US issues waiver for sale of major defence equipment to Pakistan

Blackwater

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
21,156
Likes
12,211
Washington: In an indication of the "positive trajectory" of the bilateral ties, the US has issued a waiver, second in six months, for sale of major defence equipment to Pakistan citing national security interest.

The waiver issued quietly by the then Deputy Secretary of States Thomas Nides on February 15 and posted on the State Department website a week later on February 22 would pave the way for some major defence equipment sales to Pakistan.

"The Department issued the waiver because we have determined that security assistance is important to the national security interests of the United States and is a critical component of US efforts to continue to build a strong, mutually beneficial relationship with Pakistan grounded in concrete action on areas of shared interest," a State Department spokesperson told PTI.


The waiver, issued within a fortnight of Secretary of State John Kerry taking the reins US diplomacy on February 1, allows for the execution of America's Foreign Military Financing (FMF) programme, and for the sale or export of certain Major Defence Equipment (MDE).

"Major Defence Equipment," means any US manufactured defence article whose export is controlled by US Munitions List which has a nonrecurring research and development cost of more than USD 50,000,000 or a total production cost of more than USD 200,000,000. These items require Congressional notification, the spokesman said.

"As a matter of policy we do not discuss proposed defence sales or transfers until they have been formally notified to Congress," he said, refraining to give any figure to the expected sale of major defence items to Pakistan after this waiver.

According to a known South Asia expert, the two waivers issued by the then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in September were sweeping and so allowed the release of all forms of assistance for the fiscal 2012 including nonmilitary.

It seems the main purpose of the February 15 waiver was to create a positive atmosphere for meetings in Washington DC with visiting senior military officials from Pakistan.

"These waivers don't represent an improvement in US-Pak relations so much as they represent attempts to improve such relations," an expert explained said adding that from the US perspective, some level of working relations with Pakistan is necessary for the US drawdown from Afghanistan to go smoothly.

Observing that security assistance builds Pakistan's capabilities in countering terrorism, the State Department official said that such assistance will continue to be implemented consistent with its policy goals of supporting Pakistan's shared interest in regional stability and countering terrorism.

"Despite the past challenges in our bilateral relationship with Pakistan, we are encouraged by recent engagements which indicate the positive trajectory of the relationship, including productive working group meetings addressing the full range of the relationship and Pakistan's participation in Core Group meetings with Afghanistan," the spokesperson said.

"As we have said, our number one shared priority remains pursuing our counterterrorism objectives to secure the safety of American and Pakistani citizens. We face a common threat from a common enemy, and we must confront terrorism and extremism together," the official asserted.

In a two-paragraph notice to US exporters posted on the website February 22, the Directorate of Defence Trade Controls of the State Department said Section 203 of the Enhanced Partnership with Pakistan Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-73), which is more popular as Kerry-Lugar-Berman bill, prohibits for fiscal years 2012-2014 the issuance of export licenses for major defence equipment to be exported to Pakistan absent an appropriate certification or waiver under Section 203 in the fiscal year.

"On February 15, 2013, Deputy Secretary Thomas Nides signed a waiver of these prohibitions for the current fiscal year. DDTC is now reviewing all license applications for the export to Pakistan of defence articles, including major defence equipment, on a case-by-case basis," said the notification.

Under the Kerry-Lugar-Berman bill the US can't approve sale of major defence equipment to Pakistan unless the Secretary of State either gives a waiver under national security interest or certifies that Pakistan is continuing to cooperate US to dismantle supplier networks relating to the acquisition of nuclear weapons-related materials, and has demonstrated a sustained commitment to and is making significant efforts towards combating terrorist groups.

The bill requires the Secretary of State to certify that Pakistan has made progress on matters such as ceasing support, including by any elements within the Pakistan military or its intelligence agency, to extremist and terrorist groups, particularly to any group that has conducted attacks against United States or coalition forces in Afghanistan, or against the territory or people of neighboring countries.

It also requires the State Department to certify that Pakistan is taking steps to prevent Al Qaeda, the Taliban and associated terrorist groups, such as Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed, from operating in the territory of Pakistan, including carrying out cross-border attacks into neighboring countries, closing terrorist camps in the FATA (federally administered tribal areas), dismantling terrorist bases of operations in other parts of the country, including Quetta and Muridke, and taking action when provided with intelligence about high-level terrorist targets.

Among other things the State Department also needs to certify that Pakistan is strengthening counterterrorism and anti-money laundering laws; and that the security forces of Pakistan are not materially and substantially subverting the political or judicial processes of Pakistan.


US issues waiver for sale of major defence equipment to Pakistan | NDTV.com
 

Blackwater

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
21,156
Likes
12,211
is it the lollipop from US?? or again pakis manage to beg and blackmail USA
 
Last edited:

Virendra

Ambassador
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
4,697
Likes
3,041
Country flag
Americans ... :dude:
They will never learn it seems :tsk: :tsk:
By the way, to what extent will the Americans continue to support Pakistan overall, after the former had taken their necks out of Afghanistan in 2014?
 

drkrn

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2010
Messages
2,455
Likes
902
what kind of equipment are they going to get now
any possibility of drones?
 

farhan_9909

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Messages
5,895
Likes
497
i hope we get our 32 embargo F-16 as well for whom we have paid in the 90's
 

farhan_9909

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Messages
5,895
Likes
497
Americans ... :dude:
They will never learn it seems :tsk: :tsk:
By the way, to what extent will the Americans continue to support Pakistan overall, after the former had taken their necks out of Afghanistan in 2014?
i dont think america will turn there back to pakistan onwards 2014 or when the withdraw from afghanistan..

i mean pakistan and america relation has only disturbed after the afghanistan invasion not improved.
 

agentperry

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2010
Messages
3,022
Likes
690
well such embargo doesnt last long specially when embargoes state is an important coalition partner( atleast on paper, willfully or not is a doubtful case)
with the presence of cheap chinese weapon system i dont think this will change anything between usa and pakistan. this is on the basis of the way weapons are procured, hard cash in case of usa and cheap soft loans in case of chinese weaponry.
 

sayareakd

Mod
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
17,734
Likes
18,952
Country flag
I think more military aid is just bribe for killing Pakistanis in future with drone attack. These strikes are going to get increase since not much ground presence by uncle.
Plus all the equpiment is bugged with gps, geo fence, remote kill switch and inspection and other things.
 

arnabmit

Homo Communis Indus
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2012
Messages
6,242
Likes
7,522
Country flag
US violating their own ATT resolution by supplying weapons to a terrorist state.
 

hit&run

United States of Hindu Empire
Mod
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
14,104
Likes
63,370
US violating their own ATT resolution by supplying weapons to a terrorist state.
They always have a clause of national interest when wavering sanctions and self imposed embargoes; to lick the what they spit back and against what they first went gaga about on moral duties being a rational super power.
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
Ok this is the carrot, what's the stick this time?
 

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
That's the biggest hypocrisy of US. Hope that will change after 2014 else US will face severe credibility loss.
Do you not believe Obama?


Refocusing on the Threat from al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan

President Obama took office pledging to end the war in Iraq while refocusing on al Qaeda – particularly in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Since taking office, the Obama Administration has focused its resources on al Qaeda and its affiliates. These counter-terrorism efforts have substantially impacted al Qaeda's leadership, including the death of Osama bin Laden in May 2011.

On December 1, 2009, at West Point, the President put forth a new U.S. strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan that is focused on disrupting, dismantling, and defeating al Qaeda and preventing its capacity to threaten America and our allies in the future.


To accomplish this, he said we would pursue three objectives: denying al Qaeda a safe haven, reversing the Taliban's momentum, and strengthening the capacity of Afghanistan's security forces and government so that they can take lead responsibility for Afghanistan's future. He also committed to begin the responsible withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan beginning in July 2011.

On June 22, 2011 the President addressed the American people about the way forward in Afghanistan. We have made substantial progress on the objectives the President laid out at West Point, and he made clear that we will begin the drawdown of U.S. troops from a position of strength. We have exceeded our expectations on our core goal of defeating al-Qa'ida – killing 20 of its top 30 leaders, including Osama bin Laden. We have broken the Taliban's momentum, and trained over 100,000 Afghan National Security Forces. The U.S. withdrew 10,000 U.S. troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2011, and the 33,000 "surge" troops he approved in December 2009 will leave Afghanistan by the end of summer 2012.
Foreign Policy | The White House
 

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
US-Afghan-Pakistani Relations During Obama's Second Term

Pakistan-U.S. Relations

U.S.-Pakistan relations during the first term of the Obama administration were not positive for the region's future security and stability. U.S. warplanes killed 24 Pakistani troops in November 2011. When the U.S. didn't meet Pakistan's official apology and compensation demand for the troops' families, Pakistan, first of all, closed its border with Afghanistan that was widely used by NATO and then kept a very limited relationship with the U.S. until May 2012.[3] Thus, in Pakistan's 65-year history since independence in 1947, Obama's first presidential term had become the period that the U.S.-Pakistan relations were at their lowest level.[4]

It is undeniable that the internal issues of Pakistan, such as the dispute between important figures including the army and the judiciary, also play a dominant role in its relations with the United States. However, Pakistani authorities sense that this situation is not the primary problem that needs to be solved. Pakistani officials are annoyed at Washington as the United States does not inform Islamabad, let alone ask for approval, before carrying out operations in Pakistani territory.[5] The most serious incident of these operations was the May 1st, 2011, Operation Neptune Spear, which killed Osama bin Laden.

Conversely, the U.S. is angry at Pakistan on the same issue, from a different perspective. U.S. officials instinctively feel that they need to question how Pakistani authorities and intelligence services could have no information about the compound that Osama bin Laden was killed at while it was very close to the capital city, Islamabad, and only less than a mile from one of the most important military training academies of Pakistan.[6] Therefore, it seems that President Obama and his team evaluated the possibility of not finding Osama bin Laden in his compound if they had have informed Pakistani officials in advance and decided to carry out the operation.

In addition, U.S. officials also believe that Pakistan has not shouldered enough responsibility to ensure security and stability in the region despite the billions of dollars of aid given to them because of the Afghan war. Even though the U.S. administration takes a dim view of the Pakistani administration for these reasons, they still want to continue constructive relations with Pakistan as they know it is not possible to achieve peace, security and stability in the heart of Asia without Pakistan.
 

farhan_9909

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Messages
5,895
Likes
497
US violating their own ATT resolution by supplying weapons to a terrorist state.
you consider pakistan a terrorist state? :O

anyway USa lawmakers like hagel consider india a terrorist state as evident from the statement of India is funding terrorism against pakistan in afghanistan
 

arnabmit

Homo Communis Indus
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2012
Messages
6,242
Likes
7,522
Country flag
I don't have to. Pakistanis themselves knows so.

[video=youtube_share;r4D9goJqQME]http://youtu.be/r4D9goJqQME[/video]

[video=youtube_share;_chA3nowdCE]http://youtu.be/_chA3nowdCE[/video]

[video=youtube_share;rkmlWqzoOKE]http://youtu.be/rkmlWqzoOKE[/video]

Chuck never called India a terrorist state or accused India of terrorism. He said we financed Balouchi nationals. Please clean your ear and watch the video again. Chuck's silence on this topic after assuming office and avoiding clarification shows how embarrassed he is of that misinformed statement he made many years ago. Current US policy towards India has nullified that statement many times over.

On a personal note, financing the liberation of oppressed people is good karma. We should do more of it. We do not send weapons or men, so our support can not be called terrorism.

you consider pakistan a terrorist state? :O

anyway USa lawmakers like hagel consider india a terrorist state as evident from the statement of India is funding terrorism against pakistan in afghanistan
 
Last edited:

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top