« USA Slips Behind 22 Countries in Banking/Credit Technology-US Banks 'Unable to Afford Cost' Equal to 1/4 of Goldman Sachs 2009 Bonuses | NobleCommentDecider's Blog | Fox News Poll Evidence Fox is Nothing But GOP Affiliated Brainwashers, as the White House Suggests »
Obama/Clinton Ending Bush Era Munich-Like Appeasement of Pakistan and its Military/ISI Warlords-This is Real Change
Finally an end to the Bush era Munich like appeasement of the Pakistani defense establishment and warlords. And they are squealing about it, and likely missing George W. Bush and his weak and incompetent administration.
Pakistan's military is complaining about the Democratic Congress and Obama administration ending the 'blank check' policy of the Bush administration, and the blind support of the often corrupt military establishment and their violations of the Pakistan's Constitution and law. Democrats are demanding actual accountability in the planned US multi-billion dollar aid to the country. Unlike the Bush administration which kept track of hardly anything sent into the region, be it weapons and bundles of $100 bills in Iraq or aid in Pakistan, the Obama aid legislation has new standards.
There were reports as late as 2007 that aid sent by the Bush administration went to a Pakistani military without safeguards when it was known elements of the miltary/ISI were working with and funding the Taliban. It was also likely under Bush that Musharraf used the money to bolster his own image and pocketbook:
Perez Musharraf, a Washington ally, served as both chief of staff and president, making it easier to divert money intended for the military to bolster his sagging image at home through economic subsidies.
The Obama administration is ending the wishful thinking and delusional policies of Bush in regard to the region. In April, 2009 Hillary Clinton said:
"I want to take this occasion in this public forum to state unequivocally that not only do the Pakistani government officials, but the Pakistani people . . . need to speak out forcefully against a policy that is ceding more and more territory to the insurgents, to the Taliban, to al Qaida," Clinton told the House Committee on Foreign Affairs....
NYT October 7 2009:
The legislation passed by Congress last week gives Pakistan $1.5 billion over the next year for the Zardari government to build roads, schools and other infrastructure, a gesture intended to shore up the weak civilian government and turn around the widespread antipathy toward the United States among Pakistanis.
Instead, the aid package has served to widen the distrust between the powerful military and the civilian government, even though the new aid comes in addition to America's aid to the Pakistani military, which had totaled more than $10 billion since 2001.
Where's the beef? The accountability section of the legislation S-962 :
Certification- The certification required by this subsection is a certification to the appropriate congressional committees by the Secretary of State, after consultation with the Secretary of Defense and the Director of National Intelligence, that the security forces of Pakistan--
(1) are making concerted efforts to prevent al Qaeda and associated terrorist groups, including Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed, from operating in the territory of Pakistan;
(2) are making concerted efforts to prevent the Taliban and associated militant groups from using the territory of Pakistan as a sanctuary from which to launch attacks within Afghanistan; and
(3) are not materially interfering in the political or judicial processes of Pakistan.
The Obama administration is asking Pakistan to crack down on the terrorist organization responsible for the recent attack in Mumbai:
This is real change and change that is long overdue as Pakistan is serving as the major sanctuary for terrorists in the region, and it is long overdue for the US to stop sending blank checks to a country that thinks it is a violation of their sovereignty to demand action against known terror organizations on their soil, or risk losing military or other aid.
ITS ABOUT TIME!
Pakistan's military is complaining about the Democratic Congress and Obama administration ending the 'blank check' policy of the Bush administration, and the blind support of the often corrupt military establishment and their violations of the Pakistan's Constitution and law. Democrats are demanding actual accountability in the planned US multi-billion dollar aid to the country. Unlike the Bush administration which kept track of hardly anything sent into the region, be it weapons and bundles of $100 bills in Iraq or aid in Pakistan, the Obama aid legislation has new standards.
There were reports as late as 2007 that aid sent by the Bush administration went to a Pakistani military without safeguards when it was known elements of the miltary/ISI were working with and funding the Taliban. It was also likely under Bush that Musharraf used the money to bolster his own image and pocketbook:
Perez Musharraf, a Washington ally, served as both chief of staff and president, making it easier to divert money intended for the military to bolster his sagging image at home through economic subsidies.
The Obama administration is ending the wishful thinking and delusional policies of Bush in regard to the region. In April, 2009 Hillary Clinton said:
"I want to take this occasion in this public forum to state unequivocally that not only do the Pakistani government officials, but the Pakistani people . . . need to speak out forcefully against a policy that is ceding more and more territory to the insurgents, to the Taliban, to al Qaida," Clinton told the House Committee on Foreign Affairs....
NYT October 7 2009:
The legislation passed by Congress last week gives Pakistan $1.5 billion over the next year for the Zardari government to build roads, schools and other infrastructure, a gesture intended to shore up the weak civilian government and turn around the widespread antipathy toward the United States among Pakistanis.
Instead, the aid package has served to widen the distrust between the powerful military and the civilian government, even though the new aid comes in addition to America's aid to the Pakistani military, which had totaled more than $10 billion since 2001.
Where's the beef? The accountability section of the legislation S-962 :
Certification- The certification required by this subsection is a certification to the appropriate congressional committees by the Secretary of State, after consultation with the Secretary of Defense and the Director of National Intelligence, that the security forces of Pakistan--
(1) are making concerted efforts to prevent al Qaeda and associated terrorist groups, including Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed, from operating in the territory of Pakistan;
(2) are making concerted efforts to prevent the Taliban and associated militant groups from using the territory of Pakistan as a sanctuary from which to launch attacks within Afghanistan; and
(3) are not materially interfering in the political or judicial processes of Pakistan.
The Obama administration is asking Pakistan to crack down on the terrorist organization responsible for the recent attack in Mumbai:
The generals were specifically infuriated by mention of Quetta, which the Obama administration says is a base for Taliban who fight American forces in Afghanistan, and of Muridke, which is a well known base for Lashkar-e-Taiba, a militant group formed two decades ago by the Pakistani government to fight India.
The United States and India say Lashkar was behind the attacks in India's financial capital, Mumbai, last November that killed 163 people.This is real change and change that is long overdue as Pakistan is serving as the major sanctuary for terrorists in the region, and it is long overdue for the US to stop sending blank checks to a country that thinks it is a violation of their sovereignty to demand action against known terror organizations on their soil, or risk losing military or other aid.
ITS ABOUT TIME!
Advertisement
















And Pakistan was continually held up as a nation that was working WITH US to fight 'terrorists.' Neocons have always held that it was wise just to support the defacto military rule with Mushareff as figurehead. Is that 'pragmatic' or just expedient? At the very least it seems like a poor use of our tax dollars. I say bully to Hillary. What do you think is the blowback potential?
October 8, 2009 10:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
There is no downside, the fact is Pakistan has never been the democratic multi-ethnic secular state its founder Governor Jinnah intended for it. The 'two state' solution Mountbatten shoved thru for India was and is a failure. Pakistan is a mess and the military have run the place for their own benefit while being in constant fear of India. I note today the civilian government is pushing back against the military on this issue.
link
Farhatullah Babar... strongly defended the aid package, saying ''there is nothing against the national interest in the bill.''
October 8, 2009 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink