TOKYO: US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Sunday that the United States and Pakistan are putting past tensions behind them to focus on the future, after meeting with her Pakistani counterpart.
It was their first face-to-face meeting since the two countries last week struck a deal to re-open key supply routes into Afghanistan, closed for seven months following a US attack in which 24 Pakistani soldiers died.
Clinton told reporters in Tokyo on the sidelines of a conference on Afghanistan that she had “a broad-ranging discussion” with Hina Rabbani Khar on resolving some of the issues surrounding the re-opening of border routes.
“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.
The killing of the soldiers, coupled with a US raid on the Pakistani compound of Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in May 2011, had plunged ties between the two nations to new lows.
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.
Her talks with Khar had “focused on the necessity of defeating the terror networks that threaten the stability of Pakistan and Afghanistan” as well as Afghan reconciliation efforts.
“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 is a challenging and interesting relationship and it remains so,” Clinton said.
But she warned the relationship was likely to remain rocky at times.
“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,” Clinton said.
Last week, Clinton said Washington was sorry for the deaths of the Pakistani soldiers, paving the way for Islamabad to agree to reopen the supply routes vital for NATO and the US to truck supplies into Afghanistan.
The border blockade had forced the United States and its allies to rely on longer, more costly routes through Central Asia, Russia and the Caucasus.
As part of the deal to reopen the borders, Washington will also release about $1.1 billion to the Pakistani military from a US “coalition support fund” designed to reimburse Pakistan for the cost of counter-insurgency operations.
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
"TOKYO:US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Sunday that the United States and Pakistan are putting past tensions behind them to focus on the future, after meeting with her Pakistani counterpart" Yes absolutely Hilary Clinton is right on her this stance because mostly US' tensions are being put behind furtively not Pakistan's tensions and the most especially importantly Pakistan's tension drones' strikes which are always ahead and US' leaders' top priority/agenda the drones' strikes shall have to be continued on Pakistani tribal areas.
“To see a vulgar display of US duplicity and hypocrisy one needs to look no farther than the US violating the Geneva Convention with respect to perpetrating regime change, waging aggressive war(s), engaging in torture and murder, conducting extraordinary renditions and providing support for terrorist organizations like the MEK [MKO], PPK, Jundullah and now al-Qaeda in Syria.”
“This is the method the US uses to ensure its way of life. The US has a long history of enlisting terrorist support in the implementation of a terrorist foreign policy, and this policy is causing more and more nations to realize they do not need the US to engage in mutually beneficial trade, cultural exchange or military agreements as such are growing to the exclusion of US interests and influence.”
@gp: For your information Britain is still giving £280 million pounds per year and will continue at that rate till 2015. So i don't know why you are feeling so high and mighty about, coming on a Pakistani site and and giving your biased views.
US behaving like true masters..................
@GP65: Why do you compare Pakistan with India? Pakistan is a different country and is not part of India. Another point is, India was poorer than Pakistan not long ago. Just check it out yourselves. Dont be too proud as if India is a Developed country like Switzerland or Germany.. Its still a third world country and there`s rampant poverty.
Pakistan is in this state because of many wars it has to face. 3 wars with India, and with the soviets and now the so called war on terror. It has to support refugees from Afghanistan. This is the reason why Pakistan needs to Aids. Even the Size of Pakistan is much smaller than India and it has to take Afghan Refugees.
Once Imran Khan saheb comes to power, look at how Pakistan will be. Pakistan will be come a true Islamic State, with no corruption. Plz stop comparision till elections.
You need to clarify your statements on "aid" received by India. India does not get any significant free aid money anymore. You are confusing international loans for investment and infrastructure with free dole-outs.
Washington has no other options but to apologise. The U.S. is running out of time and the countdown 2014 is on. Yet the situation could change if the Pakistan's People's Party loses its majority in the parliament in next year's general elections.
@adil: For a country that is very proud of its ghairat, you are looking forward to other people's help in many areas where most sovereign countries help themselves: 1. Repaying your own loans 2. Building power plants in country 3. Resolving your issues with neighbours 4. Managing your internal law and order situation.
I understand your post was sarcastic but there was an implied sarcasm that US really wasn't doing the things that you expect a 'friend' to do , so this friendship was not worthwhile for Pakistan. The reality is that you truly want to get a relationship of 'Friends not mastwers', then you will need to show more self respect in your relationship instead of constantly saying 'Give more'.
@syed baqar ahsan: "“Putting tension(arrogance)behind” ,It was that pinch of extra US$ 2.1 BILLION Americans (sense prevailed) paid for using northern or Russian route to supply or support their troops for seven months by effective blocked by Pakistan.Be careful my “Friend”."
Yes. You do realize that it is Pakistan that capitulated. It agreed to every US condition. US agreed to no Pakistani condition.
@True Muslim Paki: "They give billions in aid to Afghans.. but not Pakistan.".
Sovereign nations do not demand aid or complain about the quantum of aid they get. Figure out if you want to call yourself sovereign or not first. India for example has a well defined aid policy. Only certain countries are allowed to give aid . For any other country, the aid has to be minimum 250 million dollars or India will not accept it. Even from the countries it accepts aid, the aid CANNOT be tied i.e. there can be no conditions imposed by donor country. India also does not accept aid during calamities such as tsunami, floods etc. because it does not like foreigners to take charge of rehabilitation efforts.
UK newspapers created a big issue when India did not give a certain defense orde3r to UK companies about the fact that despite getting aid, India was not giving them the order. Indian foreign minister said - please stop giving us aid. We will make decisions based on our national interests not based on donor request.
Uncle Sam is not going to forget very quickly, the antics this Aid dependant Nation has played over past year ! There are going to be long term implications in this relationship and the real test will come in 2014, as to the reality of this so called relationship !
As a nation we have developed a mentality of very high over estimation for ourselves and very low underestimating others and these are extremes infested among the entire country in all fields of life not only religion. Nothing is indispensable, if we are not co-operative, someone else will the only repercussions will be higher costs for the USA but still livable. If America has $100.00 and spends $1.00 via Pakistan's help they will still be able to spend even $5.00 while losing $4.00 but they won't become number 2 and stay #1 in the world as a supper power for years to come.
sign of another trouble coming ....
"Putting tension(arrogance)behind" ,It was that pinch of extra US$ 2.1 BILLION Americans (sense prevailed) paid for using northern or Russian route to supply or support their troops for seven months by effective blocked by Pakistan.Be careful my "Friend".
Yeah, time for you to dig another tension up for us. Please let it be without any bloodbath this time.
Always problem/corruption/dis honesty starts from the elder, it is a universal truth and young one or small only copy.USA has to be careful.India, Japan and 18 0thers can import oil from Iran and Pakistan is being stopped to export wheat and import energy.What a Hillary's USA is.
In your dreams buddy!