After setbacks, U.S. military tries to rebuild ties with Pakistani military

[civfanatic]

One you are doing a great disservice to India by bringing in Pak and tryin to compare India with Pak.

No, I am trying to view the situation as the Western powers viewed it in 1947.

They considered India and Pakistan to be more or less equal and made it their goal to keep it that way. Even now the mentality of comparing India with Pak is still there.

For me Pakistan was on the right side but the powers to be could not use it to their advantage and devise a proper strategy to help itself. It was tunneled in its vision and thought if nothing else but Kashmir and obsessed with India. Remember Pakistan was economically doing far better than India early on but could not make use of that to deliver prosperity to its people and instead chose to radicalize. It chose to present itself as a tissue paper. Dont blame the US for it.

The point is not whether or not Pakistan chose to destroy itself; on this point I agree. The point is that a meaningful alliance between India and the West was futile from the start. Pakistan as a nation was created specifically as a continuation of the Great Game. Its primary function was to serve as a pro-West buffer between the Soviet Union and the Persian Gulf/Indian Ocean, and in this role it served faithfully throughout the Cold War. In such a scenario, a pro-West India would be extremely limited in its foreign policy initiatives vis-a-vis Pakistan. We would basically need to accept whatever the West dictated in regards to Indo-Pak relations, as we would both be Western lackeys.

During the Soviet Intervention in Afghanistan, Pakistan was used like a condom by the CIA and was discarded accordingly. I don't think anyone wants India to be used in a similar fashion.

India is completely different in this regard. Freedom and Democracy is a base point of convergence. India is not a small country without sound institutions.

Since when were freedom and democracy prerequisites to economic success?

People always bring up the "success stories" of pro-US puppet countries like South Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan and think their model can be replicated by India, while failing to realise that these countries are almost the exact opposite of India. They are all small, homogenous states that went through an authoritarian phase during their early economic development, while India is a massive, heterogeneous state with ad hoc democracy and much slower decision-making capabilities. Naturally, this means that economic growth - for the nation of as a whole - will come slower than in these East Asian countries. Even in India there are well-developed enclaves like Goa, Chandigarh, and Delhi that in population and economic vibrancy rival the Asian Tigers, but developing the whole nation is a more difficult task.

I don't understand why people have this closed mind when it comes to the US? Back in the days when we were opposed to the US, people moved to the US by the thousands than to the Soviet. Why? Best part is many of those who opposed the US either live in the US or are the ones likely to move to the US or have their kids study in the US.

Part of the reason is that those people have a better understanding of the US than those who have not experienced it.

I don't know why we approach the US with a negative and defensive mindset.

People who study history have an annoying tendency to do this.

 

[nitesh]

Well it is always a great economic strain on any country to keep tabs on a huge country that is far away, landlocked and surrounded by unpredictable neighbours. The USSR tried and gave up when its own economy could not bear it anymore, among other reasons. Now that the US got OBL, and full credit goes to the US marines and intelligence, I think the US should seriously try to reduce their footprint in Afghanistan, concentrate at home and try to bring their economy back on track

I say they are the most inefficient organizations, who kept giving away money to the ones who were protecting them, .and now also pussyfooting in dealing with the real enemy. Too scared to fight haan

There is a lot to be done in the domestic front by the US. First of all, those Congressmen who were trying to persuade banks to give out housing loans to people who would otherwise not qualify for loans, should come out in the open, admit their mistake and either propose some ways to get the economy back on track or should simply retire from politics. The US Foreign Department really needs to listen to a few sane minds, like Ron Paul (IMHO), remaining in US politics, stop making ridiculous decisions that eventually backfire, quit giving aid to thankless 'allies' like Pakistan and rather try to use that money to develop public transport in major US cities so that at least the burden of oil imports is reduced.

All those who take money from Fai like elements, will never stop the gravy train. They are equally responsible for terrorism. In fact US loves terrorists on their side.

I fail to understand why the US is trying to rebuild ties with the Pakistani Military.

If you stop looking from biased view that US is all powerful, you will understand. US is a weak power not able to take down there enemies, hence trying to find a solution like a coward

 

[Yusuf]

Civ,

Pakistan as a buffer came on much later. Remember the US tried to court India first and Nehru snubbed him. Afghan war came on much later. India would have served US interests well and in return out interests too would have been served. Remember many a times despite being at the opposite ends, the US on many occasions did help India out.

Think of it, the US quickly withdrew sanctions against India post nuke tests valuing what India had to offer it.

We cannot be stuck in the past. We cannot keep saying that the US is not a trustworthy partner. Any partnership has certain compromises. Flexibility is the name of the game. Certain thoughts still prevailing in India betray the old commie mindset.

In the name of independent foreign policy, we have actually achieved very little that we can say has helped us economically or geopolitics. The world was dominated by super powers for better part of the last century and people aligned with them overtly or covertly. That is how it is. There was no hard in doing so as long as it helped the country's interests.

I do not believe the US would have forced a settlement between India and Pak on the kashmir issue if both of us were allied with it. If at all, we would have actually benefited from it considering they have "great foresight in strategic matters". They would have forced Pak to give up GB and cut it off from China.

 

[asianobserve]

Foreign policy independence does not equal economic isolation. China is the West's largest trading partner but they maintain their own independent foreign policy. Is it so difficult for India to do the same without becoming slaves like South Koreans and Japanese?

You think Pakistan was on the right side?

China sided with the US and took advantage of the association. Do you think China will be what it is now if it did not agree to US bargain against the USSR? China has exhibited excellent foresight in dealing with the superpowers and has so correctly chosen closer association with the US. It is now reaping the benefits.

India on the other hand is a late comer to US(West) association, albeit with a heavy Soviet mentality/mindset baggage. But it is catching up (nobody can deny this).

With regards to Paki land, well, the Paki nation as a whole has failed themselves. It is not their association with the US that caused their miseries. In contrast to the Chinese the Pakis has exhibited almost absolute stupidity in handling its ace (US), they took all the wrong approaches for all the wrong reasons in this association.

 

[asianobserve]

(self-delete)

 

[Illusive]

Why does this buildup surprises a few. There was always a high probability of this happening. US doesn't want to go to war with Pak. Pak was scared of the US military buildup in the western border, they were putting a brave face by resorting to their old swan song of "we are nuclear power". Hillary must have really put Pak back to its place in that meeting.
Naturally for any country their own interests come first, its in our interest that US attacks Pak but not in theirs. Also it would spoil the BLA rebellion.

And as far as taking out LET is concerned, we need to do that ourselves, if we can say we have a independent foreign policy, we should also act on anti India elements independently too.

Neither am i here ProUS but it doesn't hurt to have them on our side, India just needs to wait for this Obama administration to be out.

 

[Ray]

As the days go by, the case becomes more confusing.

What with what Hilary said and then what Karzai said to the Pakistanis.

 

[agentperry]

i said long back that relations between usa and pakistan is like two friends playing noora kushti. they tussle to gain and sit over head but still they are friendly competitors. when relationship between pakistan and usa got rosy after years of neglect and sanctions then these things are very very small.

i dont think i caught indian establishment off the guard or by surprise.

 

[Iamanidiot]

This reminds be of a relation between a rich man and his concubine

 

[Illusive]

As the days go by, the case becomes more confusing.

What with what Hilary said and then what Karzai said to the Pakistanis.

Probably because Karzai doesn't want to die, possibly because US told him to do so.

 

[asianobserve]

Probably because Karzai doesn't want to die, possibly because US told him to do so.

Maybe its more of the latter. He's a scared rat after his half-brother and Rabbani were murdered.

He's really a ridiculous character at the moment.

 

[thakur_ritesh]

lets go back a year and a half, nukes are falling in the hands of the taliban. what happened?

the month of may, hand over the 5 terrorists, or else. what happened?

a few weeks back, go after the haqqani network, or else. what happened?

it was a week into this high voltage rhetoric between the US and pakistan, and Ejaz and i were discussing how escape routes are being created.

well we have got used to listening to all this drama now, something new which can catch our imagination, please!

 

[johnee]

Ritesh,
the one thing that is unmistakable is the acceptance that pakis are unrelaible, rabid terrorists. It will be difficult for pakis to improve their image.

 

[thakur_ritesh]

Ritesh,
the one thing that is unmistakable is the acceptance that pakis are unrelaible, rabid terrorists. It will be difficult for pakis to improve their image.

they are terrorists till what time?

till the time they hurt US's interests?

till the time they hurt west's interests?

or is it even when they hurt india's interests?

we will get those answers only once there has been a complete pull out by the americans, and americans would depend on pakistan to pull the strings in afghanistan, when taliban would be back with a bang.

 

[johnee]

they are terrorists till what time?

till the time they hurt US's interests?

till the time they hurt west's interests?

or is it even when they hurt india's interests?

we will get those answers only once there has been a complete pull out by the americans, and americans would depend on pakistan to pull the strings in afghanistan, when taliban would be back with a bang.

whatever those narratives, the image of pakis is spreading far and wide.

 

[thakur_ritesh]

whatever those narratives, the image of pakis is spreading far and wide.

mate the problem is, its not indian media which creates perceptions all over, its the the american and european media.

transformations happen. opinions can be changed over a period of months.

let us say the west finds utility of pakistan yet again, which they will, and the pre condition is to completely do away with the tag of terrorism with them, wont the clean up act happen, wont the "experts" start suggesting that how useful, helpful the pakistanis have been.