US aid to Pakistan based on conditions: Report

The White House is basing billions in on Islamabad's ability to meet a 'scorecard' of security objectives.


Express August 15, 2011
US aid to Pakistan based on conditions: Report

WASHINGTON: The White House has started conditioning billions of dollars in aid to Pakistan based on progress on a secret scorecard of US objectives to combat militancy, The Wall Street Journal reported on Monday.

(Read: More strings on Pakistan aid)

The report said that the United States is asking Pakistan to take specific steps to ease bilateral tensions.

The classified system, put in place after the US raid in Abbottabad that killed Osama bin Laden, signals a shift by the White House toward a pay-for-performance relationship.

The report quotes a senior military official calling the unusual new approach "a hard-knuckled reflection of where we are right now" in relations.

US officials say a sharp breakdown in counter-terrorism cooperation following the Abbottabad raid in May and the arrest of a CIA contractor in Pakistan have led to aid conditioning.

The new approach represents an effort to salvage as much counter-terrorism cooperation to deliver a deathblow to al Qaeda's remaining leadership in Pakistan.

COMMENTS (26)

Dallas Ali | 13 years ago | Reply

Love it! Pakistan will probably get "D minus".

Love the accountability for my hard earned tax money.

AnisAqeel | 13 years ago | Reply

@malik: "So, can we outsource our Home Ministry to CIA since they seem to be doing a better of making the country safe?"

Other than being sarcastic, it is a good idea. Todays closely knit world offers these opportunities and recent example is London,s Riots where British Government sought help from New York Polce Chief, Kelly to handle and advise. We don't have Britain's comparison as they are way, way superior with our management. It is a good idea to come out of the well we are living in.

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