US not to keep up aid to Pakistan without change: Clinton

US secretary of state stresses it is time for the US and Pakistan to ensure their interests and actions are aligned.


Huma Imtiaz June 24, 2011

WASHINGTON:


In the filled-to-capacity room at the Dirksen Senate Office Building, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was subjected to a barrage of questions about Afghanistan and Pakistan at the hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.


Held barely 12 hours after US President Barack Obama announced his plans to withdraw 10,000 US troops from Afghanistan by the end of the year, Secretary Clinton was pressed on the new most important issue: Pakistan.

Secretary Clinton, who described the US-Pakistan relationship as frustrating, said that they were not stepping back from the relationship. But she also said that the US is not prepared to continue the same levels of military aid to Pakistan, unless it sees some changes in the relationship.

“When it comes to our military aid, we are not prepared to continue providing that at the pace we were providing it unless and until we see some steps taken,” Clinton said. She didn’t specify the steps, but stressed it was time for the US and Pakistan to ensure their interests and actions are aligned.

In her opening remarks, she said: “We cannot walk away from this relationship and ignore the consequences, for all the reasons that Senator Richard Lugar outlined in his opening statement: Pakistan is a nuclear-armed state sitting at the crossroads of a strategic region. And we have seen this movie before. We have seen the cost of disengaging from the region. As [US Defence] Secretary Robert Gates, who was there at that time, has stressed, we cannot repeat the mistakes of 1989.”

In response to a question from a senator, Clinton said, “We have to engage, work with and continue to influence Pakistani behaviour”. However, said Secretary Clinton, the US cannot solve all of Pakistan’s problems.

On Afghanistan, Secretary Clinton said that the military, diplomatic and development surge has worked. She added that the cost of one year of civilian aid in Afghanistan was equal to 10 days of war.

In her responses vis a vis Pakistan’s stance on Afghanistan, Clinton said that Pakistan wants strategic depth in Afghanistan, and an Afghanistan that did not pose a threat to Islamabad. “Pakistan does not want Afghanistan to become a satellite of India”.

Clinton also underscored the importance of Pakistan’s role at the table for reconciliation in Afghanistan, and the role of other neighbours. (With additional input from Reuters)

Published in The Express Tribune, June 24th, 2011.


COMMENTS (49)

inam | 10 years ago | Reply

It is really amazing to hear that they called the unpaid amount payable by American as

Aid. If we analyze the figures that thing will become crystal clear that Pakistani’s are not getting any aid rather than paying America charity a poor man charity.

American pays at most 2 billion US dollar to Pakistan Army as so called aid and Pakistan army stationed approximately 150000 Pakistani troops at Afghan border of approximately 750 Kilometer to minimize terrorist movement.

The amount is approximately 36 US dollar per day for the services of one army person and all the machine cost on the army person

2 billion /150000/365= 36.53 USD

If we compare those figures with the American army expenditure inside Afghanistan things will become quite clear.

American army expenditures approved by the congress for Afghan operations were 140 Billion Dollar and further they get trench of 20 billion dollar. Approximately 120000 American army personnel’s are stationed in Afghanistan. Average cost per soldier per day is 3,196 US Dollar per day. Important thing is that above mentioned cost is excluding salary paid to the soldiers.

(140+20) billion /120000/365= 3,196 US $

We are providing same services at 90 times cheaper rate to American and still they called it Aid. I like to call it Joke of the century. You cannot understand the qualitative impact of this donation which we are facing.

It is better that you should not pay that amount but make sure that you have alternative arrangement to cope up with the situation. You have 120000 army soldiers at stake in Afghanistan but for us that cooperation will end up in our whole nation at stake.

Ashutosh | 10 years ago | Reply @anonymous: Don't worry ! India is not an ally ...
VIEW MORE COMMENTS
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ

E-Publications

Most Read