Trump Administration to Tighten Screws on Pakistan

square

Strategic Issues
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2016
Messages
1,636
Likes
1,464
pakistan fail to get support from iran...
russian refuse to meet pakistan minister...

RUSSlA refused to meet our Minister : Pak media i…:
 

Hari Sud

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Messages
3,941
Likes
8,859
Country flag
Choices before Pakistan


Pakistan's relationship with Western Power has gone a full circle. It started in 1954 with Pakistan signing a joint defence agreement with US, became a member of CENTO (Central Treaty Organization) and SEATO (South East Asian organization) both together with NATO, were meant to encircle Soviet Union and to some extent China. With Pakistan in its back pocket, encirclement was complete. Pakistan enthusiastically joined both the military pacts and signed the joint defence agreement. In the process Pakistan received in today's dollars military aid worth $16 billion from 1954 to 1965. This aid included about 120 Saber jets, 600 Patton M-48 tanks and other military hardware and a Ghazi submarine. All free, no charge to Pakistan, if it stayed within the pacts. Pakistan stayed as member of these pacts until they were defunct in seventies. But US honoured all its defence obligations including sending the 7th Fleet to threaten India in 1971.

Pakistan had only one reason to join the pacts was to get as much military aid as possible to beat India and grab Kashmir. US intent to give this kind of military aid was to have a reliable military ally in Asia and they got it.

Pakistan from 1952 till 1960 was unstable democracy with 12 prime ministers in eight years until General Ayub grabbed the political power. But all along Pakistan was a pro west and and anti communist mid level power, with very little interest in people's welfare.

With India, its relationship was worst. All their energies were focussed on grabbing Kashmir and no time for governance and public welfare in 1964 was up in their mind, so much so that 51% of their budget was on defence matter or I should say offence matters only.

India on the other hand was limping along economically with socialism at its core. Politically it was stable. To counter Pakistani moves to get free military hardware, India also somewhat grudgingly bought some British and French hardware and made some moves to get cheaper Soviet hardware. Militarily both Pakistan (about one seventh of India's size) and India were balanced. That was good situation for Pakistan to initiate the 1965 war immediately after 1962 India - China debacle. The objective was same that is to grab Kashmir.

1965 war not successful, as Pakistan lost 300 M-48 tanks and 30 Sabre jets. Those losses together with loss of petroleum , oil and lubricant stores, Pakistan ran out of steam to fight the battles to take over Kashmir. Hence this 20 days of battle was a stalemate, with much credit to Indian Army, although after huge losses were giving a batter account of Pakistanis almost victories. All lies.

But now India prepared well and spent time time to buy Soviet hardware and learnt to use it. In 1971, Pakistan was soundly beaten with 120,000 Pakistanis in Indian hands as POWs. Much of the military hardware was lost again, but President Nixon promised to replace it.

US all along worried for the misuse of its supplied military hardware. It began to question the free military aid. But by then Pakistanis had developed strong enough relationship with successive US Administration that the aid never stopped. In the process Pakistan became more and more aggressive. They flouted all US military aid and conditions. Pakistani Army hit upon an another idea that terror war to grab Kashmir as good as fighting a pitched battle. This they had learnt it from US in Afghanistan as their aid to Mujahideen was to fight terror battle.

US all along unhappy about Pakistani role but did nothing about it. Pakistanis had US State Department officials in their back pocket like US assistant Secretary of South Asian affairs - Robin Raphael etc. as pro Pakistani official in Bush (sr) and Clinton Administration.

After 9/11 US needed Pakistan more and more for its Afghan policy hence turned a blind eye to Pakistani activities including stealing more and more of technology from the West. From 2001 to 2016, US poured close to $30 billion more military aid to Pakistan as grants.

Come Trump as President of USA. He has political troubles at home but decided to have a fresh look at US military aid to Pakistan. With all anti Indian State Department officials gone, the new breed of officials had a different view of Pakistan now. They wanted Pakistan to listen to them or else. They want Pakistan off the terror network or else.

That is where US and Pakistan mutual relations are today I.e. US does not need Pakistan as an ally today. The forgoing would have happened twenty five years back but for 9/11 and earlier bombing of twin towers by Osama Bin Laden. He was hiding in Afghanistan and Unknown to US, Pakistan was helping him with logistic support and offering sanctuary for his work. The US sending troops to Kabul required Pakistani support hence more money to be poured into a bankrupt but military power, Pakistan. President Bush - jr and Obama paid only lip service to anti world and pro terror activities of Pakistan. They knew all along but kept their mouth shut as 30,000 US troops were stuck in Afghanistan and supply route ran thru Pakistan.

Come Trump to power, anid he decided to hold the bull by its horns.

Knowing this as a possibility the Pakistanis in mid nineties opened up a military relationship with china. They initially started it as a ploy but Chinese were very willing to supply military aid and economic aid. But Chinese never give anything for free as US does. They maintain a full account of their money they spend and sometime in future would ask for their money back.


The forgoing is a bad situation for Pakistan. It isnfrom frying pan into a fire. Hence Pakistan is trapped in a situation that it does not wish to give up terrorism but also do not wish the free military and economic aid from US.


Now, what are Pakistani Options:


1. Give up desire to control Afghanistan


2. Give up terrorism as an option to grab Kashmir


3. Give up terrorism as a political option for the rest of the world


4. Control its Army and ISI. These should be strictly under civilian control.

If these conditions are met and no American or coalition deaths in Afghanistan happen, then US may reconsider its hard line.

Remember that there are no friendlies left in US State Department or Defence Department to help Pakistan dance around its strict policy. So it is advisable for Pakistan to fall in line.

As for china factor , it is more of a political show. They will never match up to US as to what US did in form of help to Pakistan in the past and what they will do if US begins Pakistani like more.

A new prime minister will soon take over Pakistan. He may review and decide one way or the other. Either way the option goes in direction only I.e. Keep Pakistani Army out of Pakistani politics and governance.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top