Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

US could punish Pakistan if no cooperation

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • US could punish Pakistan if no cooperation

    Rex Tillerson: US could punish Pakistan if no cooperation - Times of India


    US could punish Pakistan if no cooperation

    AFP | Updated: Aug 23, 2017, 08:45 AM ISTHighlights

    • US has asked Pakistan not to provide safe havens to terrorists.
    • Secretary of state Rex Tillerson said "we have some leverage" against Pakistan.
    • US may impose sanctions or end Pakistan's status as a major non-NATO ally.





    WASHINGTON: The United States warned an angry Pakistan on Tuesday that it could lose its status as a privileged military ally if it continues giving safe haven to Afghan militant groups.

    One day after President Donald Trump unveiled a new strategy to force the Taliban to negotiate a political settlement with the Kabul government, his top diplomat upped the heat on Islamabad.

    Trump had warned that Pakistan's support for the Afghan Taliban and the Haqqani extremist network would have consequences, and secretary of state Rex Tillerson has now spelled these out.

    "We have some leverage," Tillerson told reporters, as he fleshed out Trump's speech, "in terms of aid, their status as a non-NATO alliance partner — all of that can be put on the table."

    As one of 16 "Non-NATO Major Allies," Pakistan benefits from billions of dollars in aid and has access to some advanced US military technology banned from other countries.

    This year, the United States has already withheld $350 million in military funding over concerns Pakistan is not doing enough to fight terror, but the alliance itself was not in question.

    Tillerson said Washington wants to work with Pakistan as it expands its own support for Kabul in the battle against the Taliban, but warned it to close militant safe havens.

    Some of Pakistan's critics in Washington have urged Trump to go further, by authorizing US strikes against militants inside Pakistan or declaring Pakistan a "state sponsor of terror."

    Officials have not yet brandished the designation threat, which could lead to severe sanctions and legal threats to Pakistani officials, but Tillerson did not rule out strikes.

    The United States has hit targets within Pakistan before, most famously when Trump's predecessor Barack Obama ordered US special forces to kill al-Qaida leader Osama Bin Laden.

    "The president has been clear that we are going to attack terrorists wherever they live," Tillerson said.

    "We have put people on notice that if you're providing safe haven to terrorists, be warned — we are going to engage those providing safe haven and ask them to change what they are doing."

    And Tillerson added that, aside from the Afghans, Pakistan has more to gain "than any other nation" from an end to the fighting.

    Both Tillerson and Trump also called on Pakistan's long-standing rival and fellow nuclear power India to become more involved in Afghanistan, an idea that is anathema to Islamabad.

    All this drew a hurt response from Pakistan, which has been a US ally since the Cold War, despite tensions over its rogue nuclear program and clashes with emerging great power India.

    Seeking to rebut Trump's "disappointing" allegation that it had harbored "agents of chaos," Pakistan's foreign ministry re-stated its commitment to fighting terrorism.

    "No country in the world has suffered more than Pakistan from the scourge of terrorism, often perpetrated from outside our borders," it said in a statement.

    "It is, therefore disappointing that the US policy statement ignores the enormous sacrifices rendered by the Pakistani nation in this effort," it continued.

    During the 1980s, Pakistan worked with the United States and Saudi Arabia to support Islamist rebels against what was the then pro-Soviet Afghan regime in Kabul.

    But after the rise to power of the Pakistani-backed Taliban and the Al-Qaida attacks on US cities of September 11, 2001, the US has pressured Islamabad to cut its links with the militants.

    Pakistan has conducted campaigns against the Pakistani branch of the Taliban — which threatens its own stability — and turned a blind eye to a US drone campaign against Al-Qaida leaders.

    But it fears the rise of an Indian-backed government in Kabul, and maintains support for some Taliban and other factions to keep its influence across the long, lawless border.

    "As a matter of policy, Pakistan does not allow use of its territory against any country," the foreign ministry said.

    "Instead of relying on the false narrative of safe havens, the US needs to work with Pakistan to eradicate terrorism."

    Beyond the stand-off with Pakistan, Trump's new strategy also authorizes US generals to deploy more American troops to support Afghan government forces in what is now a 16-year-old conflict.
    "The past is not my concern. The future is no longer my concern either. One minute. One minute of everything at once. And anything before is nothing. Everything after nothing. Nothing in comparison to that one minute."

  • #2
    Everybody already knows that the Americans could squash Pakiland and wipe this dirty sh!t stain "off the map" at any time they wanted, but they wont do it, so these statements mean nothing.

    Americans have been making these statements for years but still throw some bones to these stinking paki dogs to chew on.

    Believe that American attitudes have changed only when you see action. We are already used to hearing the words, and not much more.
    Long Live Baloch Freedom Struggle Until Victory!
    sigpic
    Long Live Baloch Freedom Struggle Until Victory!

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Insight View Post
      Rex Tillerson: US could punish Pakistan if no cooperation - Times of India


      US could punish Pakistan if no cooperation

      AFP | Updated: Aug 23, 2017, 08:45 AM ISTHighlights

      • US has asked Pakistan not to provide safe havens to terrorists.
      • Secretary of state Rex Tillerson said "we have some leverage" against Pakistan.
      • US may impose sanctions or end Pakistan's status as a major non-NATO ally.





      WASHINGTON: The United States warned an angry Pakistan on Tuesday that it could lose its status as a privileged military ally if it continues giving safe haven to Afghan militant groups.

      One day after President Donald Trump unveiled a new strategy to force the Taliban to negotiate a political settlement with the Kabul government, his top diplomat upped the heat on Islamabad.

      Trump had warned that Pakistan's support for the Afghan Taliban and the Haqqani extremist network would have consequences, and secretary of state Rex Tillerson has now spelled these out.

      "We have some leverage," Tillerson told reporters, as he fleshed out Trump's speech, "in terms of aid, their status as a non-NATO alliance partner — all of that can be put on the table."

      As one of 16 "Non-NATO Major Allies," Pakistan benefits from billions of dollars in aid and has access to some advanced US military technology banned from other countries.

      This year, the United States has already withheld $350 million in military funding over concerns Pakistan is not doing enough to fight terror, but the alliance itself was not in question.

      Tillerson said Washington wants to work with Pakistan as it expands its own support for Kabul in the battle against the Taliban, but warned it to close militant safe havens.

      Some of Pakistan's critics in Washington have urged Trump to go further, by authorizing US strikes against militants inside Pakistan or declaring Pakistan a "state sponsor of terror."

      Officials have not yet brandished the designation threat, which could lead to severe sanctions and legal threats to Pakistani officials, but Tillerson did not rule out strikes.

      The United States has hit targets within Pakistan before, most famously when Trump's predecessor Barack Obama ordered US special forces to kill al-Qaida leader Osama Bin Laden.

      "The president has been clear that we are going to attack terrorists wherever they live," Tillerson said.

      "We have put people on notice that if you're providing safe haven to terrorists, be warned — we are going to engage those providing safe haven and ask them to change what they are doing."

      And Tillerson added that, aside from the Afghans, Pakistan has more to gain "than any other nation" from an end to the fighting.

      Both Tillerson and Trump also called on Pakistan's long-standing rival and fellow nuclear power India to become more involved in Afghanistan, an idea that is anathema to Islamabad.

      All this drew a hurt response from Pakistan, which has been a US ally since the Cold War, despite tensions over its rogue nuclear program and clashes with emerging great power India.

      Seeking to rebut Trump's "disappointing" allegation that it had harbored "agents of chaos," Pakistan's foreign ministry re-stated its commitment to fighting terrorism.

      "No country in the world has suffered more than Pakistan from the scourge of terrorism, often perpetrated from outside our borders," it said in a statement.

      "It is, therefore disappointing that the US policy statement ignores the enormous sacrifices rendered by the Pakistani nation in this effort," it continued.

      During the 1980s, Pakistan worked with the United States and Saudi Arabia to support Islamist rebels against what was the then pro-Soviet Afghan regime in Kabul.

      But after the rise to power of the Pakistani-backed Taliban and the Al-Qaida attacks on US cities of September 11, 2001, the US has pressured Islamabad to cut its links with the militants.

      Pakistan has conducted campaigns against the Pakistani branch of the Taliban — which threatens its own stability — and turned a blind eye to a US drone campaign against Al-Qaida leaders.

      But it fears the rise of an Indian-backed government in Kabul, and maintains support for some Taliban and other factions to keep its influence across the long, lawless border.

      "As a matter of policy, Pakistan does not allow use of its territory against any country," the foreign ministry said.

      "Instead of relying on the false narrative of safe havens, the US needs to work with Pakistan to eradicate terrorism."

      Beyond the stand-off with Pakistan, Trump's new strategy also authorizes US generals to deploy more American troops to support Afghan government forces in what is now a 16-year-old conflict.
      I like this new strategy. Sanctions will be imposed on Pakistan, Talib safe havens and their leadership must be targeted in Pakistan. Also in Afghanistan I believe USA will go for the same successful strategy used in Iraq against Daesh: use local ground forces, American special forces and massive air fire power in order to push back the Taliban.

      Unlike Iraq I believe USA doesn't want really to defeat the Taliban. They will just force them to engage in peace talks and reach an agreements. Its more about face saving than defeating the bad guys.

      "For thirty years, I endured much pain and strife,
      I awaken the Ajam by this Persian [language]. "

      -Ferdowsi.

      Comment


      • #4
        Domestic violence.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Baserka View Post
          Domestic violence.
          I'm afraid Afghanistan is the much used and abused second wife then.
          Last edited by toughpashtun; 08-26-2017, 01:56 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Lets see how the punishments come about.If our top leadership(both military and civilian but especially mil) shows some spine , no one can dare violate Pak's sovereignty.
            In case of sanctions , we'll learn to survive on other means in addition to gaining self-respect and independence in the true sense.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by toughpashtun View Post
              Lets see how the punishments come about.If our top leadership(both military and civilian but especially mil) shows some spine , no one can dare violate Pak's sovereignty.
              In case of sanctions , we'll learn to survive on other means in addition to gaining self-respect and independence in the true sense.
              What sovereignty is that? Should I remind you that drones are your national birds? lmao
              "For thirty years, I endured much pain and strife,
              I awaken the Ajam by this Persian [language]. "

              -Ferdowsi.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Firdousi View Post
                What sovereignty is that? Should I remind you that drones are your national birds? lmao
                Valid point you've got there.
                I said that if our leaders show some spine and courage(which they have not shown much so far) , then we would be a sovereign nation in all respects.
                There have been instances when the top brass did take a bold stand , such as blocking NATO supplies after Salala incident etc.But as a whole I admit that our leadership have accepted the US as our master.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by toughpashtun View Post
                  Valid point you've got there.
                  I said that if our leaders show some spine and courage(which they have not shown much so far) , then we would be a sovereign nation in all respects.
                  There have been instances when the top brass did take a bold stand , such as blocking NATO supplies after Salala incident etc.But as a whole I admit that our leadership have accepted the US as our master.
                  First off I would like to apologize for mocking. I just wonder, why can't we be friends? Why can't we get along?
                  "For thirty years, I endured much pain and strife,
                  I awaken the Ajam by this Persian [language]. "

                  -Ferdowsi.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Firdousi View Post
                    First off I would like to apologize for mocking. I just wonder, why can't we be friends? Why can't we get along?
                    You don't have to apologize. What you said reflected the truth , although you had a mocking and insulting tone.
                    Anyway , I am all for being on friendly terms with you or anyone for that matter.
                    How are we not getting along?What do you mean?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by toughpashtun View Post
                      You don't have to apologize. What you said reflected the truth , although you had a mocking and insulting tone.
                      Anyway , I am all for being on friendly terms with you or anyone for that matter.
                      How are we not getting along?What do you mean?
                      He's talking about bad relations between Afghans and Pakistanis.
                      Originally posted by Kaushika

                      majority of Hilly Rajputs are the product of these cross breeding and want to disassociate with their past. rajputs with rajwadi surnames consider themeselves superior but those native kings who look darker gets mocked as "gola" (mix breed, son of rakhile) so they actually invite light skinned rajputs and kshatriya tribes from Jammu region such as jamwals to sleep with their women so that their wives can give birth to pure white looking Native Child.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Traveller View Post
                        He's talking about bad relations between Afghans and Pakistanis.
                        Don't want to get started on that.This topic has been discussed and fought over many times on PF.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          post de da hamgha............ pa page wagora.

                          "To burn always with this hard gemlike flame, to maintain this ecstasy, is success in life."





                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Firdousi View Post
                            I like this new strategy. Sanctions will be imposed on Pakistan, Talib safe havens and their leadership must be targeted in Pakistan. Also in Afghanistan I believe USA will go for the same successful strategy used in Iraq against Daesh: use local ground forces, American special forces and massive air fire power in order to push back the Taliban.

                            Unlike Iraq I believe USA doesn't want really to defeat the Taliban. They will just force them to engage in peace talks and reach an agreements. Its more about face saving than defeating the bad guys.

                            http://www.tolonews.com/index.php/af...%A0air-strikes


                            This is not to say that Pakistan does not prostitute itself to survive, but times have changed.

                            Pakistan is not in the same situation it was in 7 years ago. Pakistan's ties with China have grown deeper, militarily and economically.

                            Secondly, Russia and Iran are both supporting the Taliban insurgency, Iran more so than Russia. Difficult to deny this fact while the US military and intelligence states that Russia and Iran are backing the Taliban. In addition, the Ghani/Kabul regime also state that Russia/Iran are militarily backing the Taliban insurgency. Are the US and Ghani/Kabul regime lying?

                            US general accuses Russia, Iran of boosting Taliban in Afghanistan | Fox News



                            Pakistan, China, Russia, and Iran are now all aligned with regards to Afghanistan. That is why US could only ask India to get more involved.

                            If Pakistan is made a State Sponsor of terrorism, whatever is left of the relationship will unravel. That means Pakistan would end all cooperation, and without that the war effort comes to a stop. I think the US especially with Trump in power, will label Pakistan a state sponsor of terrorism.
                            "The past is not my concern. The future is no longer my concern either. One minute. One minute of everything at once. And anything before is nothing. Everything after nothing. Nothing in comparison to that one minute."

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Bush tried this strategy and it did not work. It seems like the Generals just wanted to convince Trump this is a new strategy so he can sign off on it. Pakistan considers an India friendly gov in Kabul an existential threat so they can not move against the Taliban.

                              The US can not move against Pakistan. The Us military views the paki generals, who support the Taliban, are better than the alternative just like the paki military views the Taliban, whose certain factions attack the paki military, are better for Pakistan than the alternative.
                              This is a cycle that the paki elites, Afghan elites and US defense corporations while making money are happy with robbing the US Treasury and spilling the blood of US soldiers, Afghan soldiers, Paki soldiers and poor Afghan civilians.
                              Last edited by khushal; 08-28-2017, 09:35 PM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X