"The army in the past as well as at present has conducted successful military operations using its own resources without any external support whatsoever," military spokesman Major General Athar Abbas told AFP.
US President Barack Obama's chief of staff, William Daley, confirmed in a television interview on Sunday that the United States has decided to withhold almost a third of its annual $2.7 billion security assistance to Islamabad.
Abbas, however, said the military had not been officially informed of the decision to suspend aid.
Relations between the key allies in the war on Al-Qaeda drastically worsened after US commandos killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan on May 2, humiliating the Pakistani military and opening it to allegations of complicity or incompetence.
Abbas referred AFP to an extraordinary statement issued by army chief of staff General Ashfaq Kayani on June 9 as part of the bin Laden fallout which recommended that US military aid be redirected towards civilians.
The US aid freeze was welcomed by Pakistan's neighbour and rival India.
"It is not desirable that this region had to be heavily armed by the US," External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna said, according to the PTI news agency, adding that the spending would upset the regional power balance.
The US administration on Monday, meanwhile, reiterated the reasons for its decision.
"When it comes to our military assistance, we're not prepared to continue providing that at the pace that we were providing it unless and until we see certain steps taken," State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said.
Islamabad's demand that about 100 US advisers leave Pakistani soil, effectively halting military training, was a bar to the prospect of improving "our cooperation in counterterrorism, in counterinsurgency," she added.
"We obviously can't do that in an environment where Pakistan has asked our trainers to go," Nuland told reporters.
The suspended aid includes about $300 million to reimburse Pakistan for some of the costs of deploying more than 100,000 soldiers along the Afghan border, according to The New York Times.
Pakistan says it has 140,000 soldiers in the northwest, more than the 99,000 American troops in Afghanistan, fighting a local Taliban insurgency.
The United States has long called on Pakistan to do more to crack down on militants, such as the Al-Qaeda-linked Haqqani network, who use its soil to attack within Afghanistan, but the army says its troops are too over-stretched.
But the relationship is complicated as the US uses Pakistan as a sea port and land corridor to truck about 50 percent of its military supplies into Afghanistan, although Taliban and other militants routinely attack the convoys.
Ties between the US and Pakistan are now at their lowest point since Islamabad officially broke with the Taliban and sided with Washington after the 9/11 attacks, analysts said.
One Western security official in Islamabad told AFP that bin Laden's killing had hardened America's approach to Pakistan, but the underlying difference was that the so-called allies cannot agree who or what the enemy really is.
"They don't have the same enemy and so relations will only continue along this chaotic path," the official said.
Analyst Rasul Baksh Raees acknowledged the deep antipathy to America that is prevalent in Pakistan, but added: "I think Pakistan and the United States will come to some kind of understanding soon to sort out irritants."
In Washington, Islamabad's ambassador to the US Husain Haqqani said civilian aid continued to flow and that "so far all suggestions for an aid cut-off for Pakistan have been defeated" as the US Congress looks at funding for next year.
On the ground Monday, two missiles fired from a US drone hit a compound in Pakistan's northwestern tribal belt on the Afghan border, killing at least 10 militants, local security officials said.
The missile strikes are hugely unpopular among a Pakistani public deeply opposed to the government's alliance with Washington and sensitive to perceived violations of sovereignty.
COMMENTS (10)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
Petulant not defiant!!!!!!
@Arindom:
money should never be made part of the equation.........having said that lets lok t the ground realities of things... the Bush administration made it very clear "ur either with us or against us".. like every other country (except for iran) pakistan had no choice but to be with the US....given the fiscal and current acocunt deficit.. growing inflation and a myriad of other problems Pakistan couldnt possibly fight the war given its current budget alocation for military expenditure (albeit the most significant part of our budget).. so it was clear pakistans up for helping the US but the US needs to provide pakistan with the funds to fight the war.. plain and simple... hvaing said that im all for getting rid of the US and US aid and Hiliry clinton for that matter so that we can stand on our own two feet for one...
The US media is screaming about the “Billions of Dollars” of aid to Pakistan. The reality is different. A recent study found that Pakistan has lost $68 billion in revenue because of the US war on terror. US Aid doesn’t come close to funding the difference. The US public overlooks the cumulative impact of Pakistan’s role in GWOT in terms of loss of domestic and foreign investments, decline in industry, capital-flight. The US and NATO forces abuse Pakistan roads and bridges and do not pay for their maintenance. The loss of infrastructure losses due to the militant activities has created a net loss for Pakistan.
Last time I checked US Govt. was borrowing from US citizens retirement funds to run the government fund.
Exhibit A:
Thank God for the Pakistani army. They don;t need any aid. They need to do what is in the nation';s best interest and that alone. Look at the mess the world created and left after Pakistani helped defeat the Soviets in Afghanistan. We will be cleaning up the mess again when they leave soon. I am glad that Kayani has his head on straight. He will do what s best for Pakistan and Pakistan alone. When the West put sanctions on Pakistan, we became self sufficient in fighter planes, tanks and missiles. Let's hope for more of the same. Pakistan Zindabad!
The Generals are angry, all of them were looking forward to taking their families to Disney ! Now they must settle for Murree....
Good .... now the only thing standing before Pakistan's way to Prosperity, self Reliance and regaining its dignity is our Politician.
Get rid of them and we shall make it through. Keep up with them and perish..
The choice is ours!
We should try Imran Khan ... it is time!
Pakistani civilians should understand that they are wasting huge sums of money on the eastern front.When one looks at history, it was the Pakistani Army that had started wars with India and in each case has lost. It is time for the armed force and proxy fighters to draw down from the eastern border thereby allowing the Indians to reduce their strength at their western border and concentrate on their northern border. Pakistan should not expect the Indians to reduce their troop strength until Pakistan starts reducing. Since Pakistan is a nuke state one does not see any reason for such a large troop deployment at the border. Pakistan has not agreed to a no first strike and as such is at liberty to use a nuke if India should take agressive moves at the border. One should understand the expansion and mordenisation taking place is not Pakistan centric but China centric. With the concentration of Paakistani troops and their proxies at the LOC and international border India has no option but to maintain their troop strength and increase recrutement to proctect the northern and eastern border with China. By moving the Pakistani troops and assets to the western border to fight terror, you will not require US aid and you will encourage India to reduce their deployment on their western border and it will also encourage the western workd to put pressure on India to reciprocate. China is not a true friend. They are making use of Pakistan to keep India occupied on their border with pakistan so that their border with India is not fortified by the Indian forces. Once the Chinese hac concluded their border treaty with India, they will have no use of Pakistan. Their support will be zero as they are money faced. Their trade with India will so vast that Pakistan will be wiped out in any equation. Please take a step back and think of what US and China are doing to you.
No Pakistan must prove itself whether it is on the side of the Civilised world or on the side of terrorists by going after Terrorists solely out of it's beliefs and not because of money.