meaningful American investment (building dams rather than repairing tube-wells) and engagements among civil society groups, politicians, journalists and academicians. There is no doubt that both Pakistan and the US should remain wedded to this relationship, though it has to be tempered with greater realism that includes lowered expectations. Exaggerated claims of  “strategic partnership” never jelled with reality, which is why when Salala happened, it threatened to destroy the relationship.

Published in The Express Tribune, August 15th, 2012. ]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>US must seal Afghan border for Waziristan push: Pakistani official</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/420718/us-must-seal-afghan-border-for-waziristan-push-pakistani-official</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/420718/us-must-seal-afghan-border-for-waziristan-push-pakistani-official#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sat, 11 Aug 12 08:10:02 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[afp]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[World]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=420718</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Official accuses Americans of failing to seal the border when operations were planned twice before.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Pakistan has told Washington that US forces must seal the Afghan border in the event of any offensive against the al Qaeda-linked Haqqani network in North Waziristan, an official said Saturday.

The Haqqanis, blamed for some of the deadliest attacks in Afghanistan and whose leaders are understood to be based in the Pakistani tribal district, is one of the thorniest issues between Islamabad and Washington.

"The Americans have been repeatedly told that they will have to seal off the border on the Afghan side whenever an operation is launched in North Waziristan," a senior Pakistani security official told AFP.

Without protecting the porous, mountainous border, militants would simply escape into Afghanistan, where Pakistan has no writ, the official explained.

He claimed that Americans have "never been encouraging on this point" and accused them of failing to seal the border when operations were planned twice before in North Waziristan.

On August 3, The Wall Street Journal reported that Pakistani and US officials were considering joint counter-terrorism campaigns in Afghanistan and Pakistan against the Haqqanis and Taliban fighters who attack Pakistan.

The paper said the campaigns would mark an upturn in cooperation after more than a year of rancorous relations and stamp out major threats facing each country.

Pakistani officials later denied any agreement with the United States for a joint operation in North Waziristan, and said "routine" actions on each side of the border "should not be mistaken for 'joint operations'".]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>US, Pakistan appear to make little headway in spy meet</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/417149/us-pakistan-appear-to-make-little-headway-in-spy-meet</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/417149/us-pakistan-appear-to-make-little-headway-in-spy-meet#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 03 Aug 12 16:31:09 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[reuters]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=417149</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Sources say drone strikes issue raised with US. Pakistan not to stand in way of labelling Haqqani Network FTO.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[US and Pakistani spy chiefs exchanged grievances in their first official meeting this week, sources familiar with the discussions said on Friday, but it was unclear if the two uneasy allies made any progress to end deep divisions on militants living in Pakistani tribal areas or on US drone strikes.

Lieutenant-General Zaheerul Islam, who was named to head the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) in March, on his first official visit to Washington met on Thursday with CIA Director David Petraeus at CIA headquarters.

Ahead of his visit, Pakistani officials said the country's spy chief would call for an end to US military drone strikes in volatile areas bordering Afghanistan and push for a sharing of technology and intelligence.

The public preview of Pakistani demands of Petraeus appeared to have displeased US officials, who pushed back at the notion they might cede to Pakistani requests.

The United States and Pakistan are seeking to repair relations that have suffered over the past 20 months, in part because of the unilateral US raid that killed al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in Pakistan last May and a US air attack that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers in November.

The two countries reached a breakthrough last month with a deal that reopened ground supply routes that Nato nations use to supply troops in neighbouring Afghanistan, which had been closed since the November air attack along the Afghan border.

The Obama administration is deeply suspicious of Pakistan, which it believes harbors militants, while Pakistan accuses Washington of disregarding its own human toll from militancy and says drone strikes violate its sovereignty.

While sources familiar with the discussions said the two spy chiefs aired mutual grievances, they did not appear to have made big strides on the main issues.

Pakistan's parliament has demanded an end to the drone strikes, but the sources in Washington indicated that US officials did not yield to those demands.

"The discussions today between General Zaheer and Director Petraeus were substantive, professional, and productive," a US official said on condition of anonymity.

"Both leaders reaffirmed their commitment to work together to counter the terrorist presence in the region that threatens both US and Pakistani national security."

Ahead of Thursday's meeting, US officials signaled there would be little, if any, change in US counter-terrorism activity in Pakistan and the region.

The Obama administration is pressuring Pakistan to take action in particular against the Haqqani network, a militant group allied with the Taliban that is blamed for some of the boldest attacks against Western and Afghan government targets in Afghanistan.

Pakistan responds that it is doing all it can against militants, but notes that extremists attack its own civilians and soldiers.

Key concerns raised

A Pakistani official, on condition of anonymity, told The Express Tribune that the issue of drones was raised in multiple meetings between ISI chief Lt Gen Zaheerul Islam and US officials on Thursday.

The official added that Pakistan has presented a counter-proposal on using F-16s to target militants after US shares intelligence. "There was no compromise on "accepting" drone attacks," the official said, adding that on the whole, there was a better understanding of Pakistan's security concerns.

Another issue that has dominated the US-Pakistan relationship has been the contentious issue of the Haqqani Network. US officials have blamed the group, believed to be based in North Waziristan, for multiple attacks on coalition forces and the US Embassy in Kabul.

The US Congress has introduced legislation asked the Secretary of State to label the Haqqani Network as a Foreign Terrorist Organisation.

Another source familiar with the discussions said that the US was told that if the US Government wanted to label the Haqqani Network as an FTO, it would be the US' call, and Pakistan would not stand in the way.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Revamping the Pakistan-US alliance</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/417094/revamping-the-pakistan-us-alliance</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/417094/revamping-the-pakistan-us-alliance#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 03 Aug 12 15:38:32 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[editorial]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Editorial]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=417094</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[The war against terrorism will be fought in Pakistan whether we like it or not. And Pakistan cannot fight it alone.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Before sending his ISI chief General Zaheerul Islam to Washington to meet the CIA Director David Petraeus, Pakistan Army Chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani set the tone after meeting the top US commander in Afghanistan General John Allen: “The meeting helped towards improving strategic and operational understanding between the Pakistan military and ISAF”.

In Washington, General Islam expressed Pakistan’s desire to move to ‘new beginnings’, resetting cooperation in the two countries’ strategic projections. The ‘new beginnings’ indicate progress from where it was disrupted when the former ISI chief General Ahmad Shuja Pasha broke off talks with his counterpart in high dudgeon several months ago. Pakistan follows policy cues of its army with public opinion swinging along as moulded by the media and a divided political community competing in keeping the army on its right side.

Pakistan’s defiance did not last long because a voluble parliament and such ‘civil society’ organisations as the Difa-e-Pakistan Council (DPC) hammed it up and destroyed the fine nuances of the strategy adopted by the army when it closed Nato supply routes after the November 2011 Salala incident. The upshot of this overkill was that in July, Pakistan was politically cornered with its frayed economy sending out distress signals to an international community that was not willing to listen. The drop scene was that Pakistan reopened the supply route ‘for free’ but got $1.1 billion from the Coalition Support Fund that its policy had put in abeyance.

The Allen-Kayani meeting was obviously significant, possibly achieving some kind of agreement on how to handle the Haqqani network on the Pakistani side attacking Afghanistan and the terrorist Maulana Fazlullah’s gang in Nuristan and Kunar in Afghanistan attacking Malakand in Pakistan. The foreign office in Islamabad seems to have found its voice — with a go-ahead from the GHQ — when it declared dead the policy of strategic depth for which Pakistan had sacrificed more than it should have. If the army was once wedded to it, it may have backed off after seeing the dire straits that the Pakistan economy was in and the changing mood of the captains of the national economy who were in favour of opening up the occluded trade with India.

The new voice in the foreign office was expressed through Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar who defied the much dreaded DPC and opportunistic politician by saying that the ‘I am sorry’ type of apology from America was enough for Pakistan to forgive and forget, emphasising that Pakistan could not afford to be isolated. The phase in which the foreign office put its shoulder to the strategic depth obsession of the army was put aside at the risk of offending the non-state actors of the DPC. Pakistan is, therefore, well on its way to ridding itself of the international pariah status and thinking straight about confronting its internal weaknesses.

The theme of opposition to drones developed by Pakistan and its media will not be easily suppressed. To get Washington to stop them will depend on how honest Pakistan is in pledging to get after the terrorist outfits on its side and admitting its limitations in this regard. The other side will have to mount new operations in Kunar, a Wahabi stronghold, and in Nuristan, a province with little or no ISAF presence, to stop the Fazlullah gang from carrying out attacks inside Pakistan. Though Nato’s ability of precisely targeting enemies through drones might achieve results, Pakistan may have problems coping with the Haqqani network whose outreach in Pakistan is considerable outside North Waziristan. Pakistan has to overcome its passion with sovereignty and nationalism. Both concepts are unrealistic and have come to be associated with victimhood and an inclination to promote suicidal policies. The only viable strategy is one geared to promote Pakistan’s economy. There are signs that the GHQ is now desirous of this change. The war against terrorism will be fought in Pakistan whether we like it or not. And Pakistan cannot fight it alone.

Published in The Express Tribune, August 4th, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>CIA director holds 'productive' talks with ISI chief</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/417059/cia-director-holds-productive-talks-with-isi-chief</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/417059/cia-director-holds-productive-talks-with-isi-chief#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 03 Aug 12 07:33:24 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[afp]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[World]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=417059</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Lt Gen Zaheerul Islam met  with CIA director David Petraeus on Thursday.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The US and Pakistani intelligence chiefs held "productive" talks Thursday on ways to work together to fight extremists, a US official said, in a new sign of easing tensions between the countries.

Lieutenant General Zaheerul Islam, the new head of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency, is paying the first visit to Washington in a year by the leader of Pakistan's powerful spy body.

Islam met Thursday with Central Intelligence Agency director David Petraeus and held "substantive, professional and productive" talks, a senior US official said on condition of anonymity.

"The talks provided an opportunity to discuss a number of proposals for how we can enhance our joint efforts against terrorism," the official said.

"Both leaders reaffirmed their commitment to work together to counter the terrorist presence in the region that threatens both US and Pakistani national security," he said.

The official did not go into further detail. The United States has been looking for ways to cooperate with the ISI, whose relationship with US spies has swung from friendly to hostile in recent years.

The remarks echo those of the US commander in Afghanistan, General John Allen, who on a visit to Pakistan on Thursday praised "significant progress" in improving cooperation between the two countries.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Summer of content: Sunny days begin anew for Pak-US relations</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/416930/summer-of-content-sunny-days-begin-anew-for-pak-us-relations</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/416930/summer-of-content-sunny-days-begin-anew-for-pak-us-relations#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Thu, 02 Aug 12 22:09:08 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[huma.imtiaz]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=416930</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Allen-Kayani meeting pledges action against all terrorist sanctuaries; Pakistan receives $1.1 billion; ISI chief in US]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[After months of frost, US-Pakistan alliance showed on Thursday just how far the thaw had come in a short period of time – or, as a top US commander called it, “an upward spiral” in relations.

While the top US commander in Afghanistan General John Allen and Pakistan Army chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani met in Rawalpindi, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) chief Lt Gen Zaheerul Islam spent a busy day in Washington meeting top congressional leaders at a dinner.

Before the two meetings, Pakistan had confirmed that it had received a massive $1.1 billion from the US under the overdue Coalition Support Fund (CSF) – the first such payment in close to two years.

Kayani-Allen

In Rawalpindi, “significant progress” was being made in improving cooperation between the allies during the army chief’s meeting with the top US commander in Afghanistan – including on the divisive issue of the Haqqani network.

The talks between Gen Allen and Gen Kayani at the General Headquarters focused on improving security along the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan, and cooperation between Afghan, Pakistani and Nato troops, said a statement released by both sides.

Sources told The Express Tribune that the army chief assured Gen Allen that Pakistan would take action against ‘terrorist sanctuaries’ in the tribal areas provided the US shares ‘actionable intelligence’.

Without naming the Haqqani network, a joint statement said Gen Allen and Gen Kayani agreed to expand opportunities for coordinated action against what it called “terrorists on respective sides of the border who threaten Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the region.”

According to sources, the statement was referring to the Haqqani network as well as militants that have launched repeated cross-border raids into Pakistan from Afghanistan’s Kunar and Nuristan provinces. The two generals discussed various options to eliminate the Haqqani network and other insurgent groups, the sources added.

The offer by the army chief appears to be a significant departure from Islamabad’s previous reluctance to go after the Haqqani network. However, that may change now, as the two countries publicly hinted at coordinated operations against groups threatening peace on either side of the border. US officials have called repeatedly on Pakistan to move against the Haqqani network, a militant faction loyal to the Afghan Taliban.

Earlier this week, The New York Times claimed that General Kayani recently told US officials in private that he would launch a three-phase military operation against the Haqqanis over the next 12 months.

After the meeting Allen, who is on his first visit since Islamabad ended a blockade on Nato supplies, said that “significant progress” was being made in improving cooperation. “I look forward to these visits and am pleased with the upward spiral in our relationship they represent,” Allen said.

Kayani was quoted as saying that Thursday’s meeting had “helped towards improving strategic and operational understanding between the Pakistan military and Isaf.”

ISI chief in US

ISI chief Lt Gen Zaheerul Islam had a busy day in Washington during his first official trip to the US. Islam met top congressional leaders at a dinner hosted by Pakistan’s Ambassador to the United States Sherry Rehman, sources told The Express Tribune. The guest list included Senator Dianne Feinstein, Chairperson of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Congressman Mike Rogers, and Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, while Deputy CIA Director Mike Morrell and Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee also attended the reception, according to sources.

While no details were immediately forthcoming about the mood of the meetings, a source said that the ISI leader discussed mutual challenges and ways to go forward on joint concerns with the US. Broad strategic issues and opportunities for “new beginnings” were also discussed.

The Pakistan Embassy and the Central Intelligence Agency declined to comment on the ISI chief’s visit.

The ISI Director is scheduled to meet CIA Director David Petraeus and US Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan Ambassador Marc Grossman.

CSF payment

Washington released $1.1 billion following the signing of a new agreement between Pakistan and US on Nato convoys. The fund, which is designed to reimburse Pakistan for the cost of counter-insurgency operations, paid $8.8 billion to Pakistan between 2002 and 2011. But Islamabad stopped claiming the money as relations collapsed in the wake of the May 2011 raid that killed Osama bin Laden.

“We received $1.118 billion from the coalition support fund last night,” Syed Wasimuddin, spokesman for the central State Bank of Pakistan, told AFP. He said it was the first installment since $633 million in December 2010. (ADDITIONAL INPUT FROM AFP)

Published in The Express Tribune, August 3rd, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>US sees 'progress' with Pakistan in talks</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/416434/us-sees-progress-with-pakistan-in-talks</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/416434/us-sees-progress-with-pakistan-in-talks#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Thu, 02 Aug 12 11:01:00 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[afp]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=416434</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Talks focused on improving security along the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The US commander in Afghanistan said Thursday that "significant progress" was being made in improving cooperation with Pakistan, after his first visit since Islamabad ended a blockade on Nato supplies.

The talks between General John Allen and General Ashfaq Kayani focused on improving security along the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan, and cooperation between Afghan, Pakistani and Nato troops, said a statement released by both sides.

"I look forward to these visits and am pleased with the upward spiral in our relationship they represent," Allen said.

"We are making significant progress toward building a partnership that is enduring, strategic, carefully defined, and that enhances the security and prosperity of the region."

Allen's visit is a further sign of efforts to repair the fractious anti-terror alliance with Pakistan, which plunged to its worst crisis after US air strikes killed 24 Pakistani soldiers and American troops killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan last year.

Both sides signed a deal Tuesday governing Nato convoys travelling through Pakistan into Afghanistan until the end of 2015, well beyond the scheduled withdrawal of the bulk of Nato troops in 2014.

Kayani was quoted as saying that Thursday's meeting had "helped towards improving strategic and operational understanding between the Pakistan military and Isaf," using the acronym for the Nato mission in Afghanistan.

The statement made no mention of the specific problems and difficulties that have increasingly characterised relations between Afghan, Pakistani and Nato troops.

US officials have called repeatedly on Pakistan to move against the Haqqani network whose leaders are based on Pakistan's side of the border.

Afghanistan and Pakistan are also locked in public acrimony over attacks carried out across the porous and often unmarked border.

Pakistan says Taliban loyal to Maulana Fazlullah are using havens in Afghanistan to resume attacks in northwestern Pakistan three years after he escaped an offensive in the Swat valley.

Afghanistan has complained about cross-border artillery shells and rockets being fired from Pakistan into Afghanistan's Kunar province.

Islamabad on July 3 lifted the longest blockade on Nato traffic during the war in Afghanistan after Washington said sorry for the deaths of the Pakistani troops who were killed in the air strikes last November.

Lieutenant General Zaheerul Islam, chief of Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency, is also currently in the United States, the first visit by a head of the ISI to Washington in a year.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>NATO supplies: Pakistan, US sign new deal</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/415784/nato-supplies-pakistan-us-sign-new-deal</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/415784/nato-supplies-pakistan-us-sign-new-deal#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Tue, 31 Jul 12 22:08:17 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[kamran.yousaf]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=415784</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[US to release $1.1b, Pakistan given right to reject shipment, lethal supplies not allowed.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Pakistan and the United States signed a new deal on Tuesday governing arrangements for Nato convoys travelling to Afghanistan until the end of 2015. The new deal replaces verbal arrangements in place since the Musharraf-era, and signals yet another step towards gradual rapprochement between the two allies. 

The pact, signed by Additional Defence Secretary Rear Admiral Farrokh Ahmed and Deputy US Ambassador in Islamabad Richard Hoagland, was the culmination of protracted negotiations over a period of seven months, in which the fractious allies fought hard to secure their respective interests.

Seemingly a quid-pro-quo arrangement, the agreement inked at the defence ministry in Rawalpindi will see the US release $1.1 billion due under the Coalition Support Fund (CSF) to reimburse Pakistan for its efforts in the war on terror, in exchange for the reopening of vital supply lines into Afghanistan.

Hoagland told reporters that Washington would release the funds following the formalisation of the new deal. The US last released CSF payments to Pakistan in December 2010, amounting to about $633  million (approximately Rs55 billion).

Officials at the ceremony gave no details of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) nor did they release a copy at a news conference.

The development comes just a day before the chief of the Inter-Services Intelligence, Lieutenant General Zaheerul Islam, begins a three-day visit to Washington for talks with the head of the CIA.

‘Increased transparency’ 

Richard Hoagland hailed the MoU between the two governments.

“This MoU is a demonstration of increased transparency and openness between our governments, in respect of Pakistan’s sovereignty as requested by the Pakistani parliament,” he said, adding that the process had also opened new channels for the two countries to resolve other issues.

“Of course, it’s clear to our political leadership in both capitals ... that we have a number of other issues to work on,” he added. Newly appointed Defence Secretary Asif Yasin Malik, who attended the ceremony, said the deal would contribute to the stability of the region and hailed it as a “landmark achievement.”

“With this agreement, there are no grey areas left in the process,” said Malik.

Islamabad agreed to reopen land routes for Nato goods on July 3 – ending the longest border closure of the decade-long war in Afghanistan.

The closure was in protest against Nato air raids that killed 24 Pakistani troops last November. However, a row over security guarantees and compensation has delayed a resumption of normal traffic.

Parliament’s guidelines 

The deal lasts until the end of 2015, well beyond the 2014 departure date for the bulk of Nato’s 130,000 combat troops from Afghanistan, and can be renewed for one-year intervals beyond that.

Interestingly, both countries can discontinue the MoU at any time by informing each other in advance

The deal specifies routes to be taken and has a list running to several pages of lethal supplies that may not be transported through Pakistan, as per the guidelines laid out by parliament earlier this year, although armoured vehicles and Humvees are permitted provided they are not mounted with weapons. However, Afghan security forces are exempt from this clause.

Furthermore, a central coordination authority will also be established at the defence ministry to monitor Nato supplies. In order to ensure the implementation of the new agreement, officials from both sides will meet regularly.

A Pakistani security official said the agreement gave Islamabad the right to refuse or reject any shipment and special radio chips would be fitted to containers for monitoring.

(Read: New deal on NATO supplies)

Published in The Express Tribune, August 1st, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Pakistan-US sign new agreement on Nato supplies</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/415419/pakistan-us-sign-new-agreement-on-nato-supplies</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/415419/pakistan-us-sign-new-agreement-on-nato-supplies#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Tue, 31 Jul 12 10:15:13 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[kamran.yousaf]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=415419</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[According to new accord, Pakistan will not allow transportation of arms and ammunition.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[A new agreement on Nato supplies has been signed between Pakistan and the US on Tuesday, replacing the existing Memorandum of Understanding in place since 2004.

The new deal was part of an overall review Pakistan had sought in its ties with the US in the wake of last year’s Nato cross-border raid which killed 24 soldiers — consequently causing the suspension of the ground lines of communication for Nato-led foreign forces in Afghanistan for over seven months.

According to the new accord, Pakistan will not allow transportation of arms and ammunition, as demanded by the parliament in its foreign policy recommendations approved in April. However, military equipment for the Afghan National Army would be permitted to pass through the country.

Pakistan will also not provide any warehouses or storage facilities for Nato goods.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>New beginnings, new rules: Pakistan, US set to sign NATO supply deal today</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/415250/new-beginnings-new-rules-pakistan-us-set-to-sign-nato-supply-deal-today</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/415250/new-beginnings-new-rules-pakistan-us-set-to-sign-nato-supply-deal-today#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jul 12 22:05:53 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[kamran.yousaf]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=415250</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[The new agreement will be in place till 2015.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Closing the chapter on weeks of hard-talk and gruelling negotiations, a new agreement on Nato supplies through Pakistan is to be signed today (Tuesday) in Islamabad by senior officials from Pakistan and the US.


The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) will replace the existing arrangement that had been in place since 2004. The new deal was part of an overall review Pakistan had sought in its ties with the US in the wake of last year’s Nato cross-border raid which killed 24 soldiers — consequently causing the suspension of the ground lines of communication for Nato-led foreign forces in Afghanistan for over seven months.

However, earlier this month, Pakistan formally agreed to lift the ban on the supplies for Nato forces after the US apologised for the killings.

Last week, the federal cabinet formally approved the new deal the two countries had been able to finalise after weeks of intense negotiations. Washington managed to convince Islamabad to drop its earlier demand of imposing an additional transit fee on Nato containers in return for an apology for the Salala incident and the release of long overdue finances from the Coalition Support Fund (CSF), which are reimbursements for expenses accrued in the war on terror.

According to the new accord, Pakistan will not allow transportation of arms and ammunition, as demanded by parliament in its foreign policy recommendations approved in April. However, military equipment for the Afghan National Army would be permitted to pass through the country.

Two routes have been identified for containers carrying Nato goods — southern and northern routes. Containers on the southern route will travel to Afghanistan from Karachi (Bin Qasim Port) via Chaman while the northern route caters to supplies from Karachi (Bin Qasim Port) via Torkham to Afghanistan.

According to the new MoU, Pakistan will not provide any warehouses or storage facilities for Nato goods.

It also authorises Pakistani authorities to stop the supply of goods that do not fall within the parameters of the new deal. Pakistan has agreed to provide facilities for security and quick transfer of the cargo and will keep the US informed about the monitoring and transit points of the shipments.

But it makes clear that the government will not take any responsibility of damage to commercial carriers. Under the new arrangement, the defence ministry will act as a central coordination authority to monitor the supplies.

In order to ensure the implementation of the new agreement, it was decided that officials from both sides will meet regularly.

The fresh MoU will be valid till December 31, 2015, but could be extended for one year after mutual consultations.


Published in The Express Tribune, July 31st, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Security forum: Chances of another 9/11 ruled out</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/413616/security-forum-chances-of-another-911-ruled-out</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/413616/security-forum-chances-of-another-911-ruled-out#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 12 05:10:22 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[huma.imtiaz]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category><category><![CDATA[World]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=413616</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA['It’s not impossible, but very difficult for al Qaeda in Pakistan to launch an attack outside its borders.']]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Former US National Counterterrorism Centre (NCTC) director Michael Leiter has said that the US has greatly reduced the chance of another 9/11 style attack emanating from Pakistan.


Speaking at a session on the role of the NCTC at the Aspen Security Forum and accompanied by current director Matthew Olsen, Leiter said that the US has been doing very well in terms of gains against al Qaeda in Pakistan.

“It’s not impossible, but very difficult for al Qaeda in Pakistan to launch an attack outside its borders,” said Leiter.

Olsen said that the issues with Pakistan are much broader than just counterterrorism. He added that the country faced political, military and security challenges.

David Sanger, author of Conceal and Confront and moderator of the session, asked the two about the threat of nuclear arms falling into the hands of militants in Pakistan.

Leiter said that that possibility remained a concern, and that both countries in the past had worked on the issue. He added that in a country that had militants launching sophisticated attacks on military installations, the US had reason to be concerned.

The Aspen Security Forum will feature speakers from current and former US administrations. Ambassadors from Pakistan and Afghanistan are also scheduled to address the forum.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 27th, 2012. ]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>US says its working with Pakistan, Afghanistan to curb border violence</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/413184/us-says-its-working-with-pakistan-afghanistan-to-curb-border-violence</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/413184/us-says-its-working-with-pakistan-afghanistan-to-curb-border-violence#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 12 23:12:01 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[World]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=413184</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Pentagon spokesperson George Little says border cooperation with Pakistan is improving.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[As relations with United States settle back into normal phase of cooperation after months of strain, Washington is now going to focus more on working with Islamabad and Kabul to contain militant activities along the porous Durand Line.  

"Well, we're working closely with both countries, obviously, to try to limit violence along the Afghan-Pakistan border," a Pentagon spokesperson said, amid weeks of complaining from both sides about cross-border attacks along the disputed Pak-Afghan border.

Pakistan has asked Kabul to act against safe havens of militants in its eastern Kunar and Nooristan provinces, in the backdrop of more than a dozen deadly cross-border assaults that have killed over 100 people, including civilians and soldiers.

Reports say Mullah Fazlullah and other militants, who fled the army's counter terrorism operations in Swat and Bajaur, have found refuge across the border in Afghanistan.

Pentagon Press Secretary George Little said,"we are settling back into a normal phase of cooperation with our Pakistani partners. And border coordination, we believe, is improving."

Last week, the ISAF commander in Afghanistan General John Allen said that his forces were ready to act on the Afghan side of the border if Pakistan reciprocates on its side of the Durand Line against militant safe havens.

Answering a question, Little saw no change in the US-led allies' Afghan mission.

"In our estimation, I'm not sure there's any particular change to the mission in Afghanistan. We're carrying out the mission as we've designed," he said.

"We're moving quickly and prudently toward implementation of the improvement of Afghan national security force capabilities. And, of course, we're following the Lisbon timeline toward the end of 2014," he added referring to the deadline set by Nato for transferring full security responsibility to Afghans and end the combat mission in Afghanistan.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Roundtable: Afghanistan, the determining factor for Pak-US relations</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/410640/roundtable-afghanistan-the-determining-factor-for-pak-us-relations</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/410640/roundtable-afghanistan-the-determining-factor-for-pak-us-relations#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 20 Jul 12 00:50:33 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[news.desk]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=410640</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Experts discuss the relationship in the backdrop of recent events.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Convergence or divergence of the viewpoint on Afghanistan is the key driver of the Pak-US relations. This was the crux of a roundtable discussion held at the Institute of Regional Studies held here on Thursday, said a press release issued by the institute.


Lieutenant General (retd) Talat Masood argued that even though an agreement on the logistical arrangements for the reopening of the NATO supply routes would soon be inked, US still had reservations about Pakistan’s efforts against the Haqqani Network (HQN), which the former considers a major threat to its forces in Afghanistan.

He maintained that assertions about Pakistan’s support for the HQN were exaggerated. He alluded to Pakistan army’s limitations in carrying out an operation in North Waziristan, and the need for coordination with the NATO forces across the border on the same as restraining factors in taking decisive action against the HQN. He further said that undertaking a military operation in North Waziristan at a time when the Americans are also negotiating with the Taliban would also be counter-productive.  “Pakistan’s future policy with respect to HQN might, thus, be determined by whether the US government designates the HQN as a terrorist organisation as suggested by its House of Representatives,” he argued.

Lt Gen Masood criticised drone attacks as “counter-productive” against the insurgency. He added that the attacks were “eroding the capacity of Pakistan as a state in the eyes of its people.” He disagreed with the notion, however, that the US was deliberately trying to destabilise Pakistan, maintaining that most of the problems that Pakistan is facing are of its own making. He questioned the commonly-held perception in Pakistan that the US wants to “denuclearise” Pakistan. He said that the US might have made contingency plans about Pakistan’s nuclear weapons in case of any emergency, but that would not amount to a concerted effort on the part of the US to denuclearise Pakistan.

Gen Masood said that the US and NATO were trying to give a greater role to India in Afghanistan because of their overall improving relations with the latter. He questioned Pakistan’s reservations about it though, arguing that Pakistan should not have any problem with any two nations wanting to improve their relations. He further said that, in trying to counter Indian influence in Afghanistan, Pakistan was getting adversarial towards Afghanistan, India, and the US, which, he argued, is not in Pakistan’s best interest.

“Pakistan should derive confidence out of its strategic location; India cannot replace Pakistan for Afghanistan,” he said.

Lt Gen (retd) Saleem Haider argued that the US did not appreciate Pakistan’s role as its ally. He cautioned against taking a military action in North Waziristan against the HQN, arguing that its fallout might be difficult for the nation to handle.

Ambassador BA Malik stressed improvement of Pakistan’s domestic situation as well as its relations with other countries in the region as leverage for having better relations with the US. “Our Indophobia has led us into an unequal alliance with India, and we haven’t been able to get out of it,” said the ambassador.

The US Embassy Deputy Political Counsellor John Hill shared some details about United States Agency for International Development’ assistance to Pakistan over the past few years, stressed that the US wanted Pakistan to succeed as a responsible nation in the international community

Published in The Express Tribune, July 20th, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>US lawmakers approve cut in Pakistan aid: Report</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/410546/us-lawmakers-approve-cut-in-pakistan-aid-report</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/410546/us-lawmakers-approve-cut-in-pakistan-aid-report#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 12 15:08:05 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[web.desk]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[World]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=410546</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[US lawmakers approve amendment to cut the US aid to Pakistan by half.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The US House of Representatives has approved an amendment which would cut US aid to Pakistan by half, bringing the amount down to $650 million, the Associated Press reported on Wednesday.

Calling Pakistan the “Benedict Arnold” of nations, Representative Ted Poe complained about the level of Islamabad’s cooperation in the fight against terrorism, the report said. It added that the members of the Congress were particularly angry with Pakistan’s conviction of Dr Shakil Afridi, who conducted a fake polio vaccination in order to help CIA track down al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad.

“Pakistan doesn’t deserve the American money,” Poe was quoted as saying.

According to a report by Politico, Poe had first demanded a $1.3 billion cut from Pakistan’s military aid and had initially won the endorsement of Representative Bill Young, but later a cut of $650 million was settled upon.

The Politico report also quoted Poe as saying that Pakistan is “playing” America.

The unsteady relations between Pakistan and the US were coming back on track when Pakistan reopened the Nato supply routes in return for an apology offered by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. But this cut in aid may harm the ongoing efforts between the two countries to maintain a balanced relation.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>ISI-CIA meeting: Spymasters plan US rendezvous</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/409798/isi-cia-meeting-spymasters-plan-us-rendezvous</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/409798/isi-cia-meeting-spymasters-plan-us-rendezvous#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 12 00:04:09 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[asad.kharal]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category><category><![CDATA[World]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=409798</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Lt-Gen Islam’s visit will be the first by a high-ranking officer in over a year.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[In a key development in thawing ties with Washington, the chief of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) will visit the US in coming days, The Express Tribune has learnt.

Well-placed sources said that Director-General Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) Lt-General Zaheerul Islam’s visit has been approved by the government. It will be the first visit by the army chief or an intelligence chief to the US in over a year.

The ISI chief will meet his US counterpart, Director Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) David Petraeus, and other senior American officials to discuss matters related to counter-terrorism cooperation. Lt-Gen Islam will also focus on unilateral drone attacks by the US, sources further stated. It is likely that emphasis on provision of strategic and technical intelligence input obtained through drones will be sought, so that Pakistan can take action against terrorists.

The spymaster’s travel to the US will be the first by a high-ranking military officer since the unilateral raid by US special forces into Pakistan to kill al Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad on May 2, 2011.

Ties thereinafter had quickly plummeted. There was the Salala incident in November 2011, in which US-led Nato forces attacked a Pakistani border post. Twenty-five soldiers were killed in the attack, which resulted in the closing of Nato supply routes through Pakistan for seven months and the plummeting of Pak-US ties to their lowest levels since the September 11, 2001, attacks in the US.

The sentencing of Dr Shakil Afridi, the man who helped the US locate Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad, in Pakistan also became a divisive issue. The US reacted strongly to the sentencing of Dr Afridi a few weeks ago for running a fake polio vaccination drive, which was really meant to hunt down Bin Laden. Genuine and critical polio vaccination drives have suffered a number of setbacks in Pakistan since the sting operation – with many high-risk areas becoming off limits for vaccinators.

The incumbent DG ISI had also postponed his scheduled visit to the US in May, citing “pressing commitments.” At that time, the US and Pakistan were still deadlocked on a number of issues – particularly the reopening of Nato supply routes. The supply routes finally reopened on July 4, 2012, after some US officials expressed regret over the loss of Pakistani soldiers’ lives.

Now that the supply routes have been reopened, and ties seem to have resumed, a number of other outstanding issues will require discussion – most of all renewing understandings on cooperating against terrorism.

According to sources, the ISI chief will discuss the possibility of the transfer of drone technology and capacity building of Pakistani forces. They also held that he will reject any ‘wink-and-nod’ offers from the US in terms of drone strikes and US boots on the ground. The ISI chief will focus on a new mechanism to ensure Pakistan’s input on drone strikes.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 18th, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Mere patch-up will not do!</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/409492/mere-patch-up-will-not-do</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/409492/mere-patch-up-will-not-do#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jul 12 16:31:16 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[tariq.fatemi]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=409492</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Pak-US continuing differences are not only impacting their bilateral ties but also prospects of peace in Afghanistan.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Even with the strange circumstances surrounding earlier spats between Pakistan and the US, the one that both sides claim to have overcome earlier this month was truly bizarre.

If, however, their differences have been resolved and relations brought back on track, it is a welcomed development. But unless this ‘patch-up’ is fundamentally different from earlier band-aid efforts, it is only a matter of time before it hits another road block. The ‘understanding’ has too many loose ends with both sides choosing to be less than honest in their statements.

It would be recalled that fearing national outrage from the Salala attack, the government — reportedly, at the military’s behest — passed the buck to parliament to formulate what our policy ought to be. Parliament, however, went overboard and came up with a wish list rather than a list of attainable goals. Nevertheless, the government chose to bask in the glory of  ‘national dignity and honour’ with Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar, in her youthful exuberance, becoming its enthusiastic standard bearer. In the process, relations went into a free fall with US officials belligerent and ours worried.

It now appears that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s utterance of the word ‘sorry’ applied balm on our bruised egos and achieved the impossible. But if this word possessed such potency, surely it could have been uttered much earlier and saved us all the despair and agony of months. Suddenly, all the talk of “supremacy” of parliament and “no bargain on national honour” got flushed down the drain. Of course, if that was evidence of hard-headed realism, it would be reason to celebrate. But that would be expecting too much from a leadership interested only in transient considerations.

Even more inexplicable is the fact that when ‘realism’ finally dawned on us, we went overboard on the other extreme. We not only agreed to equate “sorry” with apology but also agreed to accept culpability for the Salala killings, as is evident from Secretary Clinton’s words: “Foreign Minister Khar and I acknowledged the mistakes that resulted in the loss of Pakistani military lives”. This was after a detailed report by the Pakistan Army denying any Pakistani responsibility for the tragic event!

The ‘understanding’ on drones, too, is worrying. Parliament’s demand was for a complete cessation of all drone attacks. Instead, we agreed on a vague concept of ‘intelligence sharing’ arrangement, which may provide the US with a legal fig leaf to continue its drone operations. On the issue of transit fee, after haggling for rates described by US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta as ‘gouging’, we became unnecessarily generous, which reminded me of a similar episode when one of our redoubtable finance ministers turned down US economic assistance at lower rates, insisting on paying market interest rates, so as not to compromise our non-aligned credentials!

There is no denying that the continuation of this stand-off — while inconvenient and expensive to the US — was most detrimental to Pakistan’s interests. It was increasingly apparent that the mounting pressure from the US and its allies was becoming unbearable. But if our initial reaction to Salala was hasty and emotional, the decision taken after eight months of deep deliberations appears equally ill-considered.

The Afghan endgame is still to reveal its many twists and turns, particularly with both Washington and Islamabad unable to formulate their Afghan policy with clarity and consistency — elements that are desperately needed if peace is to be ensured in Afghanistan post-2014. It is not only Islamabad where political leadership is absent on Afghanistan; in Washington, too, the Pentagon and the intelligence apparatus have been pushing their own agendas, sowing confusion about US long-term objectives.

While Pakistan-US relations may not be “neurotic, mutually destructive”, as David Ignatius wrote in The Washington Post last week, their continuing differences are not only impacting their bilateral ties but also prospects of peace in Afghanistan. In such a scenario, it is Pakistan that is likely to suffer much more.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 18th, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Pakistan-US ties — the way forward</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/409035/pakistan-us-ties-%e2%80%94-the-way-forward</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/409035/pakistan-us-ties-%e2%80%94-the-way-forward#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 12 16:55:49 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[talat.masood]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=409035</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Pakistan, US can minimise policy differences if they show greater understanding of each others’ points of view.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The decision by Hilary Clinton to state that Washington was sorry for the loss of lives of the 24 Pakistani soldiers at Salala provided a fig leaf to Pakistani decision-makers to open the Ground Lines of Communication even without asking for any increase in transit fees. This also resulted in the US agreeing to release the Coalition Support Fund of over a billion dollars, thereby easing the tension somewhat and taking the two countries back to the position where their relations stood before the Salala incident. While serious disagreements on major policy issues still exist, both countries realise the importance of ensuring a cooperative relationship.

There is a widespread belief in Pakistan that the US is only interested in a transactional relationship that will last until its interest in Afghanistan remains. A more fundamental issue is whether Washington has benign or Machiavellian objectives in the region. There are many, even among the intellectual community, who think that the US is interested in deliberately destabilising Pakistan (and Afghanistan) to advance its broader strategic goals. More importantly, the widespread belief that the US plans to denuclearise Pakistan drives the security community paranoid.

Another major factor that generates insecurities within Pakistan is the Indo-US strategic partnership and the deep converging interests of the two countries in Afghanistan and the region. With the US allowing greater space to India in Afghanistan, the Pakistani establishment conjures up the worst-case scenario of a potential double encirclement by India. The India factor looms large in Pakistan’s strategic calculus.

On the US side, the distrust is equally disturbing. It accuses Pakistan of duplicity — running with the hare and hunting with the hounds. For Admiral Michael Mullen to testify before the US Senate — a few days prior to his retirement — that the Haqqani network is the veritable arm of the ISI, only reflects the deep schisms and policy differences that exist.

Mutual interests, therefore, lie in removing the differences and apprehensions through candid and rational dialogue.

First, Pakistan is already facing huge challenges of instability due to rising militancy, mushrooming of radical forces, poor economic growth, corruption, institutional in-fighting and the worsening law and order situation. Surely, this is not a foreign (or US) inspired phenomenon. It is very much homegrown and the cumulative result of years of policy and governance failings. In any case, what does the US stand to gain by destabilising Pakistan? On the contrary, its interest lies in stabilising the region to ensure that there is no repeat of 9/11. Moreover, Washington’s economic and strategic interests — exploitation of natural resources and enhancing influence in a geostrategic area — are best served when there is stability. As regards the nuclear factor, Washington must have contingency plans for a worst-case scenario of Pakistani nukes falling in the hands of terrorists. This is very different from assuming that the US is intrinsically after Pakistan’s nuclear capability and is planning to nullify it.

On the other hand, the US allegation that Pakistan supports and provides protection to the Haqqani network and other militant groups has no valid basis. The reality is that the Pakistan military justifiably feels that any operation in North Waziristan can only be successful if there is a joint operation from both sides of the border. Furthermore, the GHQ is justified in emphasising that at a time when the US is withdrawing the bulk of its forces from Afghanistan, it is prudent to focus on negotiations rather than on opening new fronts. It is also not correct to give disproportionate importance to the Haqqanis. Moreover, in Pakistan, the right wing and religious parties who are opposed to the US presence in Afghanistan value the resistance offered by the Taliban and their associates to the US occupation, which neither the government nor the military can overlook.

Pakistan justifiably feels that Afghanistan and the US fail to own up to their failings in managing the border. How many militants of the Haqqani group have been killed or captured crossing the 200-km distance between the Pakistan-Afghan border to Kabul? Will the problems of Afghanistan go away once the Haqqani group is eliminated? The reality is that there is flow of militancy from both sides of the border and a cooperative approach would be more helpful than blaming Pakistan.

Pakistan has been a victim of terrorism and Washington overlooks this. The US indifference to Pakistan’s territorial integrity is also deeply resented. In the past, drones enjoyed tacit approval of the Pakistani military and civilian leadership but are now no more politically acceptable. Their use should only be permissible if it is a joint intelligence and military operation.

In the final analysis, Pakistan and the US can minimise their policy differences if only they show greater understanding of each others’ points of view and reconcile their policies that generate mutually beneficial interests. The present tangible improvement in relations provides that opportunity.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 17th, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Stereotyping Pakistan</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/409030/stereotyping-pakistan</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/409030/stereotyping-pakistan#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 12 16:43:45 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Syed Mohammad Ali .]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=409030</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Prominent US think tanks continue to further demonise the countries with which cooperation is being sought.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Nato supplies through Pakistan have resumed despite internal opposition and criticism concerning the transit fees associated with the resumption. Although the US has issued a mutually incriminating apology, it has not yet abandoned its ‘do more’ mantra, nor do US policymakers view Pakistan with any less distrust. The thaw in US-Pakistan relations is thus hardly anything to become complacent about given the impending array of challenges, which will emerge out of Nato’s phased withdrawal from Afghanistan.

While use of strategic depth by Pakistan is blamed for its reluctance to wholeheartedly support the US-backed government of President Hamid Karzai, it is unfair to put the entire blame of failure in Afghanistan on Pakistani shoulders. In fact, the often quoted notion of using Islamic militants to obtain strategic depth within the region itself needs revision given that Pakistan has also suffered enormously at the hands of Islamic militants over the past decade. The deep state’s apparent ability to manipulate these militants to achieve foreign policy objectives must also have corroded.

Moreover, collateral damage of drone strikes and other incursions into Pakistani territory — including use of an immunisation campaign to confirm the location of Osama bin Laden and manipulating provision of international aid to achieve strategic objectives — have all caused immense harm to the US image in Pakistan which makes it very hard for our government to remain a key US/Nato ally. This problem of negative perceptions is hardly one-sided.

There is evidence of increasingly negative portrayals of Pakistan in the US as well, ranging from accusations of duplicity in contending with militancy to challenging the very feasibility of the country as a viable nation-state. The US-based Fund for Peace institution has continually been questioning Pakistan’s very ability to survive and ranks this sixth most populous nation in the world high on a list of potential failed states. The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace has also published a recent paper on “Pakistan’s Impending Defeat in Afghanistan” which claims that irrespective of how the coming security transition in Afghanistan pans out, Pakistan is on the inevitable path of further destabilisation if it decides to support the Taliban.

Such lop-sided analysis fails to consider the impact of US policy failures themselves, including its ability to formulate an inclusive governance model in Afghanistan, supplemented by regional cooperation, to deny the Taliban from making a comeback after the impending Nato withdrawal.

Rather than trying to fight fire with fire, the US should have had the sense to invest in international conflict transformation by fostering notions of reconciliation, understanding and coexistence. In our part of the world, the US could have helped resolve the Kashmir dispute to allay Pakistani fears and neutralise the underlying imperative for apparent duplicity or the suspected adherence to the strategic depth doctrine, instead of fanning Pakistani insecurities by its unilateral recognition of Indian nuclear capacity to establish a regional counterweight to China. The US antagonistic relations with Iran have further undermined regional cooperation not only in Afghanistan but also in the Middle East.

It is about time the US administration takes a hard look at how it has been behaving since 9/11 and the resulting strain its actions have put on promoting understanding and cooperation between the West and Muslim nations in general. The former president Jimmy Carter’s recent op-ed for The New York Times has also referred to the waning US moral authority due to the manner in which its counterterrorism efforts are being conducted.

Yet, much of the analysis emerging from prominent US think tanks continues to further demonise the countries with which cooperation is being sought — as is evident from the over-simplified and biased portrayals of Pakistan. This prevailing lack of self-reflexivity must be overcome to prevent indulging in unproductive blame games and to prevent the reinforcing of stereotypes, which only serve to deepen mistrust and suspicions despite revival of transactional ties in the short-run.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 17th, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Mending ties: Munter for avoiding Salala-like tragedy</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/408907/mending-ties-munter-for-avoiding-salala-like-tragedy</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/408907/mending-ties-munter-for-avoiding-salala-like-tragedy#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sun, 15 Jul 12 23:13:58 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[our.correspondent]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=408907</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Nato routes affected not just Pakistan and the US, but 50 other countries who are fighting the militants, says Munter.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[While describing the 2011 Nato air raid on Pakistan’s border posts in the Salala area of Mohmand Agency as a ‘tragedy’, the top US diplomat in Islamabad said on Sunday that ‘we should make sure such a tragedy never happens again’.


“It [Salala debacle] became an emotional issue on both sides. It took too long to get it resolved but both sides have learnt from this [as to] how we have to live with each other,” Cameron Munter, the US ambassador to Pakistan, said in an interview with Nadia Naqi on ExpressNews programme Takrar.

It’s good the ‘solution’ to the Salala episode was generally welcomed by peoples in both countries, he added.

Pakistan unblocked the Nato supply lines more than two weeks ago after US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton offered a ‘near-apology’ to Islamabad over the death of two dozen troops in the Salala air strike. Asked why it took the Obama administration seven months to ‘apologise’, the American diplomat said that it was because emotions were at play ‘on both sides’. Ambassador Munter said the deadlock over the Nato routes affected not just Pakistan and the United States, but 50 other countries whose troops are fighting the militants ‘who want to attack Pakistani way of life’.

“The resumption [of Nato supplies] will help Pakistani soldiers as much as it’ll help US and Isaf soldiers in the common fight against militants,” he added. He said Islamabad and Washington could now start working out other issues that had been put on the backburner for seven months due to the stalemate over the Nato supply lines.

“It’s my understanding that our experts continue to talk with you about the ways we are going to implement the agreements that have made,” he added. The US diplomat said that Pakistan’s army, its parliament and its executive respect the United States and “we want to keep good relationships with them”. However, he admitted lack of trust between the two countries. “Unfortunately, some events took place during the last two years that added to the mistrust about the Americans and it will take a lot of time to heal,” he added.

(Read: Why it took so long for Nato supplies to reopen)

Correction: An earlier version of this article had incorrectly mentioned the year of the Salala air raid. This has been fixed.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 16th, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Negotiating with the US: Pakistan offers new drone-use mechanism</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/408906/negotiating-with-the-us-pakistan-offers-new-drone-use-mechanism</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/408906/negotiating-with-the-us-pakistan-offers-new-drone-use-mechanism#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sun, 15 Jul 12 22:48:59 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[kamran.yousaf]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=408906</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Suggests Pakistani agencies handle high-value targets based on CIA information while drones carry out surveillance.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[With fissures in their bilateral ties quickly being healed, Pakistan has offered the US a new mechanism encompassing ‘surveillance’ of targeted operations against wanted militants as an alternative to drone strikes in the country’s tribal regions.

The plan, as crafted by Islamabad, involves both the identification of targets by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in the tribal areas and swapping of information with the Pakistani security agencies. The latter will then deal with the situation accordingly, said officials familiar with the development.

“To ensure that Pakistan acts on the information provided by the CIA, the US can use any mechanism to monitor our operation on the ground,” revealed a senior figure of the country’s security establishment.

“They (US) can even use drones for this purpose,” the official explained. However, he clarified that no foreign boots on the ground would be allowed for surveillance.

The mechanism is currently figuring in behind-the-scene discussions between Pakistan and the US, he said.

The idea also seeks to dispel the growing perception in Washington that Islamabad is playing a ‘double game’ in the ‘war on terror’.

He disclosed that both sides had coordinated initial drone attacks when the CIA first launched its campaign back in 2004. Another official remarked that “the CIA later took a solo flight under the assumption that Pakistan is playing a double game”.

The official said Pakistan expects a breakthrough in its ongoing negotiations with the US on finding a ‘mutually acceptable’ alternative to the CIA-piloted drone campaign.

The optimism stems from the fact that until now, Pakistan had never offered the US any serious alternative to predator strikes.

The reason, the official cited, was a tacit understanding between Pakistan and the US to use pilotless drones in the rugged terrain along the Pak-Afghan border where key al Qaeda figures are believed to have found refuge.

Perhaps for the first time, officials also acknowledged that drone attacks eliminated several key militants who posed an equal threat to both Pakistan and the US.

In a candid admission, one official went to the extent of saying that collateral damage figures compiled by independent human rights organisations in the drone attacks were somewhat exaggerated.

However, the official said the government ‘had’ to oppose the drones campaign due to the widely-held public opinion that drones violate Pakistan’s territorial sovereignty and integrity.

“That is why we have offered this alternative to the US – because we (Pakistan) want to become part of the system rather than being isolated,” he maintained.

However, officials did not give any timeframe for a breakthrough on the stalemate over drones, which the US believes are critical to eliminating high-value targets associated with al Qaeda and the Taliban.

Given that it’s election year in the US, many experts are sceptical that the administration of US President Barack Obama would agree on any drastic changes in their drones’ campaign.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 16th, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>US crafted ‘apology’ to suit allies abroad, opponents at home</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/407115/us-crafted-%e2%80%98apology%e2%80%99-to-suit-allies-abroad-opponents-at-home</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/407115/us-crafted-%e2%80%98apology%e2%80%99-to-suit-allies-abroad-opponents-at-home#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jul 12 04:26:50 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[reuters]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[World]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=407115</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA['Apology  a statement of regret, using terms associated with an apology, enough to get across GLOC finish line.']]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[In the end it was a meeting in a nondescript conference room in Chicago that finally set in motion the long-awaited US apology to Pakistan last week ending a seven-month impasse over Nato supply routes for the Afghan war.


The meeting in late May followed months of clamouring by Islamabad, images of flag-draped coffins on television, and widespread outcry from Pakistanis incensed by the US air attack that killed 24 soldiers on the Afghan border last November.

The breakthrough, in which Islamabad reopened supply routes into Afghanistan and Washington yielded to months of Pakistani demands to apologise for the border deaths, was praised as a prelude to improved ties between two nations whose security alliance had lapsed into mutual suspicion and hostility.

After US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s discussions with President Asif Ali Zardari in the cavernous Chicago conference centre where world leaders met for a Nato summit, Clinton instructed Thomas Nides, a top deputy back in Washington, to do what it took to find a solution ensuring Nato could once again supply the war in Afghanistan via Pakistan.

At the heart of last week’s denouement was a carefully worded statement that allowed the United States to accommodate Pakistani indignation without opening President Barack Obama up to criticism months before presidential polls.

Just as importantly, it aimed to avoid alienating those within Obama’s government who had resisted apologising to a country many in Washington see as acting to subvert US goals in the region, even while accepting US aid.

“The logic was that this was not a full-throated apology but that it was enough of a statement of regret, using terms associated with an apology, to get us across the Ground Lines of Communication (GLOC) finish line,” a US official said requesting anonymity.

Taking it to the top

Clinton’s talks in Chicago with Zardari proved pivotal because, for the first time, they elevated months of efforts to hammer out a solution on technical issues, including proposed fees on Nato supplies, to the senior political level.

In her statement, issued after a call last Tuesday to Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar, Clinton did not use the word “apology.”

“Foreign Minister Khar and I acknowledged the mistakes that resulted in the loss of Pakistani military lives,” Clinton said.

“We are sorry for the losses suffered by the Pakistani military,” she said.

According to sources familiar with the matter, the deal was aided by signals from the Pakistani side that parliamentary demands for an ‘unconditional’ apology would not necessitate stronger language than Clinton ultimately used. Pakistan also dropped demands for extra fees on Nato supplies.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 12th, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Khar to visit Washington to chalk out ‘clear-cut’ deal</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/407106/khar-to-visit-washington-to-chalk-out-%e2%80%98clear-cut%e2%80%99-deal</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/407106/khar-to-visit-washington-to-chalk-out-%e2%80%98clear-cut%e2%80%99-deal#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jul 12 03:37:53 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[kamran.yousaf]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category><category><![CDATA[World]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=407106</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[It will be the first high-profile visit since the Nato route stand-off.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar will soon visit Washington in an effort to chalk out a ‘clear-cut’ deal on the relationship between the two countries, a Pakistani diplomat posted in Washington told The Express Tribune.


This will be the first visit by a senior Pakistani official to Washington since the lifting of the seven-month long blockade of the Nato transit routes.

US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton had invited Khar during a meeting on the fringes of the recent Afghan conference in Tokyo, the official said. “The foreign minister accepted the invitation and dates of the visit are being finalised.”

Khar will meet with key US officials, including Clinton, to thrash out details of an agreement for future cooperation between the two allies.

An agreement on Nato routes will be one of the key issues, the official said, adding that a ‘clear-cut’ deal would be chalked out “covering each and every aspect of bilateral relations”.

Despite Washington’s initial reluctance, Islamabad is believed to have convinced the Obama administration of entering into a written agreement identifying not only areas of cooperation, but also ‘no-go’ areas.

“There are several bilateral issues which need immediate attention,” said another Pakistani official requesting anonymity. He added: “Islamabad was keen to revive the stalled strategic dialogue to ensure that Pak-US ties are not merely confined to security cooperation.”

The strategic dialogue, which covers a wide range of issues from Pakistan’s energy needs to its health and education sectors, was initiated by the Obama administration.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 12th, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>It wasn’t about an apology</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/406321/it-wasn%e2%80%99t-about-an-apology</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/406321/it-wasn%e2%80%99t-about-an-apology#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jul 12 18:29:15 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[lt-gen.r.asad.durrani]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=406321</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Most crucial part of the process was assessment of best possible or best available deal &amp;amp; when it could be clinched.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Let us try to evolve a reasonably sound negotiating strategy, post-Salala incident. When the Nato forces killed over a dozen Pakistani soldiers on November 26 last year, we got a chance to review our terms of engagement with Washington. Freezing logistic routes through our territory seemed the first obvious step. It had been done before.

Only a few weeks earlier, on November 7 in Istanbul, Pakistan along with others from the ‘gang of four’— Iran, China and Russia — had foiled an American design to keep a long-term military presence in the region. It is possible, therefore, that Salala was a warning — don’t repeat the mischief in the Bonn Conference. Boycotting the Conference that was scheduled for December conveyed the right message: no more business as usual.

Next, one had to think of a few tough benchmarks that could be ‘relaxed’ when the right deal was struck (opening positions are always compromised in a negotiated settlement). If President Barack Obama was unlikely to apologise in an election year, or if the US could not be ‘gouged’ for money, an apology and a multiple increase in the transit fees seemed to serve the purpose perfectly.

Talks could now start, indeed away from the public glare. But to help the process proceed without undue constraints and to ensure broad domestic support, one needed to become creative. One advantage of a democratic setup is that even though it is the executive’s domain, difficult decisions can always be fired from the shoulders of parliament. In this case, the parliamentary route would have additional benefits. If the negotiators needed more time, the committee constituted could be asked to go slow. And just in case the other side saw through the game and decided to call the bluff, say by offering an apology (not really the crux of the matter), it could be told to wait till the country’s supreme body completed its deliberations.

If an entity like the Difa-e-Pakistan Council (DPC) could rally the masses against reopening of the routes that could also help our position on the table. There was indeed the risk that in case of an unsatisfactory settlement, the streets would continue to remain alive. Someone, therefore, needed to establish the right leverage with the DPC.

Some deft exterior manoeuvre would obviously be useful. Mercifully, relations with regional countries were on the mend. Post Jandullah, Iran had shown understanding. With Russia, the turnaround was remarkable. The Indian front had lately remained quiet but needed constant care. Of course, the US would exercise relentless pressure, twist our economic arm, unleash its powerful media and might even throw an odd spanner in our delicate relations with India and Iran. But then pressure management is the hallmark of this game. Two countries could help prevent the prickly relationship with the US going over the edge: Saudi Arabia and the UK.

The most crucial part of the process was the assessment of the best possible or the best available deal, and when it could be clinched. Some of us had started getting nervous pretty early in the game; others favoured hanging tough till the other side grovelled on its knees. The golden rule is that neither side leaves the room red-faced; nor declare victory once outside.

I have no idea if during the protracted stand-off Pakistan followed a chartered course or kept innovating. But most of what happened, by design or by default, made eminent sense (the Chicago yatra did not, but then no one is perfect). All that was agreed upon behind the scenes was not likely to become public knowledge. Since the saga has not yet ended, that too, is the sensible thing to do.

What augurs well for the future rounds is that despite serious internal weaknesses, Pakistan held out longer than was expected.

And then there is always the DPC.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 11th, 2012.  ]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Define relations with the US</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/406327/define-relations-with-the-us</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/406327/define-relations-with-the-us#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jul 12 18:04:06 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Ejaz Haider]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=406327</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[The objective is to secure America, whatever it takes. Cost for Pakistan — or for any other country — doesn’t...]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The Nato supply lines have been reopened but the fundamentals of US-Pakistan relations have not changed. That may not stop the two sides from trying to make it work, though. In fact, knowing that there are major divergences, but also that working together is important, there is reason for both to apply themselves to the task of keeping this transactional relationship afloat.

In Pakistan, for that to happen, we must first define this relationship and identify US objectives.

Easier said. We still haven’t figured out whether the US is a friend and ally, a frenemy, or an enemy. For the Right it is an enemy; for the Left-Libs it is a friend.

Unfortunately, these positions analyse US policies through ideological prisms. They also indicate the internal fissures in Pakistan and are a poor tool for analysis that requires the appreciation of a state’s policies in terms of multiple factors, not just one — or ideological.

Take an example from the Left-Lib position: the US is trying to fight extremism that also threatens Pakistan, has helped Pakistan and Pakistani military with funds and must, therefore, be seen as a friend. This linear argument — incidentally derived from the US narrative — presents the US as a state that is out to create much good in the world by eradicating the bad guys.

But the US is not altruistic. It is a power that wants to secure the world system it created post-World War II against any challenges to the system as well as to its role as a world leader. It will do that through chaos or through aid, whichever suits the purpose at whichever moment. Very often, it would do both.

So, it will give funds to Pakistan but also put in place a spy network. It will help in the energy and other sectors but also pursue policies that could ramp up violence and get more Pakistanis killed. The objective is to secure America, whatever it takes. The cost for Pakistan — or for any other country — doesn’t matter. It would matter only if it also increased the cost for the US. No grudging this because this is how states operate.

There are two theories about US intentions vis-a-vis Pakistan. One posits that actions leading to instability in Pakistan are not in the interest of Washington. The other argues that a strong, unified Pakistan is not in the US interest.

The proponents of the first question the rationality of a course of action which, as they argue, could unleash many unintended consequences. The second school argues that because Pakistan’s strategic interests in the region conflict with the US’ and also with India’s, and because the US is also planning a future conflict with China, which cannot be a direct one, the stability-instability paradox necessitates proxy wars and the battleground will be Af-Pak and, increasingly, Pakistan itself.

From emerging evidence, the second school cannot be outright discounted. The rational choice approach of the first school can also be challenged by asking the proponents to define the optimal choice(s) of the US in the region and in relation to Pakistan. It is not enough to say that the US is playing the game for peace and stability and that is the optimal choice because very often the endgame in and of itself does not determine the course of action. In other words, if state X is playing for peace, it is neither necessary nor inevitable that it would use approaches that are also peaceful. Neither can peace itself define peace. Would the US consider a strong, stable Pakistan as a necessary and sufficient condition for peace? What if that is not the case, especially if a strong Pakistan were not aligned with its interests in the region?

This would then require playing a more complex game where, while outcomes become more unpredictable, their unpredictability is seen to outweigh the high stakes involved and the dividends to be reaped. Let’s put it in another way: what would be the ideal scenario for the US — a strong, stable Pakistan with nuclear weapons or a Pakistan sans nuclear weapons and subsumed in the larger US scheme for the region?

Understanding the game would also require defining US interests. What are they? If it’s only about peace in Afghanistan, then the US should be pursuing the talks track with the Taliban more seriously than has been the case so far. Does the coterie that rules Kabul have any interest in talking to Pakistan or settling the issues with the Taliban? So far, it is clear that it is in the interest of the Kabul cabal to consolidate the system that keeps it in power. And that means two things: continued military and economic support by the US and US presence in Afghanistan.

Threat perception is not a fixed notion and depends on unfolding situations. In theory, if at point X, Pakistan feels that in situation Y the level of threat from the US stands at nine on a scale of 1-10, at point A and in situation B it could drop to two. A simple benchmark is the capability-intention framework. States employ it to determine threats and identify counter-measures, not just immediate but also distant, not just possible but also probable. Capability is important because intentions can undergo a change, depending on situations and interests.

Add to it the fact that threat analysis is not an exercise in linearity and we have a situation where, while the US is not a friend, we need to work to ensure that it doesn’t become an enemy either. To this end, we have to devise direct and indirect policies that increase our strategic options in the region. We also have to ensure the writ of the state internally in order to be able to advance the sovereignty argument more effectively. But to do all this we have to go heavy on strategy, not tactics. Can we?

Published in The Express Tribune, July 11th, 2012. ]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>The issue of apologies</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/405852/the-issue-of-apologies</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/405852/the-issue-of-apologies#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 09 Jul 12 19:05:19 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[c.christine.fair]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=405852</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Obama should have apologised immediately, using it to begin frank conversations about divergent goals of Pakistan, US.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Last week, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton uttered something vaguely resembling the much demanded apology as a quid quo pro for Pakistan’s reopening the ground supply routes to Afghanistan. The civilian drama followed backstage haggling among Pakistan and US military brass where the real work was done. However, for many Pakistanis, Clinton’s vague utterance did not constitute an apology. Meanwhile in the US, many Americans are waiting for some apologies from Pakistan.

The diplomatic word-crafting fooled no one. Though a temporary workaround to open the ground routes was found, the fundamental differences in the countries’ strategic priorities haven’t been addressed.

For many Americans, Pakistan got what it deserved after some eleven years of support to those groups attacking US and allied troops occupying Afghanistan. This sense of accumulated outrage decreased any appetite for apologies. That this is an election year further compounded the Obama Administration’s considerations. There is no more appetite for continued engagement of Pakistan among an increasingly broke and war-weary public. Prior to Salala, Americans were incensed by the revelation that Osama bin Laden had been living in a town a short distance from the Pakistan Military Academy. While some analysts concede that there is no hard proof that the ISI or other senior leadership knew about Bin Laden’s presence (including this author), many Americans find this hard to believe. Pakistan has done little to assuage their incredulity. For example, it has shown no interest in discerning who helped Bin Laden remain in Pakistan undetected for years. Instead, Pakistan has focused singularly upon a hapless physician who helped bring down Bin Laden. Former Pakistan Ambassador Husain Haqqani was berated in Pakistan’s media, Supreme Court, khaki circles and parliament for allegedly selling Pakistan’s sovereignty by issuing visas to the various CIA agents who brought down Bin Laden. No one has bothered to discern who sold out Pakistan’s sovereignty by aiding and abetting Bin Laden’s tenure in the country. All of this has accumulated in a simmering sense among Americans that it is Pakistan who owes the Americans some apologies. Having taken more than $22 billion in US taxpayers’ money since 9/11, many believe that Pakistan is more intent on helping our enemies than helping us to defeat them.

Of course, many Pakistanis rubbish these contentions. Unfortunately, Pakistanis share the American proclivity to be ignorant of their own history. For example, many Pakistanis cling to the canard that it was America that foisted jihad upon Pakistan during the 1980s when the Soviets occupied Afghanistan. Pakistan’s Afghan policy took shape in the mid-1970s under Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. When Ziaul Haq seized power, he was unable to persuade then US president Jimmy Carter to support Pakistan’s preferred means of managing the Russians in Afghanistan: jihad. Not only did Carter refuse to budge, his administration imposed nuclear proliferation-related sanctions in April of 1979 which precluded security assistance to Pakistan. These were waived with the invasion by the Soviets on Christmas Day in 1979. This began a decade of American subordination of its nonproliferation goals to its Afghan policy, which required it to find ways of funnelling aid to Pakistan.

When the US withdrew in 1990, Pakistan continued supporting Islamist militants in Afghanistan in hopes of undermining the communist Najibullah government. Pakistan supported Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, who battled Ahmad Shah Masood and his Northern Alliance. While the Russians never destroyed Kabul, these duelling warlords did. When Hekmatyar failed, the Pakistan shifted its support to the Taliban. The Taliban come from the same madrassas as several Deobandi militants tied to the Pakistan Taliban, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi/SSP, Jaish-e-Mohammad and so forth. Not only did Pakistan continue to be involved in Afghan policy throughout the 1990s — when the US was absent from the region — it also supported a slew of militant organisations that also operated in Kashmir.

With such starkly different accounts of history and responsibility, the deal that has been tentatively inked is bound to fail. The apology should have never been linked to an opening of the ground lines of control. President Obama should have apologised immediately and should have used that occasion to begin a frank conversation about the very real divergent goals that Pakistan and America have in and for the region. Unless these differences could be narrowed and unless — at a minimum — Pakistan immediately ceased support for the very groups killing US, Nato and Afghan troops and civilians, there should have been no deal.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 10th, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Pakistan begins work to speed NATO supply transit</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/405749/pakistan-begins-work-to-speed-nato-supply-transit</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/405749/pakistan-begins-work-to-speed-nato-supply-transit#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 09 Jul 12 09:25:53 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[afp]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=405749</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Pakistan is doubling the capacity for NATO trucks at the Torkham border crossing.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Pakistan is doubling the capacity for NATO trucks at a key border crossing, officials said Monday, to speed up processing for an expected influx of supplies for troops in Afghanistan.

Customs officials at Torkham border crossing in the country's troubled northwest told AFP that work had begun to expand dedicated parking for NATO containers.

Islamabad agreed to reopen overland routes to NATO convoys last week after a seven-month blockade sparked by a botched US air raid on a border post that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.

"After expansion the parking capacity for NATO trucks will be doubled," Obaidullah Khan, a customs official at Torkham, the closest border crossing to Kabul, told AFP.

"Prior to the closure the terminal had a parking capacity of 250 vehicles and now we are expanding it to 500."

Khan said work was also under way on two special rooms for customs officers dealing with paperwork for NATO vehicles to speed up their transit into Afghanistan.

Security at the crossing is being boosted, Khan said, to foil Taliban militants who have vowed to attack NATO trucks and kill their crews.

Four checkpoints have been set up around the Torkham terminal and the number of security personnel will be raised from the previous level of 550.

"No NATO supply vehicle will be allowed to pass a night at Torkham, even if we need to work for extra time," Khan said.

Meraj Khan, an administrative official at Torkham confirmed the details.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Pak-US strategic dialogue to resume</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/405607/pak-us-strategic-dialogue-to-resume</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/405607/pak-us-strategic-dialogue-to-resume#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 09 Jul 12 03:44:31 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[kamran.yousaf]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=405607</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Both sides mulling revising the number of agenda items under discussion at talks, sources reveal.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Pakistan and the United States are likely to resume their stalled ‘strategic dialogue’ designed to dispel the widely-held perception that the relationship between the two countries is only confined to security related matters.


A foreign office official confirmed that the two sides were discussing the possibility of reviving the talks as the relationship appears to be gradually improving following the resumption of the Nato supply lines.

The official, however, did not give a timeframe saying: “Things are being worked out at the moment.”

Sources said that the two countries are mulling revising the number of agenda items being discussed under the banner of the so-called ‘strategic dialogue’ in an effort to make it more result-oriented.

The strategic dialogue, which covers a wide range of issues from Pakistan’s energy needs to health and education sector woes, was initiated by the Obama administration as part of its efforts to allay Pakistani fears that the US might repeat the mistake of the 1980s when it left Islamabad isolated after driving out the former Soviet Union from Afghanistan.

The last round of talks was held in October 2010 in Washington. The dialogue was supposed to take place in March last year but was delayed because of a controversy over the killing of two Pakistanis by a CIA contractor.

The two sides, however, agreed to resume the process in May after Raymond Davis was freed in a deal struck with the heirs of the victims.

But talks were delayed yet again and never resumed to date following the secret operation by US commandos to kill al Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden in his Abbottabad compound.

When contacted, an American diplomat said that the two countries were discussing various issues under the strategic dialogue.

“It is just a label, otherwise the two countries are cooperating in various fields other than security matters,” explained the diplomat, requesting anonymity.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 9th, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Post-Salala bonhomie: Burying the past, US, Pakistan look to future</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/405653/post-salala-bonhomie-burying-the-past-us-pakistan-look-to-future</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/405653/post-salala-bonhomie-burying-the-past-us-pakistan-look-to-future#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sun, 08 Jul 12 22:49:22 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[aamir.ilyas.rana]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[World]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=405653</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[In a meeting with Hina Rabbani Khar, Secretary Clinton says US will focus on ‘more trade, not aid’ for Pakistan.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[After a bad patch in their roller-coaster relationship, Pakistan and the United States have started warming up to each other at last.

They have agreed to bury the bitterness of the past seven months caused by a deadly Nato air raid on a Pakistani border post and subsequent punitive actions by Islamabad.

“The two countries are putting past tensions behind them to focus on the future,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told reporters after a meeting with her Pakistani counterpart, Hina Rabbani Khar, on the fringes of a day-long conference in Tokyo.

Khar agreed with Clinton: “The deadlock between our two countries has ended and we are now heading in the right direction.”

It was the first one-on-one interaction between the two top diplomats following an ‘apology’ from Secretary Clinton led to the reopening of the Nato transit routes by Islamabad.

Clinton said that she had ‘a broad-ranging discussion’ with Foreign Minister Khar on some of the issues  surrounding the reopening of Nato supply lines.

“We are both encouraged that we have been able to put the recent difficulties behind us so we can focus on the many challenges ahead,” she said.

She acknowledged that ties between the two wary allies would still be tested in the future. But the two countries aimed to use the ‘positive momentum generated’ by last week’s deal to move forward on many of the challenges still facing them, Clinton said.

She stressed that her talks with Khar “focused on the necessity of defeating the terror networks that threaten the stability of Pakistan and Afghanistan” as well as reconciliation efforts in Afghanistan.

“We also discussed economic support and the goal of moving towards more trade then aid as part of our economic relationship,” Clinton said.

“Obviously, there’s a lot of follow-up work that has to be done. I’ve said a number of times that this is a challenging and essential relationship. It remains so,” Clinton added.

“I have no reason to believe that it will not continue to raise hard questions for us both, but it is something I think is in the interests of the United States as well as Pakistan,” the top US diplomat said.

Foreign Minister Khar said that she was encouraged by the US response to Pakistan’s concerns on ‘contentious’ issues between the two countries.

“Pakistan looks forward to settling all outstanding issues with the US through negotiations and Washington has given a positive gesture in this regard,” she added.

In particular, she spoke about the controversial US drone campaign in Pakistan’s tribal regions. “These attacks prove counter-productive besides hurting the efforts to sink differences between the two countries,” she said.

Other meetings

Apart from her interaction with Secretary Clinton, Foreign Minister Khar also met with her Indian counterpart, SM Krishna.

Speaking to journalists after the meeting, she called for initiatives from both sides for bridging the gulf between the two peoples which, she believed, would help improve their bilateral relations.

Pakistan has taken several measures, including trade concessions for New Delhi, in order to normalise relations with India, she said. Khar urged India to reciprocate to Pakistan’s ‘positive gestures’ — hinting at the longstanding issues of Sir Creek and Siachen. Separately, Khar met with her Japanese counterpart, Koichiro Gemba.

After their bilateral talks, Clinton and Khar both met Afghan Foreign Minister Zalmay Rasul. The three issued a statement that emphasised their desire for militants to surrender their arms and enter reconciliation talks with the Afghan government.

(WITH ADITIONAL INPUT FROM AFP, REUTERS)

Published in The Express Tribune, July 9th, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>No new agreement signed on NATO supply route: US diplomat</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/404507/no-new-agreement-signed-on-nato-supply-route-us-diplomat</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/404507/no-new-agreement-signed-on-nato-supply-route-us-diplomat#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 06 Jul 12 11:25:15 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[peer.muhammad]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=404507</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[No need to sign new agreement as we have resumed our relations from where we had left, says Richard Hoagland.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Richard A Hoagland, Deputy Chief of Mission at the US Embassy in Islamabad said on Friday that no new agreement had been signed on the reopening of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) ground supply line through Pakistan and neither was it going to happen in the future.

He was speaking to media after attending a pre-departure orientation session for the winners of Fulbright scholarships for 2013.

“We welcome Pakistan’s step to reopen the key ground supply line through its border for the NATO forces without demanding any charge. This will further rebuild the Pakistan-US relations,” said Hoagland.

“There is no need to sign a new agreement as we have resumed our relations from the point where we had left in November last year,” he added.

“This route is essential for NATO countries but also crucial for Afghanistan,” said the diplomat.

Hoagland added that it was the outcome of several months’ long intensive negations between the two countries and would strengthen trust and rebuild stalled relations.

“Both sides have agreed to work together as there are many areas to be discussed and issues to be settled,” he remarked.

Responding to a question pertaining to the serious criticism of the US media for tendering an apology on the Salala attack, the diplomat said that this was the election year in the United States and media hype is a natural thing. He added that everything which is being highlighted in the media is not true.

When he was asked whether the US has taken up the issue of Dr Shakil Afridi and the alleged harassment of US diplomats at the hands of Pakistani security officials during the recent negotiation with the Pakistani authorities, he replied saying that such things were being discussed regularly.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Pakistan to scan all NATO containers</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/404503/pakistan-to-scan-all-nato-containers</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/404503/pakistan-to-scan-all-nato-containers#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 06 Jul 12 09:53:31 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[afp]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=404503</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Containers to be scanned to ensure they do not contain lethal supplies. Malik says Police directed to ensure security.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[All containers passing through Pakistan to supply NATO troops in Afghanistan are to be scanned to ensure they do not contain lethal supplies, customs officials said Friday.

Islamabad reopened overland routes to NATO convoys earlier this week after closing them in protest at a US air raid that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers at a border post in November.

A number of trucks have already crossed into Afghanistan, but the vast majority are still in Karachi, where they have languished for the past seven months.

Ties between Washington and Islamabad, fractious allies in the "war on terror", plummeted following the air strike and blockade, which ended after US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said sorry for the deaths.

The two sides are still rebuilding trust and officials in Karachi, where thousands of trucks and containers languished during the blockade, said there would be thorough checks to ensure the convoys conformed to parliamentary guidelines barring the transport of lethal supplies.

"We scanned the containers randomly in the past, but now every container will be duly scanned," Karachi customs spokesman Qamar Thalho said.

"We can seize any item, anything that be, if it is not mentioned in the agreements between Pakistan and Afghanistan and Pakistan and NATO."

An official speaking on condition of anonymity said the move was intended to stymie opposition parties and religious groups - who have criticised the resumption of supplies.

"A strict scanning of the cargo is just one important measure not to give enough space to the opposition to exploit public sentiments," the official said.

Up to 1,500 trucks packed with NATO supplies have been stranded in Karachi during the blockade, unable to unload and find other work.

Rana Mohammad Aslam, vice president of the All Pakistan Goods Carrier Association, said 560,000 rupees ($6,000) compensation per vehicle would be paid to the truck owners by NATO subcontractors.

The land routes into Afghanistan are vital as the United States and NATO withdraw troops and equipment built up since the 2001 invasion.

The blockade had forced the United States and its allies to rely on longer, more expensive routes through Central Asia, Russia and the Caucasus, costing the US military about $100 million a month, according to the Pentagon.

Security for supplies

Advisor on Interior Rehman Malik said on Friday that complete security will be provided to all Afghanistan bound NATO containers travelling from Karachi to Khyber PakhtunKhwa.

Talking to newsmen Friday outside Parliament House, he said all Inspector Generals of Police have been directed to provide security cover to the containers within their respective remits.

Malik said Rangers and Police would provide security cover to containers in Sindh province while Police and Frontier Constabulary will escort the containers in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

On fears that the long march of Difa-e-Pakistan Council against the re-opening of NATO supplies through Pakistan could pose problems, he said the public are "free to exercise their right of protest. However, strict action would be taken on any violation of law."

No supplies through railways

Minister for Railways Haji Ghulam Ahmed Bilour on Friday categorically denied that Pakistan Railways was providing any transportation service to NATO.

"We have no such information and the news published in a section of the press is baseless and has no reality," the minister said in a press release issued adding information about provision of three routes for transportation of NATO goods was false.

The minister said "we are already short of locomotives to meet the local freight requirements, how can we give this facility to NATO."]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Pakistan not pushing for end to US drone strikes</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/404368/pakistan-not-pushing-for-end-to-us-drone-strikes</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/404368/pakistan-not-pushing-for-end-to-us-drone-strikes#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 06 Jul 12 04:13:39 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[zia.khan]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=404368</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Authorities are instead seeking control of human intelligence on ground for target specification of their choice.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Contrary to public posturing, Pakistani authorities are not pushing the US to halt drone strikes inside its tribal regions and are instead seeking control of human intelligence on the ground for target specification of their choice.


“This is the maximum they have been seeking. Nothing more,” said an official privy to talks held this week between civilian and military leaders from Pakistan and the US that culminated in breaking a seven-month deadlock on the resumption of Nato supplies.

The demand of seeking control of human intelligence vital to guide drone strikes is in sharp contradiction to a resolution passed by parliament earlier in the year, calling for cessation of attacks by the pilotless planes operated by Americans to hit top al Qaeda operatives.

Officials said both political and uniformed leaders are on the same page when it comes to an opinion on drone hits but military high-ups and intelligence operatives are keener to have the remote control in their hands.

“They know the US will never step back as they have been saying … so the idea is that it is better to have something that suits you than losing it all,” one of the officials said, explaining the reasons behind the contrast in private and public positions.

There have been reports in the past that Pakistani military authorities are worried about the killing of activists from groups that do not create problems inside their country and focus their energy on across the border.

Although the military usually denies this notion, a spokesperson was not available for comments on this information.

Control on human intelligence, or Humint as it is technically called, would give Pakistani secret outfits a chance to select targets of their choice to be hit by drones, such as the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP).

Pakistan’s leniency is evident from the fact that despite all the hostility in its relations with the US after last year’s Salala attacks, drone strikes restarted in January or within two months of the incident.

Last week, both countries managed to remove a key irritant troubling their ties by agreeing on reopening land routes through Pakistan for supplies to international forces stationed in Afghanistan.

But several crucial issues remain unresolved, with drone strikes at the top of factors that continue to generate a hostile reaction by political parties and a cluster of religious groups opposed to the country’s war on terror role.

Pakistani civilian and military leaders have been telling countrymen they want a complete end to drone strikes responsible for killing more innocent civilians than active al Qaeda associates.

But their behind-the-scenes positions are quite different, said an official who spoke to The Express Tribune.

The fact is that the drone campaign serves Pakistan’s objectives because top al Qaeda affiliates and its local associates are the targets in most cases.

“That is where they like it. It is doing their job with minimum efforts and energy, and more importantly they don’t have to face the blame,” said the official.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 6th, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Long road ahead in US-Pakistan ties after NATO deal: Sherry Rehman</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/404257/long-road-ahead-in-us-pakistan-ties-after-nato-deal-sherry-rehman</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/404257/long-road-ahead-in-us-pakistan-ties-after-nato-deal-sherry-rehman#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jul 12 19:30:44 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[reuters]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[World]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=404257</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Says talks on wider issues now possible; Pakistan fears prolonged instability in Afghanistan.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[With the thorny issue of closed Nato supply routes now resolved, Pakistan and the United States are looking forward to resuming broader talks on security cooperation, militant threats, aid and other issues, Pakistan's envoy to Washington said on Thursday.

But bridging underlying differences that had strained US-Pakistani ties almost to breaking point will be daunting since the allies remain at odds over how to handle the twin threats of the Taliban in Afghanistan and militants in Pakistani tribal areas.

The agreement reached this week prompting Pakistan to reopen NATO supply routes into Afghanistan, was clinched when US President Barack Obama's administration ceded to months of Pakistani demands and apologised for the US air attack that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers last November. It brought welcome relief for both countries.

"I certainly think it opened the door to many other issues," Ambassador Sherry Rehman told Reuters in an interview.

"There's a long road ahead, but both sides can use this opportunity to build a path to durable ties," she added. After US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton apologised in a phone call to Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar, Pakistan permitted trucks carrying NATO supplies to cross into Afghanistan for the first time in more than seven months.

This was a boon for NATO nations that had been paying 2-1/2 times as much to bring supplies in through an alternate route. While NATO will not be paying any new fees for shipping supplies into Afghanistan, Washington will give Pakistan at least $1.2 billion which it had owed the ally for costs incurred while fighting militants.

A US official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said no specific commitments were made to increase military or counter-terrorism activities for Pakistan, but there was a 'good faith agreement' to continue talks on those issues.

All about the apology 

"A number of other things became stuck with all this," the official said. "It was never a money haggle or a transactional deal," Rehman said of the apparent 'price gouging' as claimed by US Secretary of Defence Leon Panetta in late May.

The death of the 24 soldiers had inflamed public opinion among Pakistanis already angered by US drone strikes, the presence of CIA personnel in Pakistan and other issues.

"We're a very hospitable people but we don't like being taken for granted - that was the public sentiment," she said, stressing why the apology was so vital.

"You had 24 boys draped in flags ... that's not something that was going away from the public domain. At every level this percolated up and down" Pakistani society. While the breakthrough is welcome news for both sides, a harmonious road ahead is unlikely.

Issues that have inflamed bilateral ties persist, including US accusations that Pakistan harbors militants and meddles in Afghanistan, Pakistani chafing at US drone strikes and fears on both sides that Pakistan's western neighbour will revert to chaos after most NATO troops leave by the end of 2014.

Pakistan has long complained that the United States has overlooked its contribution to the fight against militants - scores of al Qaeda fighters were apprehended in Pakistan with American help - and the threat Pakistanis themselves face. Late last month, more than 100 fighters loyal to Pakistani Taliban leader Fazlullah snuck across the Afghan border and staged an ambush inside Pakistan. Several days later, the fighters released a video of what they said were the heads of 17 ambushed soldiers, along with their identification cards.

It was a chilling reminder of the threat militants based in Afghanistan pose to Pakistan - the mirror image of the situation that fuels US complaints about Pakistan, and a threat that would be sure to become more serious if Afghanistan were to slip back into civil war.

The United States repeatedly has pressed Pakistan to pursue the Taliban and its allies, especially the Haqqani network, which it blames for a series of high-profile attacks in Afghanistan. Last month, US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said the United States was reaching the limits of its patience with Pakistan over what it deems as foot-dragging on militants.

Rehman said that most of al Qaeda has been decimated with Pakistani cooperation, and that Islamabad would go after foreign fighters linked to other militants according to "Pakistan's priorities" and time frame. The immediate military priority was combating insurgents who target Pakistani security forces and civilians, she said.

"We are going after our own right now - foreign fighters and militants who are on our soil, who are attacking us. If there is someone beheading me I am going to go after him first."

Rehman said Pakistan stood to pay a high price if the NATO project in Afghanistan does not produce a stable country, in part because instability is likely to spill over the two countries' porous border.

"For Pakistan, the stakes in Afghan stability are very high," Rehman said.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>No ghairat on borrowed F-16s</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/404109/no-ghairat-on-borrowed-f-16s</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/404109/no-ghairat-on-borrowed-f-16s#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jul 12 18:34:23 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[kamran.shafi]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=404109</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[There can never be any ghairat on borrowed F-16s; their spares; the required permission from the American managers.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[So then, what in heaven’s name have the Ghairat Brigades and their commanders achieved in these seven or so months that the Nato supply lines were blocked, earning this country the ire and the opprobrium of the rest of the world? A world that we need and depend on for our very survival: to which we export the goods that we make, and from which we import those goods that we need for our manufacturing industry; and more than anything else for our defence needs.

Look at the so-called ‘apology’ that made us crow with delight as we opened the land routes into Afghanistan for Nato/Isaf trucks carrying supplies and equipment: Verbatim as reported in our press: “We are sorry for the losses suffered by the Pakistani military,” US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said, recounting a telephone conversation she had with Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar. “I offered our sincere condolences to the families of the Pakistani soldiers who lost their lives. Foreign Minister Khar and I acknowledged the mistakes that resulted in the loss of Pakistani military lives.”

Now let’s go back seven months, to December 4, 2011, a week after the Salala attack. This is what this newspaper of record reported then: “President Barack Obama called President Zardari on Sunday to personally condole the death of 24 Pakistani soldiers in a Nato airstrike last week. In a press release issued by the White House, President Obama “made clear that this regrettable incident was not a deliberate attack on Pakistan and reiterated the United States’ strong commitment to a full investigation”.

The press release further stated that the two leaders “reaffirmed their commitment to the US-Pakistan bilateral relationship, which is critical to the security of both nations, and they agreed to stay in close touch”. Note also that commanders at every level in Nato, US Central Command and Isaf not only apologised but also condoled the death of our officers and jawans.

But let’s specifically note the word the US President himself used in the telephone call to our president. Obama termed the incident “regrettable”. The word regrettable also means ‘lamentable’ which in turn means ‘woeful’, ‘inexcusable’, ‘appalling’ and ‘dreadful’ and ‘deplorable’. The word ‘deplorable’ also means ‘unpardonable’ which in turn means ‘indefensible’, ‘inexcusable’, ‘awful’ and ‘shameful’.

So, there was the president of the United States, let me immediately add, the country that is the source of our most sophisticated weapons systems that are used on land, sea and in the air, actually calling his country’s action on Salala post inexcusable and shameful and yet we continued to stand on our tails and growl at the world? Well, meow at any rate.

And what do we get at the end of it all: the so-called ‘sorry’ from Secretary Clinton! Really! We Pakistanis do make complete monkeys of ourselves sometimes. And then we cut off our nose to spite our face by refusing to go to the Bonn conference effectively cutting ourselves off from any deliberations to do with the ‘endgame’ in Afghanistan. (Which will be a long time coming, just watch, with us getting the drubbing of our lives).

And now for a short riposte to the mini-article penned by one SRH Hashmi of Karachi in the ‘Letters to the editor’ column of this newspaper. He says that “in matters of politics, he [I] sees everything in ‘a Pakistan versus the rest of the world’ prism”. But is it not the case? Unless Mr Hashmi missed the latest BBC poll on the most disliked countries in the world? Surely we are all old enough to know that we have steadily become a headache for the rest of the world, our  ‘friends’ and  ‘brothers’ included.

Witness the quiet demarches made by our ‘deep as the ocean’ and ‘sweeter than honey’ friend China about controlling our mad jihadis from influencing affairs in their western province of Xinjiang. Does Mr Hashmi not know that many years ago (during Musharraf’s rule, if memory serves) news surfaced of Chinese dissidents being trained in Khyber Agency? Surely he knows of the most recent deportation of Abu Jindal who was in Saudi Arabia as Riyasat Ali on a Pakistani passport and carrying two identity cards, one an NIC (National Identity Card) and the other a NICOP (National Identity Card for Overseas Pakistanis).

He says: “The Pakistan military gets a special battering from him, along with the new-found ‘security analysts’, who are increasingly from the Air Force”. True, only the ‘military’ doesn’t get a ‘battering’ from me, hopefully the brass-hats do; those who cause the running of bakeries and pastry shops and shaadi ghars in military messes, of which Mr Hashmi says nothing.

Again: “To eliminate terrorism, you also have to reduce the causes that give rise to it. However, he [I] never touches these aspects, which makes his approach seem inadequate and superficial”. Mr Hashmi obviously reads me superficially. How many times have I said that the day our Rommels and Guderians stop spawning and molly-coddling murderous terrorists for future use as their ‘assets’ terrorism will come to an end!

And finally, in regard to my saying that the Isaf commander’s offer to use the hammer and anvil method on the Af/Pak Taliban is sterling: “Also, Mr Shafi is assuming that General Allen’s offer is a sincere one and has not considered the possibility that his ploy could be to get Pakistan extensively involved in the fighting and thus deflect the full fury of the forces fighting foreign occupiers towards Pakistan.” At long last, an admission from a defender of the Deep State that the Afghan and Pakistan Taliban are one and the same entity, joined not only at the hip but also in the head.

The rest of Mr Hashmi’s mini-article answers the questions it poses, for example on Mumbai and on East Pakistan, so no discussion necessary. One hopes one will continue to read Mr Hashmi in the future …

Let me just end on the note that there can never be any ghairat on borrowed F-16s; their spares; and the required permission from the American managers. Let Mr Hashmi investigate this …

P.S. And what, pray, did Secretary Clinton mean by, “Foreign Minister Khar and I acknowledged the mistakes that resulted in the loss of Pakistani military lives”? If they both acknowledged ‘mistakes’, did we also make some? One?

Published in The Express Tribune, July 6th, 2012. ]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>After long closure, NATO supplies enter Afghanistan from Pakistan</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/403978/after-long-closure-nato-supplies-enter-afghanistan-from-pakistan</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/403978/after-long-closure-nato-supplies-enter-afghanistan-from-pakistan#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jul 12 07:38:02 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[reuters]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category><category><![CDATA[World]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=403978</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Customs officials said the container trucks had passed through the Chaman border crossing into southern Afghanistan.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[A pair of trucks carrying NATO supplies crossed into Afghanistan on Thursday, Pakistani customs officials said, the first time in more than seven months that Pakistan has allowed Western nations to use its roads to supply troops in Afghanistan.

Customs officials said the container trucks had passed through the Chaman border crossing into southern Afghanistan, a milestone following a deal this week with the United States ending the impasse triggered by the killing of 24 Pakistani soldiers by US aircraft last November.

"We received orders yesterday to allow NATO supply trucks through, but security officials hadn't received their instructions," said Imran Raza, a customs official.

"They received their orders today, and now two trucks have crossed the border into Afghanistan."

The resumption of NATO transit into Afghanistan came two days after US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, yielding to Pakistani demands, told Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar the United States was sorry for the deaths last November.

In response to the killing of the soldiers in a border post, a furious Islamabad shut the supply routes.

For months, the Obama administration refused Pakistani demands to offer an apology for what NATO said was a regrettable accident.

The closure forced NATO countries to bring in supplies into landlocked Afghanistan through an alternate route to the north, a cumbersome process that cost 2-1/2 times as much as shipping them to and then across Pakistan.

NATO commanders said the route closure did not affect operations in Afghanistan, where foreign troops battle the Taliban more than 10 years after the war began. But they acknowledged it could have become more problematic once NATO nations begin to withdraw in earnest ahead an end-2014 timeline for removing most foreign troops.

The deal struck this week on the routes could go a long way to easing tension between the two countries.

While Pakistan got the apology it wanted for the November border killings, the government agreed to drop demands to raise fees on supply trucks going into Afghanistan.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>US noncommittal on end to ‘unilateral strikes’</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/403863/us-noncommittal-on-end-to-%e2%80%98unilateral-strikes%e2%80%99</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/403863/us-noncommittal-on-end-to-%e2%80%98unilateral-strikes%e2%80%99#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jul 12 04:49:26 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[zia.khan]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=403863</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Pakistan sought from US an assurance that it would respect its borders – but Washington was noncommittal.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Despite the reopening of Nato supply routes, the United States has refused to commit that it will restrain from launching ‘unilateral strikes’ if there is a high-value al Qaeda target inside Pakistan.

Pakistan had sought from the United States an assurance that it would respect its borders – but Washington was noncommittal, officials privy to the negotiations between the two countries that resulted in the reopening of Nato transit routes told The Express Tribune on Wednesday.

Though Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in her statement that she regrets the Salala airstrikes and that the Americans would make sure such incidents are not repeated, it appeared to be too generic to be taken as an outright assurance.

US commandos intruded Pakistani territory on May 2, 2011 to launch an operation in Abbottabad to kill al Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden.

The incident proved to be a major source of contention between the two allies on the War on Terror. But US officials, instead of offering any regret, said that they would not hesitate to send their commandos again if any other al Qaeda leader was spotted in Pakistani territory.

Officials said Pakistan had been asking the US to give firm guarantees that its territorial integrity would not be violated again. “That is what our side has been seeking from them,” said one official, seeking anonymity.

The official added that Pakistan did not have any major objection to the drone strikes inside the tribal region to get al Qaeda fugitives but it was not ready to allow American ‘boots’ on the ground.

“We have asked them not to cross our red-lines in the future,” he explained.

But the officials maintained that the American side was not forthcoming with a commitment that Pakistani demands would be honoured. “They have their own concerns… they will not tolerate al Qaeda’s [existence] or leave it to somebody else to get its leaders out.”

Recently there have been some unconfirmed reports that Bin Laden’s successor Dr Ayman al Zawahiri was hiding somewhere in the rugged mountains of tribal regions in what appeared to be an alarming sign for the country.

Taking out Zawahiri is one of the most desired objectives for the Americans to show the world that al Qaeda has been eliminated, the official added.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 5th, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Nato routes: No ‘secret’ deal with US, says Sherry Rehman</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/403896/nato-routes-no-%e2%80%98secret%e2%80%99-deal-with-us-says-sherry-rehman</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/403896/nato-routes-no-%e2%80%98secret%e2%80%99-deal-with-us-says-sherry-rehman#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jul 12 00:55:01 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[our.correspondent]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=403896</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Government’s move to refer matters of national security to Parliament was meant to bring it under public scrutiny.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[A day after Pakistan reopened Nato transit routes, Pakistan’s top diplomat in Washington quashed rumours of a secret deal with the United States.


In an exclusive interview with Munizae Jahangir of Express News, Ambassador Sherry Rehman lauded the US for what she called ‘strategic patience’ and said the decision was an ‘important milestone in bilateral relations’ of the two countries.

She added that no ‘secret’ deals had been cut and that the government’s move to refer “matters of national security to Parliament for the first time in the country’s history” was meant to bring it under public scrutiny. Ambassador Rehman said the words ‘regret’ and ‘condolences’ were put forward many times by the US, but that “sorry is what we had asked for”.

Asked whether the US apology was conditional and contrary to Pakistan’s earlier demands, she said the Salala tragedy was clearly mentioned as the reason for the hiatus in bilateral relations and that makes it ‘meaningful to Pakistan’. While the opposition has criticised the government for not taking into account the parliamentary recommendations which include calling off the drone campaign, she said such a backlash was inevitable in a ‘large democracy such as ours’. She said that in the past decisions on national security were taken by the executive behind closed doors – but “we not only gave due deference, but also spent a lot of time trying to develop a consensus with Parliament”.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 5th, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Forging a new relationship: Pakistan, US might cut ‘black and white’ deal</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/403894/forging-a-new-relationship-pakistan-us-might-cut-%e2%80%98black-and-white%e2%80%99-deal</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/403894/forging-a-new-relationship-pakistan-us-might-cut-%e2%80%98black-and-white%e2%80%99-deal#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jul 12 00:39:13 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[kamran.yousaf]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=403894</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[The agreement will state areas of cooperation; ISI chief to visit US soon.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Pakistan and the United States are likely to enter a ‘black and white’ agreement which seeks to remove ambiguities in an otherwise fragile relationship. The agreement will spell out both areas of cooperation between the two countries and their respective limitations regarding the relationship.


According to officials, the understanding was reached as part of the ‘package deal’ which paved the way for resumption of supplies for the US-led foreign forces stationed in Afghanistan through vital land routes in Pakistan, officials said.

A Pakistani official familiar with the development revealed that the US was initially reluctant to negotiate such an accord since the existing ‘vague’ arrangements served its purpose. However, Islamabad managed to convince Washington on the issue during intense discussions aimed at breaking the deadlock on Nato supply lines, the official added.

Pakistani interlocutors informed their American counterparts that the November 26 incident would not have taken place had there been a written accord between the two sides.

“Salala like incidents had been taking place for years and the reason was a lack of written agreement,” said the official, who asked to remain anonymous.

“It was important that we put an end to this practice and it is only possible if we have clear agreement with the US,” the official added.

He said the new agreement will outline ‘each and every aspect’ of relationship between Pakistan and the US.

“We don’t want to leave any ambiguity in our relationship with the US,” he maintained.

Another official confirmed that the seven-month long standoff had provided both sides an opportunity to narrow down their differences on many other issues.

The official disclosed that the two sides had exchanged ‘non-papers’ identifying each other’s limitations during marathon talks between US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her Pakistani counterpart Hina Rabbani Khar in New York last September. But the process ceased following the diplomatic standoff over last year’s Nato air strikes on Pakistani check posts which killed 24 soldiers. Talks on the proposed agreement will begin soon with exchange of high-level visits from both sides, he said.

For this purpose, the head of Pakistan’s premier intelligence agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), will travel to Washington soon to discuss and identify areas of cooperation in the intelligence field. This will be Lt General Zaheerul Islam’s maiden trip to the US since he took charge of the ISI a few months back. He was scheduled to travel in May but had to delay his trip due to lingering stalemate between the two countries.

“Now that the standoff is over, the DG ISI will soon visit the US,” said a security official.

US to repair road infrastructure

Though, Pakistan dropped its earlier demand of imposing additional transit fee and taxes on trucks carrying good for NATO forces, the US has agreed to provide funds for repairing damaged roads due to the heavy traffic. “The US will soon announce the financial package for this purpose,” said a Pakistani official.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 5th, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Nato routes and our national pride</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/403559/nato-routes-and-our-national-pride</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/403559/nato-routes-and-our-national-pride#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jul 12 18:14:27 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[editorial]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Editorial]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=403559</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Is there a lesson in all this for Pakistan? Yes, three lessons.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Pakistan has lifted its seven-month long ban on the Nato supply route in return for an apology from the State Department in Washington. The ‘conditionality’ set by parliament in Islamabad contained two items: apologise and stop the drone attacks. The first seems to have been taken care of, given US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton’s remarks on July 3 where she offered her “deepest regrets” at the loss of the lives of Pakistani soldiers in the Salala attack. The second could be resolved in a resolution in a recent development whereby it was reported that America and Pakistan could perhaps, undertake “joint defence” against militants/terrorists. The Defence Committee of the Cabinet (DCC) in Islamabad has put its stamp of approval on the deal, which will net Pakistan over a billion dollars of aid plus, possibly, fee for each supply truck that passes through Pakistan.

Clearly, the army, which runs policy in Pakistan, is on board. The decision to go soft was taken a month earlier when Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar had announced that Pakistan was mindful of the economic and political power of the Nato partners of the US and could not afford to alienate them by making their forces suffer in Afghanistan due to the stoppage of their supplies. She had also announced that Pakistan was willing to separate the matter of drones from the supply route issue and would pursue it with Washington till an agreement was reached in favour of Pakistan.

Pakistan has a way of inserting itself into traps that it cannot abide for long. The army lost its cool over the killing of Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad in May 2011, little realising what it looked like to the outside world and went over the edge when the Salala incident took place in November. Vent was given to rage, which should have been controlled for the sake of national interest. The media was allowed to go berserk spreading passions of revenge the country was too weak and too wracked to satisfy. The next wrong thing to do was handing over the issue to parliament where much was made of national ‘ghairat’. The foreign policy of any state — powerful or weak — must be separated from matters of national pride so that statesmanship can be practised and conflict avoided.

The big mess that sincere observers soon began to note was the delay that parliament was allowing in its preparation of  ‘guidelines’ for Pakistan’s foreign policy. It succumbed to the baser instincts of revenge and offering insult and let slip the moment when America was more favourably inclined to accept Pakistan’s stance. In this period of bad blood, Pakistanis forgot their more pressing crises and focused on America’s apology, which they thought should be self-demeaning in the extreme. On the other hand, there was much negative and ‘terminal’ (like the dismissal of prime ministers) going on in Pakistan to provoke the columnists in Washington into dubbing Pakistan a state in conflict with itself.

Then, someone unleashed the Difa-e-Pakistan Council (DPC) on the long-suffering people of Pakistan. Made up of shady semi-terrorist elements and mujahideen that the state once employed in its asymmetrical wars, the DPC asserts that they will engage only in peaceful agitation against the decision.

Although it is quite clear from all this that Pakistan did mishandle the situation, but as the senior partner in this relationship, the US could have also done well to express its regrets over the Salala incident much earlier. That would have led to a quicker normalisation of relations and cooling of tempers on both sides and would have also enabled both the governments to solve the issue of the Nato supply routes much earlier.

Is there a lesson in all this for Pakistan? Yes, three lessons. Don’t fly into a rage of ‘ghairat’ because states don’t do that. Don’t hand over diplomacy to parliament, which is bound to mess things up further. And no matter what happens, don’t isolate yourself in the world because in today’s state of international law, isolation is another name for defeat.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 5th, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Why it took so long for Nato supplies to reopen</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/403629/why-it-took-so-long-for-nato-supplies-to-reopen</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/403629/why-it-took-so-long-for-nato-supplies-to-reopen#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jul 12 17:49:40 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[raza.rumi]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=403629</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[It is absolutely mind-boggling to understand what prevented US from making such a statement earlier?]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Finally, the Nato supply routes to Afghanistan have been reopened. The decision followed a public statement from the US Secretary of State wherein she carefully selected a few apologetic words, allowing the Pakistani authorities some measure of face-saving at home. The resolution of this key transaction took nearly eight months and it is absolutely mind-boggling to understand what prevented the US from making such a statement earlier? Or for that matter why could Pakistan not use diplomatic channels for a quicker resolution of the dispute?

The answers to these questions lie in the proclivity of both the sides for grandstanding and posturing mainly to whip up public opinion as well as play a game of needless brinkmanship. Pakistan’s demand for an apology was a fair one. As a long-standing ally, the deaths of its soldiers in US airstrikes in November 2011 was unpalatable for a military embroiled in a difficult war. That said, sections of America’s disparate policy machinery also hold the Pakistani state responsible for the Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. Did they not know all along that Pakistan was not going to dump some of the Taliban factions even when it pursued al Qaeda?

On the other hand, Pakistan’s abrupt closure of supply lines made little sense in the larger perspective, especially as far as its own national interest was concerned. Rational states anchor their policies in pure self-interest. For nine years, Pakistan had allowed Nato supplies to pass through and halted them in the 10th year when Nato/US troops were planning to start a phased withdrawal from Afghanistan. The war in Afghanistan and its spillover into Pakistan’s border areas have been major sources of instability for Pakistan. The non-transparent and narrow parameters for policy setting have meant that achieving strategic leverage in Afghanistan and countering India’s influence are the two key policy drivers. Whilst these are important considerations, the larger issue of Pakistan’s own survival as a society and state has been missing from the discourse.

The Taliban in Afghanistan have a Pakistani counterpart — the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). Al Qaeda is weak but has not disappeared and, according to several reports, has found bases even in urban areas within Pakistan. More importantly, the repeat of a 1990s-style Taliban march on Kabul is not likely anymore. So what are the policymakers thinking here? Is there a plan, a strategy of sorts on Afghanistan other than the outdated overarching quest for strategic depth? No one really knows. The contradiction between the officially stated and on-ground positions is also intriguing. On the one hand, we are comfortable with a few factions such as the Haqqani network and on the other we also complain of incursions and sanctuaries across the Durand line.

Most importantly, Afghanistan is not just a land of the Pakhtuns. There are scores of other ethnic groups with different aspirations for the future. What about the growing middle class, youth and civil society in Afghanistan, which seeks stability, and supports a pluralistic governance model? The country and the region have suffered from the imposition of a bigoted version of a so-called Islamic culture in the past. Why should we condemn ourselves to repeat history?

Despite the growing chasm between their respective strategic interests and goals, Pakistan and the US cannot do without each other, at least not until 2014. Much has been said globally on Pakistan’s present or future ‘defeat’ in Afghanistan. The challenge of mending the strained US-Pakistan relations is huge. It is, therefore, time to let diplomacy prevail with a robust set of Track II initiatives, media exchanges and search for alternative solutions, which are independent of military interests on both the sides. Pakistan faces an immense challenge in the wake of US withdrawal and has to tackle the homegrown extremists. It simply cannot delay thinking about these imperatives.

Similarly, the US must not contribute to strengthening the irrational anti-American voices through its aggressive posturing. Instead, it should think of securing regional peace through engagement and not military diktat. The latter is obviously not working in Afghanistan.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 5th, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Twitter alert: Saying ‘No’ to NATO on 4th of July</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/403456/twitter-alert-saying-%e2%80%98no%e2%80%99-to-nato-on-4th-of-july</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/403456/twitter-alert-saying-%e2%80%98no%e2%80%99-to-nato-on-4th-of-july#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jul 12 10:29:29 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[web.desk]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=403456</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA['SayNoToNato' and 'Happy 4th of July' were the top two trends in Pakistan on Twitter.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[As ties between US and Pakistan went to a record low this year, the anti-US sentiment became rife among Pakistanis.

The sentiment took a new toll when the Pakistani government announced reopening Nato supply routes immediately after the US apologised for the Salala cross-border attack which had killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.

A trend “SayNoToNato” started trending in Pakistan on Twitter, but ironically, the trend was topped by “Happy 4th of July” in celebration of the independence day of the US.

Here are a few top tweets from the local twitterati:

Jawad Ahmed ‏@ImamJawad

Life is too precious to be relaced with just an apology. America needs to do more #SayNoToNATO

Tamoor Raja ‏@tamraja

Wonder what America's response would have been if Bin Laden simply apologised after 9/11. #SayNoToNato

Awais Aslam Mirza ‏@mawaispk

Sorry for your loss" does not translate to "We apologize for (accidentally) killing your soldiers." is it Sorry? #SayNoToNato#GoAmericaGo

Shamsuddin ‏@shamspk

24 Pakistanis, 7 months, 11 words - "We are sorry for the losses suffered by the Pakistani military." - Hillary Clinton #Shame#SayNoToNato

Shaikh Asad ‏@ShakeSaab

They took 6 months for the "AFSOS" And we spared only 6 seconds to accept it #SayNoToNato #Shameful

Fatima Ali ‏@FatimaAli52

22 #Drone attacks after salala incident, how can we believe #Clinton'is sorry for our loss'!! #SayNoToNato #Pakistan #US #Afghanistan#Iran

Tamoor Raja ‏@tamraja

In #Pakistan cheapest thing to sell is our pride. We sell it for a five letter word "Sorry" #SayNoToNato

saher hayat ‏@sherryhayat

It looks ironically funny when "happy 4th of July" is trending at no. 1 and #SayNoToNATO at no. 2 in Pakistan We r definitely a confused lot.

Hassan Khan ‏@hassanK

Top two trends in #pakistan. #SayNoToNato and happy 4th july. We are one peace loving nation.

rashid rajput ‏@rashidrajput3

After hundreds of drone attacks Pakistanis still promoting#Happy4thofjuly shame!! #KonHaiUmeed #SayNoToNato

Qaiser Shahzad ‏@qaiser_shahzad

Today is the independence day of our indirect government i.e. USA ! Happy 4th of July.. #Pakistan #SayNoToNato #PTI]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>NATO routes reopened for peace in the region: Information minister</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/403443/pakistan-orders-resumption-of-nato-supplies-through-chaman</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/403443/pakistan-orders-resumption-of-nato-supplies-through-chaman#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jul 12 08:08:39 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Ema Anis]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=403443</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[The containers are ready to transport oil and food supplies to Afghanistan from Karachi.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Information Minister Qamar Zaman Kaira said on Wednesday that the decision to reopen the Nato supply routes cannot be termed as defeat or victory on part of any country, and Pakistan took the decision in an effort to sustain peace in the region.

“The Salala incident affected it [peace in the region] and it was a very unfortunate incident,” Kaira said, adding that Pakistan, a country most-affected by the war on terror, should not be given negative treatment.

“High-level officials of the US government had stated that they will not apologise, yet they went against their stated position and apologised. We should at least appreciate that.”

He added that the decision to reopen the supply routes was made in light of the parliament recommendations.

NATO supplies through Chaman

As United States apologised over its attack on Salala checkpost, Pakistan on Wednesday ordered its customs authorities to reopen supply routes to Nato forces stationed in Afghanistan, through the Chaman border, Express News quoted customs sources as saying.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Tuesday apologised over last year’s deadly Nato air raid on Pakistan’s border posts in the Salala area of Mohmand Agency that killed over two dozen Pakistani troops.

The containers are ready to transport oil and food supplies to Afghanistan from Karachi.

Rehman Malik apprises PM on route security

Senior Advisor to Prime Minister on Interior, Rehman Malik has apprised Prime Minister Raja Pervaiz Ashraf about the steps taken by the law enforcement agencies to ensure safe passage of NATO supplies en route to Afghanistan through Pakistan.

The meeting held at the prime minister house also discussed the issue of Machine Readable Passports (MRP).

Pervaiz directed the Advisor on Interior to ensure, at the earliest, the MRP facility to all overseas Pakistanis through the missions abroad.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>ISAF commander had offered "personal apology" over Salala incident</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/403045/isaf-commander-had-offered-a-personal-apology-over-salala-incident</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/403045/isaf-commander-had-offered-a-personal-apology-over-salala-incident#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jul 12 15:15:26 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[web.desk]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=403045</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Kayani had apprec­iated the apolog­y, but dismis­sed it as insufficient.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[ISAF commander in Afghanistan General John Allen offered a "personal apology" over the November 26, 2011 cross-border incident in which 24 Pakistani soldiers were killed, the BBC's Urdu language website reported on Tuesday.

According to the report, General Allen during his recent meeting with Pakistan Army chief General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, personally apologised over the incident.

The BBC Urdu, quoting a senior military official, said that General Kayani appreciated the apology, but declared it insufficient.

Kayani, according to the source, made it clear to General Allen that the issue was not between two armies, rather between the two governments, and its solution lay in those corridors.

The source added that the meeting between General Allen and General Kayani took place in the Foreign Office in the presence of other officers on the insistence of the latter. Generally the two Generals have held talks at the army headquarters in Rawalpindi.

The items discussed in the meeting covered the Nato supply routes and drone strikes. All matters discussed in those meetings would be put before the Cabinet's defence committee, which met in Islamabad on Tuesday.

The case of "friendly fire" had prompted Pakistan to close its borders for Nato supplies ferried through its territory into Afghanistan. Pakistan went on to conduct a policy review of its ties with the US, demanding that the US issue a high level apology over the incident, and end drone strikes before the routes would be reopened.

The US, on numerous occasions expressed regret over the incident, but did not offer a clear apology as demanded by Pakistan.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>PAI Mission: ‘CBMs needed to improve US ties’</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/402788/pai-mission-%e2%80%98cbms-needed-to-improve-us-ties%e2%80%99</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/402788/pai-mission-%e2%80%98cbms-needed-to-improve-us-ties%e2%80%99#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jul 12 04:09:06 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[ppi]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Sindh]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=402788</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Seeks to bring peace and harmony to the region by improving relations between the two erstwhile allies.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[With Pak-US relations reaching their lowest ebb in recent history, the Pak American Initiative (PAI), a non-governmental effort, announced its mission statement to improve bilateral relations through mutual confidence building measures.


The PAI mission, unveiled here on Monday, seeks to bring peace and harmony to the region by improving relations between the two erstwhile allies.

PAI convener Syed Jawaid Iqbal on the occasion said that the “prime purpose of this body is to dilute differences between the two countries” He added that it was important for PAI to be perceived as a neutral platform for discussion rather than being viewed as biased towards either Pakistan or the United States.

Iqbal highlighted reopening of Nato supply routes, apology over the Salala attack and alleged support to Haqqani network as difficult yet urgent challenges requiring mutually acceptable solutions.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 3rd, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Even as talks progress, US seeks funds for blockade work-around</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/402867/even-as-talks-progress-us-seeks-funds-for-blockade-work-around</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/402867/even-as-talks-progress-us-seeks-funds-for-blockade-work-around#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jul 12 01:13:21 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[afp]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[World]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=402867</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[US-led forces seek $8.2b to pay for increased fuel costs for supply lines running through the NDN, airlifts.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The Pentagon has asked Congress to shift billions of dollars in the defense budget to pay for added fuel costs to ferry supplies to Afghanistan, at least for the time till Pakistan keeps its border for Nato convoys, US officials said Monday.

In a letter to congressional defense committees, the Pentagon requested "reprogramming" $8.2 billion in funds previously approved to finance more urgent priorities, officials said.

There were "some unanticipated costs that we just didn't foresee," spokesman Captain John Kirby told reporters.

It remained unclear what programs in the defense budget would receive less funding as a result.

A large portion of the request was due to the costs "associated with the extended closure of the ground lines of communication" in Pakistan, Kirby said.

In November, Pakistan shut its border to NATO supply convoys bound for Afghanistan after a US air strike accidentally killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.

The Pentagon reportedly estimates an alternative network of northern supply routes through Central Asia has generated $2.1 billion in additional fuel costs compared to the shorter Pakistani route.

The request to shift funds was also needed to cover the cost of deploying an additional aircraft carrier to the Gulf region.

"Earlier this year, we did increase the carrier presence there," said Kirby, with the US Navy moving from one to two aircraft carriers present in the area at all times.

The expanded naval deployment came amid rising tensions with Iran, which in December and January threatened to block the Strait of Hormuz in response to increased international pressure over its nuclear program.

The US Air Force also had to pay for more "flying hours" partly related to the closure of the Pakistan routes, as the military has had to rely more on cargo aircraft to ferry in supplies to the US-led force in Afghanistan, officials said.

US continues work with Pakistan on GLOCs

The State Department on Monday said the United States continues to work with Pakistan on the issue of reopening the country's key land routes that transport supplies into and out of landlocked Afghanistan.

Spokesperson Victoria Nuland confirmed that Deputy Secretary of State Thomas Nides held talks with Pakistani officials. The two countries, she said, have been talking on wide-ranging issues including working on supply lines, adding that "that work continues."

"We don't have anything in particular to announce today," she said when asked if a deal is imminent on reopening the routes, closed by Islamabad about seven months ago.

The spokesperson also said US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made a telephonic call to new Pakistan Prime Minister Raja Pervaiz Ashraf " to wish him well in his new post." In her call, Secretary Clinton also "noted that we want to continue our engagement and work through the issues " the two countries still have, the spokesperson said.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item>	</channel>
                </rss>
