Pakistan double game cuts both ways....

Discussion in 'Pakistan' started by satyam, Jul 31, 2010.

  1. satyam

    satyam New Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2010
    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    14
    At least we have something in common with America,” the logistics officer says. “The Pakistanis are playing a double game with us, too :happy_2:

    The insurgents refer contemptuously to the ISI as “blacklegs,” for their supposedly darker skin :happy_2:

    http://www.newsweek.com/2010/07/31/with-friends-like-these.html
     
  2.  
  3. ajtr

    ajtr Veteran Member Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    12,038
    Likes Received:
    715
    Well terror is always a double edged sword.Who ever used terror as strategy has ultimately suffered from the same.
     
  4. Daredevil

    Daredevil On Vacation! Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2009
    Messages:
    11,613
    Likes Received:
    5,670
    Pakistanis are handling the double edged sword - one edge being Taliban and other being US. Like this..

    [​IMG]

    They are going to bleed their hands profusely. The earlier they stop this the better for them.
     
  5. ajtr

    ajtr Veteran Member Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    12,038
    Likes Received:
    715
    Pakistan has been lying about the role of the ISI in fomenting terror in the region (NEW)


    Posted By: Vir Sanghvi | Posted On: 31 Jul 2010 05:11 PM

    There is an increasing disconnect between the government of India’s attitude to Pakistan and the view of most educated Indians. The disconnect has been most apparent in the recriminations that have followed the failure of the Indo-Pak foreign minister’s summit. And each day brings new evidence – such as the Wikileaks documents – that seems to undermine the government’s approach.

    To be fair, the official Indian approach sounds reasonable. The government says that India cannot hope to be one of the great powers of the 21st century if it continues to engage in pointless hostility with a small neighbour. It is, therefore, important to improve relations with Pakistan. Obviously, this will not happen overnight. But it is vital to continue with a process of engagement that results in confidence-building measures, in such symbolic gestures as the release of fishermen and in tiny incremental steps that improve the overall atmosphere. When both sides narrow what Manmohan Singh calls the ‘trust deficit’, then perhaps some real progress will be possible.

    Educated Indians take a different view. They argue that there is only one compelling reason to talk to Pakistan: to put an end to cross-border terrorism. If Pakistan is serious about improving relations with India, then there is only one confidence-building measure that matters: a crackdown on those who murder and maim innocent Indian civilians.

    What’s worse, say many Indians, is that the Pakistan government is not only unwilling to stop terrorists from coming across the border but that elements within the regime are actually master-minding the terrorist operations. It makes no sense to talk of people-to-people contacts and cultural exchanges when Pakistani interests are already waging a proxy war against India. Any talks that do not result in an end to terror are worthless.

    This position is the exact opposite of the government’s. For instance, the foreign ministry now suggests that the collapse of the last round of talks had something to do with the home secretary’s statement that the 26/11 Bombay attacks were – at least, according to David Headley – an ISI operation. The foreign ministry says that the home secretary’s assertion was ‘hundred per cent correct’ but that he should not have said anything about Pakistani-inspired terrorism on the eve of the talks.

    That view demonstrates the distance between the two positions. The Indian public will only support the talks if we tackle the issue of terrorism head-on. The government of India, on the other hand, believes that we should not even mention terrorism for fear of upsetting the Pakistanis and damaging the dialogue process.

    The government’s position would have more credibility if the foreign ministry could offer us any assurances that an incremental approach to improving relations will lead to a reduction in terror. In fact, the government is in no position to offer any such assurances. There have been so many confidence-building measures over the last two decades that by now both sides should be brimming with confidence. But the terrorism continues to get worse.

    The response of the Pakistanis to India’s overtures this time around also suggests that Islamabad has no real interest in tackling the terror problem. The Pakistan foreign minister spoke insultingly about his Indian counterpart and – most revealingly – compared the Indian home secretary to Hafiz Sayeed. When a politician can no longer tell the difference between a bureaucrat and a terrorist, you know that his country is in serious trouble.

    "It is not necessary to be a Hindu communalist or a Pakistan hater to recognise that India is wasting its time. The government needs to listen to the views of its own people."
    But even if we were to accept that the Pakistanis are serious about improving relations, there are practical problems. First of all, the official position of the government of Pakistan is that it is also a victim of terror and is, therefore, unable to stamp out the terrorist threat to India, largely because it lacks the ability to do so. Secondly, it is not clear that the civilian government – the people we speak to – counts for very much. Real power appears to reside with the army whose chief was given an extension shortly after the summit collapsed. Thirdly, there is evidence to suggest that many of the terror groups are led and financed by retired Generals who pursue their own private foreign policies. They do not consider themselves bound by their foreign minister’s commitments.

    And fourthly, there is the most obvious problem: the Pakistanis have a history of lying about their support to terrorist groups within the region.

    Last week, a huge cache of 90,000 records of incidents and intelligence reports from the Afghan conflict was leaked to the Internet site, Wikileaks. While this is raw intelligence that has not been fully processed, some revelations are worrying. The documents suggest that Pakistan has been secretly supporting the Taliban and sheltering such leaders as Osama Bin Laden while simultaneously lying to the Americans about its activities. These intelligence reports also indicate that the ISI has been using the Haqqani network to launch terror attacks on Indians in Afghanistan. One such attack on the Indian embassy in Kabul resulted in the death of 54 people, including our defence attaché.

    Moreover, the documents record the movements of such figures as General Hamid Gul, an India-hating former head of ISI, who appears to be pursuing his own agenda while liaising with terrorist groups.

    The consensus in the US is that while every bit of intelligence in the raw files cannot be treated as gospel truth, the sheer mass of evidence that Pakistan is financing and arming terrorists to attack Indians (and Americans, for that matter) is too strong to be dismissed.

    These revelations will confirm the worst fears of most Indians. Every doubt we had is justified: the military does call the shots; retired Generals pursue their own agendas with private armies and Pakistan has been lying to both India and America about the role of the ISI in fomenting terror in the region.

    In the light of all this, the government’s approach makes less and less sense. Why bother with a polite step-by-step engagement with Pakistan when the situation is so grave? Pakistan is busy sending terrorists to kill Indians while cheerfully lying to the world about the activities of the ISI and its army?

    It is not necessary to be a Hindu communalist or a Pakistan hater to recognise that India is wasting its time. The government needs to listen to the views of its own people. We do not want war. We do not believe in needless hostility.

    But equally, we simply do not see the point of this pointless charade. Peace with Pakistan is a laudable aim. But one country cannot make peace by itself. And as long as the other continues to kill our people, all attempts at a high-level dialogue come across less as peaceful initiatives and more as signs of weakness.

    If not outright stupidity.
     
  6. ajtr

    ajtr Veteran Member Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    12,038
    Likes Received:
    715
    Pakistan a double dealing nation


    Tunku Varadarajan

    The United States must demand that Pakistan state unequivocally whether it is “with us or against us”. For nearly a decade now, their caveat-linked policy has cost America untold harm, billions of dollars and hundreds of dead citizens.

    The latest gaudy gush from WikiLeaks will leave the White House, the Pentagon, and the State Department soggy and irritable for many days. But one aspect of the leak-that concerning Pakistan’s brazenly unstinting support for the insurgency in Afghanistan — should be news to absolutely no one.

    In fact, one might say that the one good thing to come out of this latest leak —a thing so good that it is worth the “collateral damage” to the US from everything else — is that it could spell the end of Pakistan’s repulsive double game. This is a game in which that country takes billions of dollars of our aid money (money paid, in part, in taxes by the kin of American soldiers killed by the Taliban) and then blithely, devilishly, mendaciously stabs us in the back by arming, protecting, financing, hiding, and advising the same forces against whom this country is at war. We pay them money so that they can help our enemies kill us.

    Husain Haqqani, Pakistan’s ambassador in Washington, is essentially a decent man. He has, by instinct and by inclination, no truck with the malign men in khaki who run Pakistan’s Army. But watch him over the next few days as he contorts himself before the press, prevaricating, offering us canned lies, nuggets of tergiversation scripted in Islamabad. Don’t buy a word of it. And if the White House does buy from him, be sure to read the subtext of the purchase agreement. Above all, be skeptical —aggressively skeptical.

    We are now at a crossroads with Pakistan, a point at which we need to pull out old words from the Bush playbook. It is time to state to them — to state, in particular, to Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kiyani, the Pakistan Army’s chief of staff — that Pakistan is either with us, or against us. There can be no caveats, no exit clauses, no fine print, no weasely handwringing about Pakistan’s need to retain “strategic balance” in Afghanistan.

    Much of the latest involvement in the Afghan insurgency by the ISI —Pakistan’s military intelligence — happened on Gen Kayani’s watch, when he was the head of the ISI. That very same man, Kayani, whose agency lovingly breastfed the Taliban, and who was later elevated to chief of army staff, has just been granted a three-year extension by Pakistan’s civilian government. It boggles the mind that this duplicitous underminer of the U.S. war effort is now General David Petraeus’ direct interlocutor. Petraeus will need to navigate a labyrinth of misinformation and half-truths, accompanied by typically unctuous protestations that Pakistan is doing everything it can to help us in the war against al-Qaeda. (Readers will not have missed Hillary Cinton’s tart remarks, last week, in which she said on television that “someone” in the Pakistan government must, surely, know where Osama bin Laden is.)

    My sense is that the latest leaks will have broad repercussions of an ungovernable variety. But of one result I’d like to be certain: that the White House will now read the riot act to Pakistan, squeezing hard, if need be— and I mean this somewhat metaphorically — on the double-dealing epaulettes of Gen Kayani. Pakistan is either with us, or against us. Right now, as I see things —leaks and all — it is resoundingly, irrefutably against us.
     
  7. AirforcePilot

    AirforcePilot Defence Professionals Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2009
    Messages:
    192
    Likes Received:
    61
    Location:
    Florida
    I wish my country would stop all aid to Pakistan. Maybe some of our elected officials will smarten up and realize Pakistan is no ally to us.
     
  8. rizwan78

    rizwan78 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2009
    Messages:
    283
    Likes Received:
    110
    I wish my country to stop receiving this aid as urgently as possible, my wish is my country to stop supporting NATO, USA (slaughter armies) , we should urgently stop the traffic of NATO convoys to Afghanistan, this war is dangerous for Pakistan & its economy. these bast\erds will not stop barking more or until we send our forces to Afghanistan to protect the interest of NATO, USA forces. i wish my country leaders to show guts to ask allied forces if you are entered in Afghanistan it is yours duty to protect the border of Afghanistan along with Pakistan side, me and my countrymen would be preffor death over this shit,
     
  9. A.V.

    A.V. New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    6,503
    Likes Received:
    1,106
    Location:
    Moscow, russia

    if america stop the aids they wont get worse than whats happening now but imagine what happens to pakistan without the aid
     
  10. Iamanidiot

    Iamanidiot Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2009
    Messages:
    5,326
    Likes Received:
    1,493
    i can see pakistan becoming worse than north korea
     
  11. ajtr

    ajtr Veteran Member Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    12,038
    Likes Received:
    715
    even iran is accusing pak of double dealing.....cross posting...

    Pakistan's double dealing

    Mon, 02 Aug 2010 06:47:31 GMT
    Font size :

    By Tahereh Ghanaati

    Double, double
    Toil and trouble
    Macbeth by William Shakespeare


    Wikileaks' recent release of the 'Afghan War Diary,' a collection of classified battlefield reports from the war in Afghanistan, has set the Internet abuzz with speculation. Though many of these documents are controversial, some of the most inflammatory are the reports detailing Pakistan's double dealing.

    Indeed, Islamabad's continued cooperation with the Taliban -- literally, behind the US-led coalition's back -- may very well spell out payback time for the double-dealers.

    Though the beleaguered Afghan government has, for years, accused Pakistan of laxity in preventing militants from escaping over the border, most of the world took little notice, dismissing the accusations as the ranting of desperate officials besieged by an increasingly powerful Taliban.

    At the same time, Tehran has long accused Islamabad of harboring the leaders of the terrorist group, Jundallah, which have used Pakistan not only as their base, but as a springboard from which to launch terrorist attacks on Iran. Yet, most of the media paid the group scant notice and the world, as a whole, remained in ignorance.

    The recently released reports, however, have been impossible to sweep under the proverbial rug and Pakistan's duplicity has finally come to the public's attention.

    The documents reveal that the Pakistani military intelligence agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), has long aided and abetted the Taliban -- since the beginning of the US-led invasion of Afghanistan -- and while billions of dollars in US aid (American taxpayers' money) were being poured into Islamabad's coffers.

    In other words, 'Joe Six-pack' was paying his hard-earned tax dollars (albeit indirectly) to a government, which was helping terrorists kill his son, who had been serving in the US Army in Afghanistan!

    How will that news grab American voters when elections roll around? That is what is meant by 'payback time.' Despite Washington's attempts to dismiss the treachery by pointing to Pakistan's strategic value as an ally and protesting that the country is mending its ways and is now trying to cooperate, the American people will most likely demand major revisions in US foreign policy -- at least where Islamabad is concerned.

    If the Pakistani government had merely offered the Taliban refuge -- i.e. turned its back when the militants slipped over the border -- it would have been bad enough. But there are strong indications that Islamabad's deceit goes much further than that. According to the leaked documents, ISI agents actually helped the Taliban organize groups to fight US soldiers and assassinate Afghan leaders.

    Though US officials may not have known the full extent of Pakistan's treachery, they obviously were aware of it on some level and had their suspicions regarding it. They had certainly been given ample warning.

    As early as 2001, author and political analyst Ted Galen Carpenter, who also serves as vice president for defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute (a non-partisan Washington think tank,) named Pakistan as one of the three top countries sponsoring terror.

    In his article, which appeared on the Cato Institute's website on November 16, 2001, Carpenter writes, "Without the active support of the government in Islamabad, it is doubtful whether the Taliban could ever have come to power in Afghanistan. Pakistani authorities helped fund the militia and equip it with military hardware during the mid-1990s when the Taliban was merely one of several competing factions in Afghanistan's civil war… Even now it is not certain that key members of Pakistan's intelligence service have repudiated their Taliban clients."

    Remember, this article was written only five weeks after the October 7 invasion of Afghanistan.

    Author and Middle East expert Daniel Byman, who is a Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institute's Saban Center for Middle East Policy, in his 2005 book, titled Deadly Connections: States that Sponsor Terrorism, agrees. He writes, "Pakistan is probably today's most active sponsor of terrorism." Byman then goes on to illustrate how Pakistan has used terrorism to fight a proxy war against its old rival, India.

    Then there is the article by the journalist, author and Muslim convert, Stephen Schwartz, titled "A Threat to the World." The piece, which appeared in the August 19, 2006 issue of the British publication, The Spectator, warns that several militant and criminal groups are "backed by senior officers in the Pakistani army, the country's ISI intelligence establishment and other armed bodies of the state."

    It might be mentioned that Schwartz, as he relates in his 2002 book, titled The Two Faces of Islam: The House of Sa'ud from Tradition to Terror, maintains that so-called 'Islamic' terrorism is, in actuality, a government-manufactured tool, which is used to attain certain political ends. In his book, Schwartz focuses on Saudi Arabia, in particular, as the primary state sponsor of terrorism, and its ability to do so, which he claims hinges -- to some extent -- on the unique relationship between the House of Sa'ud and the Bush family.
    In the article appearing in The Spectator, however, Schwartz includes Pakistan (at least the Pakistani top brass and the ISI) as sponsoring terrorism, as well.

    As far as home-grown critics are concerned, there is Pakistani author and journalist Ahmed Rashid. In his 2008 book, titled Descent into Chaos, which analyzes past mistakes made by the US-led coalition in the Afghan war, Rashid accuses Pakistan's ISI of providing support as well as a haven for the Taliban.

    And finally, there is current Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari, who admitted, according to an article appearing in the July 8, 2009 issue of the British publication, The Daily Telegraph, that his country's government had "created and nurtured" terrorist groups to achieve its short-term foreign policy goals.

    "These groups were not thrown up because of government weakness, but as a matter of policy," the article states. "He (Zardari) said they were deliberately "created and nurtured" as a policy to achieve some short-term tactical objectives," it adds.

    As was mentioned earlier, even before the Wikileaks incident, some US politicians and top military brass were obviously aware of the situation.

    An article appearing in the May 11, 2010 issue of The Daily Telegraph relates that US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said she believed that certain officials in the Pakistani government were aware of the exact location of al-Qaeda leader, Osama bin Laden, (who is hiding in Pakistan's tribal regions.)

    The item quotes Clinton as telling Pakistani officials, "… I believe that somewhere in this government are people who know where Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda is, where Mullah Omar and the leadership of the Afghan Taliban is, and we expect more co-operation to help us bring to justice, capture or kill those who attacked us on 9/11."

    And then there is the allusion by Gen. David Petraeus, commander of the US and International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan, who has mentioned the connection between the ISI and "the bad guys."

    In fact, numbers of experts, including some US officials and analysts in India, believe that Islamabad is 'playing both ends against the middle' -- in other words, making a show of (token) cooperation with the United States while actually fomenting the insurgency by aiding the Taliban.
    But why would Pakistan want to play such a game? What would it gain from a prolonged Afghan war and continued insurgency?

    Part of the answer lies in the reason why it is offering sanctuary to another terrorist group, Jundallah, which has used Pakistan as a base and springboard to launch numerous attacks in Iran.

    Look at it this way. The game is tricky and treacherous, but if Pakistan is able to 'pull it off,' the rewards will be enormous. Indeed, the rewards are already great.

    One proxy war, waged by pro-Taliban, home-grown terrorists in the South and another, fought by Jundallah in the North, can at least serve to occupy -- if not weaken or neutralize Pakistan's two more powerful neighbors, India and Iran. The Taliban, itself, poses little threat and an ascendant Taliban in Afghanistan would mean, again by proxy, greater Pakistani influence in that country.

    And then there's the financial aspect. The Afghan war has proved a windfall for Pakistan and a lengthy conflict is definitely to its benefit. As recently as July 18 of this year, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced an additional $7.5 billion in aid to Pakistan in an attempt to win the Pakistanis over fully to the US cause. This is on top of the billions in military aid that have already poured into the country.

    In fact, speaking of military aid, the United States is sending Islamabad 18 upgraded F-16 fighters, which will make Pakistan the only country besides Israel to receive the latest version of the planes. According to a spokesman for the Pakistani Air Force, the capabilities of these high-tech aircraft would provide the PAF with "the means to counter the offensive designs of any air force" and they would be used to "deal with all internal and external threats."
    Despite US assurances to the contrary, India is worried and apparently with good reason. The point is, just who does Pakistan consider a threat? Obviously not the Taliban, Jundallah, al-Qaeda or any Pakistani pro-Taliban group.

    Islamabad's double dealing has paid richly up to now; but the future may prove to be something else, entirely. Pakistan's duplicity is now public knowledge and US congressional elections are fast approaching. Most ordinary people prefer straightforward allies to double-dealers and choose honor over expediency.
     
  12. SHASH2K2

    SHASH2K2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,711
    Likes Received:
    723
    Location:
    Bihar, BanGalore , India
    The Pakistan army under General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani is sponsoring a large-scale guerrilla war through Afghan proxies to keep India out of Afghanistan, according to a Canadian diplomat and former deputy head of the UN mission in Kabul. Chris Alexander, who was Canada's ambassador in Kabul from 2003 to 2005 and later deputy of the UN mission until 2009, said Gen. Kayani is calling the shots on Afghanistan and prepared to support suicide attacks in Afghanistan's cities.

    The Pakistani general has even told President Hamid Karzai that he can broker a peace deal with the Taliban - only if Indian consulates in Afghanistan are closed.

    Writing in the Globe and Mail under the title 'The huge scale of Pakistan's complicity,' Alexander said, "The Pakistan army under Gen. Kayani is sponsoring a large-scale, covert guerrilla war through Afghan proxies - whose strongholds in Balochistan and Waziristan are flourishing. Their mission in Afghanistan is to keep Pashtun nationalism down, India out and Mr. Karzai weak.

    "The principal drivers of violence are no longer, if they ever were, inside Afghanistan... ISI is the main driver of the conflict... Gen. Kayani and others will deny complicity. But as the WikiLeaks material demonstrates, their heavy-handed involvement is now obvious at all levels,'' the Canadian diplomat said.

    Because of this policy, he said "reconciliation has failed to get off the ground: the Pakistan-based Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan - the official name for the Taliban and its allies - clearly prefer to fight.'' Without Pakistani military support, "the Islamic Emirate's combat units would collapse like a house of cards. Peace and reconciliation would prosper,'' he said.

    Giving many examples of how Gen Kayani controls the principle drivers of the Afghan violence, the Canadian diplomat said, "First, in February, Pakistan's security forces began arresting a dozen or so Taliban leaders -whose presence on their soil they had always noisily denied - presumably because these insurgent commanders had shown genuine, independent interest in reconciliation.

    "Second, the chief of Pakistan's army staff, General Ashfaq Kayani, this year once again successfully resisted US pressure to launch military operations in Balochistan and North Waziristan, where the Islamic Emirate is based.

    "Third, Gen Kayani told Mr. Karzai this spring that the condition for peace in Afghanistan would be the closing of several Indian consulates, while offering to broker deals with Islamic Emirate leaders, whom he considers a "strategic asset."

    "Fourth, Gen Kayani blithely told a Washington audience that he remained wedded to "strategic depth" - that is, to making Afghanistan the kind of proprietary hinterland for Pakistan, free of Indian or other outside influence, which it was from 1992 to 2001.''

    He said the Pakistan army's interference in Afghanistan violates the UN Charter and poses a threat to world peace. "It deserves serious discussion in multilateral forums, including the UN."

    http://www.hindustantimes.com/Kayani-wants-Indian-missions-in-Afghanistan-closed-Canadian-diplomat/H1-Article1-581184.aspx
     
  13. rizwan78

    rizwan78 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2009
    Messages:
    283
    Likes Received:
    110
    you means Pakistan was Uganda before 9/11 ? think twice before posting be like mature guys, anyway reading these kind of posts,clearly shows how hyper you are .
     
  14. SHASH2K2

    SHASH2K2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,711
    Likes Received:
    723
    Location:
    Bihar, BanGalore , India
    DO you want me to provide you the link for failed states across the globe. Pakistan is doing quite good and is among top performers . If its not getting the AID it will definitely be Uganda very soon.
     
  15. rizwan78

    rizwan78 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2009
    Messages:
    283
    Likes Received:
    110
    Pakistan lost $43 bln in last nine years on terror war: FM

    http://www.geo.tv/7-17-2010/68502.htm
    Pakistan lost $43 bln in last nine years on terror war: FM
    Updated at: 1705 PST, Saturday, July 17, 2010
    ISLAMABAD: Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi Saturday highlighting the importance of international help and cooperation said Pakistan needs budgetary support for poverty alleviation and to complete development projects to fight against the menace of terrorism and extremism.

    In his opening remarks at the meeting of Ministerial Meeting of Friends of Democratic Pakistan held here at Foreign Office the Foreign Minister said, “Today we are having to divert significant resources from our development programme towards fighting the militancy and in the immediate term we need budgetary support so that our poverty alleviation and development programmes continue uninterruptedly.”

    The meeting was also being attended by Special Representative of U.S. President Obama for Pakistan and Afghanistan Ambassador Richard Holbrooke, representatives from the members of the FODP, World Bank and other international financial organizations.

    Foreign Minister Qureshi in his opening remarks further said the third FODP Ministerial meeting will be held in Brussels on 15 October this year.

    Qureshi said with a little push from FODP governments Pakistan can quickly put on the path to a significant economic growth with benefits trickling down to Pakistanis across the board.

    He said Pakistan cannot win against this hydra-headed global menace without international support adding that no country, however preponderant, can defeat terrorism alone. He said, “In this struggle, we win and lose together.”

    “We are confident that the meeting would help give further impetus to our work, and help achieve good progress,” he added.

    He said the FODP is a unique process led by Pakistan itself and it is a vehicle for a long-term engagement with democratic Pakistan.

    The Minister said, “It is about extending support to us in our peace and development efforts in accordance with our own national priorities with the view to strengthening Pakistanis hands against extremism, militancy and terrorism.”

    This forum, he said, is usefully serving to identify and discuss priority areas for FODP partners to engage bilaterally or multilaterally through the World Bank Multi-Donor Trust Fund for Pakistan.

    He said on one hand the FODP process is focusing on Pakistan’s energy deficit, as well as helping in the implementation of the Malakand Development Strategy, on the another hand it is expected to promote foreign investment in Pakistan through the mechanism of public-private partnership.

    Qureshi said Pakistan has suffered and continues to suffer enormously by terrorism and since 9/11 there have been 247 suicide attacks in Pakistan killing over 3000 civilians and injuring over 7000.

    He said the evil forces of terrorism have not even spared mosques, other religious places and the shrine of a Sufi saint in Lahore.

    “We have lost over 2550 security personnel in our ongoing law enforcement operations,” said the foreign minister.

    He said, “Our cumulative economic losses are also substantial and according to conservative estimates, Pakistan has lost $43 billion in the last nine years and our exports and foreign investments have been badly hurt.”

    He said the people of Pakistan have shown remarkable resilience in the face of varied and daunting challenges.

    The Minister said Pakistan had to look after 2.5 million dislocated population from Malakand Division following the law enforcement operation there last year, and facilitated their return to their homes within a few months that speaks volumes of people’s and institutions’ inherent strengths.

    The Foreign Minister assured the members of the FODP that evil forces of militancy will never succeed in denting national resolve and consensus against terrorism.

    The Minister said the remaining amount of pledges made at the separate Donors’ Conference in Tokyo last year may be expedited.

    He said Pakistan needs greater market access for its goods, more foreign investment in Pakistan and institution capacity building.

    The Minister said in the longer term it is trade not aid that would help achieve economic stability and prosperity in Pakistan.

    Referring to FODP Public-Private Partnership Conference held in Dubai earlier this year he said it helped make a good start adding that good momentum generated at Dubai must be sustained.

    He said Pakistan expects the FODP partners to encourage their respective corporate sectors to invest in projects that were presented at the Dubai conference.

    The Minister said Pakistan is planning to hold the second public-private partnership conference in Islamabad sometime this year or early next year.

    He said there is huge potential in Pakistan waiting to be tapped in infrastructure development, energy, agriculture, agro-based industry, mineral resources, education or health, foreign investment opportunities abound.

    The Minister said the experience of over 600 foreign companies from across the world working successfully in Pakistan is a testament to Pakistan’s great economic potential.
    The Minister said extremism and terrorism are complex phenomena with many intricate dimensions and these cannot be defeated in a pressing economic environment.

    “We need more jobs and ever more economic opportunities to prevent impressionable young minds from falling prey to misguided and pernicious ideologies which are antitheses of peaceful Islam,” he added.

    The Foreign Minister said Pakistan is a democracy with vibrant civil society, free media and independent judiciary.

    Through the 18th amendment, he said, the Constitution of Pakistan has been cleansed of many a distortions.
    He said, “We are slowly but surely moving towards making Pakistan a genuine federation with strong federal and provincial institutions to deliver.”

    He said the government has also taken long overdue legal and administrative measures to empower Pakistani women.

    The Minister said, “Our relations with Afghanistan have been significantly improved. We are committed to fully supporting an Afghanistan-led reintegration and reconciliation process.”

    He said the upcoming international conference in Kabul on 20 July should help break new grounds. The importance of a peaceful and stable Afghanistan for Pakistan can hardly be exaggerated, he added.

    He assured that Pakistan will continue playing its positive and constructive role both bilaterally with Afghanistan and multilaterally with other partners.

    The Minister said, “We are very serious about normalizing our relations with India.”
    He said, “I met with my Indian counterpart in Islamabad just day before yesterday. We agreed to embark on a sustained dialogue process. This is a good augury.”

    The Minister said, “For too long, Pakistan and India have been entangled in a conflictual relationship. It is high time our two countries engage, with full sincerity of purpose, to resolve all the bilateral disputes and make a new beginning of normal relations anchored in sovereign equality and mutual interest.”

    Qureshi said normal relations between Pakistan and India would have far-reaching salutary effects for the entire South Asia and beyond. Pakistan will do its utmost to make this happen, he added.

    Referring to report of FODP on energy sector, the Minister said, if implemented in full, it will help Pakistan fix most of its energy problems.
    He assured that Pakistan will also provide greater comfort to potential investors in the energy sector.

    He said, “We are confident that all FODP partners will fully support timely and full implementation of this important report.
     
  16. Daredevil

    Daredevil On Vacation! Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2009
    Messages:
    11,613
    Likes Received:
    5,670
    Pakistani Economy was doing fine till 2007. But the current situation is so worse that IMF had to bailout Pakistan to save it from insolvency. Economy situation is so bad that Pakistan has no money to build new dams, electricity projects, to run railways and to even pay the exgratia to the victims of terrorism (eg: datadarbar blasts). So, in this situation Pakistan has to take and beg for whatever AID it can get to keep itself afloat. You economy is pretty much stagnant because your industries are shutting down due to lack of security and lack of electricity. If US, NATO and other countries like Saudi Arabia doesn't give AID, Pakistan will go bankrupt.
     
    Last edited: Aug 2, 2010
  17. ajtr

    ajtr Veteran Member Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    12,038
    Likes Received:
    715
    Do it but it must be before sep 11 2001.
     
  18. ajtr

    ajtr Veteran Member Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    12,038
    Likes Received:
    715
    No Pakistan economy was never doing good in Musharraff era those were all fudged up figure in economy.Thats why Sartaz Aziz is known as shortcut Aziz.Btw pakistan was on brink of bankruptcy before september 2001 due to sanctions on it due to nuke tests in 1998.In one way 9/11 saved pakistan from bankruptcy.Coz after that free usa aid started flowing freely.
     
  19. hit&run

    hit&run Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2009
    Messages:
    5,493
    Likes Received:
    4,670
    I don't think Pakistan be able to handle Afghanistan this time. I can not see if any of the western countries be in a position to help Pakistan injecting its influence into AF, like they did during Russian Invasion. If Pakistan still wants, then she should do it on its own expense like India is doing. As WOT has been stretched into Pakistan, it has exposed heaps which Pakistan was hiding from many years. Therefore there are many fronts in Pakistan which she is going to face, when US will leave the region. Furthermore the way India is developing its defence capabilities on its eastern border, the AF is going to enjoy that buffer for sure. I am against ceasefire on IB and LOC; to engage Pakistan with low intensity skirmishes, when US will leave AF and Indian mission will become little more vulnerable in AF if India can not work beyond enemy lines.

    If Afghans be able to institute a democratic elected govt and secure even a small area of 5-7 provinces around major cities. Then it will be able to protect large numbers Population and project its national interests/policies in remaining larger areas. USA must ensure security and promise of international support with SOS direct military aid before quiting. This will keep Pakistan reluctant to influence its selfish strategic depth into controlled areas.

    Fear mongering mode: Afghanistan must warn its self not to act like a dysfunctional state this time cause it is their last chance to survive as a nation.
     
    Last edited: Aug 2, 2010
  20. SHASH2K2

    SHASH2K2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,711
    Likes Received:
    723
    Location:
    Bihar, BanGalore , India
    You should show this article to ISI and Army top brass and tell them its costing you much more than your enemies are loosing. May be they wil have some introspection and will mend their ways .Life will be better for You as well as US. Tell them to bomb all Terrorist factories and stop export of terrorism.
     
  21. Daredevil

    Daredevil On Vacation! Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2009
    Messages:
    11,613
    Likes Received:
    5,670
    I know about data fudging. Despite all of this economy was doing fine until 2007 as the security situation was good and there was free flow of US AID. But after Lal-masjid fiasco there was blow back against the Pakistan, security situation deteriorated, economy tanked due to global economic recession basically things started going wrong from there on and it is on the course of slow and steady collapse.
     

Share This Page