By: Azhar Azam
Long before the candidature of White House habitation, Trump has been a strong knocker of US involvement in Afghanistan. ‘Our troops are being killed by the Afghanis we train and we waste billions there. Nonsense! Rebuild the USA.’
But running into presidential election campaign, Trump reversed his ‘original instinct’ to cede Afghan war; opining US to stay in Afghanistan to avoid total collapse of Afghan government and to keep a check on neighboring nuclear country, Pakistan.
Though he still maintains touting to oppose ‘nation building’ (in Afghanistan) but now is more interested in ‘killing terrorists’ – a posture inflamed many Afghans who believe that it would escalate tensions, perpetuate casualties in Afghanistan and would make no difference to common Afghans.
In his hard-nosed speech on Monday, Trump finally bared key sockets of long awaited US policy on Afghanistan – a strategy that engrosses Pakistan more than the conflicted territory, Afghanistan, where the United States is fighting its longest battle ever.
In his hopeless rhetoric toward Pakistan, he accused Pakistan for providing safe havens to ‘agents of chaos, violence, and terror’ and paying billions of dollars in aid; pushing Pakistan ‘to demonstrate its commitment to civilization, order, and to peace’.
A hawkish but a naive on complex regional dynamics, Trump’s boxing policy is only a futile effort to prevent betrayed Pakistan to join the camps of US rivals – China and Russia. Instead, Trump blitz over Pakistan has rallied both Beijing and Moscow to defend Pakistan and denounce new US plan.
In a press briefing on Tuesday, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson defended its ‘all-weather’ friend Pakistan and praised for its ‘great sacrifices’ and ‘important contributions’ in the war on terror. Talking on telephone to secretary of state Rex Tillerson, Chinese foreign minister Yang said that US must value Pakistan’s role in Afghanistan and respect Pakistan’s sovereignty and reasonable security concerns.
Russian special envoy to Afghanistan, Zamir Kabulov, also echoed a similar sentiment and slated US Afghan policy – declaring Pakistan ‘a key player regional player to negotiate with’ and need not to be pressurized that may seriously destabilize peace in the region and may result in negative consequences for Afghanistan.
According to US State Department’s Country Reports on Terrorism 2016, 75% of deaths were caused by 55% of all terrorist attacks in five countries – including Pakistan. In 2016, Pakistan experienced a substantial decline of 27% and 12% in terrorist attacks and total deaths respectively.
More surprisingly, terrorist attacks and total deaths in Afghanistan also fell considerably by 22% and 14% correspondingly – thanks to border management services by Pakistan on its western borders – to control arms and terrorist movements, and drug trafficking.
In an epitome of great successes against terrorism in both Afghanistan and Pakistan, according to US State Department itself – United States must have had acknowledged Pakistan vital role and great successes in fighting terror. Instead, Pakistan is being accused for safe havens, using proxies, and supporting terrorism by US administration – contradictory to its own certified reports, posing serious concerns over Pakistan’s trust on United States.
Military and economic sanctions is an old tactic, Trump is trying to sell Americans in a new pack. Ash Carter, Obama’s secretary of defense, had before refused to certify Pakistan over the same paranoid basis to cease $300 million. Pentagon, under leadership of current secretary of defense, James Mattis, withheld another $50 million. Last year, Congress put on hold the proposed sale of eight F-16 to Pakistan as well.
This amount is ridiculously low to challenge Pakistan economic and defense challenges. US is threatening to ‘act’ much latter when Pakistan has already made a major strategic shift to getting close to China and Russia.
According to a report ‘Direct Overt U.S. Aid Appropriations for and Military Reimbursements to Pakistan, FY2002-FY2016’ prepared by Congressional Research Service (CRS) for distribution to multiple congressional offices, a total of $33.4 billion was appropriated for US aid to Pakistan for 15-years. Trump’s catchphrase of ‘billions and billions of dollars” centers this report so as most of the analysts’.
It distinctly shows a vertical decline in US aid appropriations to Pakistan over the period of 5-years on account of economic, security-related, and Coalition Support Fund (CSF) Reimbursements. These are just appropriations which have been subject to obligations and final disbursements, which are generally far lower than these appropriations.
As Note ‘f’ expounds, CSF Reimbursements are disbursed to Pakistan for logistics and operational support of US-led military operations – a bias to overvalue the aid. In total, US appropriations for FY2016 totaled just $322 million and $226 million on account of a number of economic-related and security-related programs. Actual releases are even lower than this.
foreignassistance.gov is State-owned institution that provides information of US assistance to other countries including planned, obliged, and actually spent. It also demonstrates an invariable declining trend in US aid to Pakistan over the years – spending values too have been much lesser than allocation.
For example, US apportioned $742 million to Pakistan for FY2017 (ending 30-September-2017) but obligated just $142 million and spent only $130 million for the fiscal year on various programs such as: Humanitarian Assistance, Economic Development, Education and Social Services, Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance, Health, Program Management, and Peace and Security.
Trump stance on funding Pakistan is entirely opposite to the state’s data and seriously doubts US intent to resolve issues to bring peace and stability in the region. In nutshell, Trump announced a plan to ‘ditch’ Pakistan which was devised much before his road to the White House.
Praising India, a country with literally no contribution toward ensuring peace in the region, hints at the changing US tactics in the region, Pakistan realized quickly and reciprocated valiantly by tying with Russia along with China. United States repeatedly stunk Pakistan after obtaining its objectives and in the last few years, US tilt to India already warned Pakistan of ‘inclined US approach’ in the region.
Galvanizing distant India into Afghanistan is ‘lesson’ meant to convey Pakistan for actively supporting and partnering China’s Silk Road aiming to connect 4.4 billion people, more than 60 countries, and share 30% of the global economy. US hopes that India could downgrade Chinese growing influence in the region.
But Trump invitation to India to help US in resolving the Afghanistan puzzle would draw a more bizarre situation that would only tremor peace in the South-Asia. US is seeking support from a country that has failed to prevent riots in its own territory – Indian held Kashmir – despite deploying almost a million security forces.
The United States is relying on a country that is unwilling to have any combatting forces’ footprints in Afghanistan and at a place, where 150,000 NATO and US troops failed to achieve country’s national security interests and goals over a period of 16-years. Whatever kind of support Trump is seeking from India; it is going to be an inevitable flaw of his strategy in this part of the world.
At the same time, Trump might bully on Pakistan but options scant! Pakistan is the only source for the United States from where it can resupply its troops and other supplies to land-locked Afghanistan. US officials fret if Pakistan becomes an active foe, it could further destabilize Afghanistan and more importantly jeopardize lives of US soldiers on the Afghan soil.
Talking to ABC News, Brookings Fellow Vanda Felbab-Brown said ‘The president says this is a strategy for victory – I don’t think this is a strategy for victory. I think it’s a strategy of avoiding catastrophe, but essentially it’s a strategy of buying us hope'.
Former Defense Secretary and CIA Director Leon Panetta responded, ‘the words that concern me the most that we are going to win this war and I think the reality is that Afghanistan is not a war that is going to be won in traditional sense’.
‘If we try to somehow tell the American people that there is going to be a military victory here, I think frankly that’s going to mislead the American Public’, Panetta added.
In an interview with RT, former Congressman and presidential candidate blasted Trump for his ‘U-Turn’ and also detonated his speech in a Tweet storm:
Long before the candidature of White House habitation, Trump has been a strong knocker of US involvement in Afghanistan. ‘Our troops are being killed by the Afghanis we train and we waste billions there. Nonsense! Rebuild the USA.’
Ron Paul is right that we are wasting trillions of dollars in Iraq and Afghanistan.— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 13, 2011
But running into presidential election campaign, Trump reversed his ‘original instinct’ to cede Afghan war; opining US to stay in Afghanistan to avoid total collapse of Afghan government and to keep a check on neighboring nuclear country, Pakistan.
Though he still maintains touting to oppose ‘nation building’ (in Afghanistan) but now is more interested in ‘killing terrorists’ – a posture inflamed many Afghans who believe that it would escalate tensions, perpetuate casualties in Afghanistan and would make no difference to common Afghans.
In his hard-nosed speech on Monday, Trump finally bared key sockets of long awaited US policy on Afghanistan – a strategy that engrosses Pakistan more than the conflicted territory, Afghanistan, where the United States is fighting its longest battle ever.
In his hopeless rhetoric toward Pakistan, he accused Pakistan for providing safe havens to ‘agents of chaos, violence, and terror’ and paying billions of dollars in aid; pushing Pakistan ‘to demonstrate its commitment to civilization, order, and to peace’.
A hawkish but a naive on complex regional dynamics, Trump’s boxing policy is only a futile effort to prevent betrayed Pakistan to join the camps of US rivals – China and Russia. Instead, Trump blitz over Pakistan has rallied both Beijing and Moscow to defend Pakistan and denounce new US plan.
In a press briefing on Tuesday, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson defended its ‘all-weather’ friend Pakistan and praised for its ‘great sacrifices’ and ‘important contributions’ in the war on terror. Talking on telephone to secretary of state Rex Tillerson, Chinese foreign minister Yang said that US must value Pakistan’s role in Afghanistan and respect Pakistan’s sovereignty and reasonable security concerns.
Russian special envoy to Afghanistan, Zamir Kabulov, also echoed a similar sentiment and slated US Afghan policy – declaring Pakistan ‘a key player regional player to negotiate with’ and need not to be pressurized that may seriously destabilize peace in the region and may result in negative consequences for Afghanistan.
Pakistan has commendably gained a great success in combating terrorism by reaching out and destroying their hideouts – an action US troops feared to take in Afghanistan to avoid casualties. The country has sacrificed nearly 70,000 people and armed forces and suffered over $100 billion of economic loss in the war on terror.
According to US State Department’s Country Reports on Terrorism 2016, 75% of deaths were caused by 55% of all terrorist attacks in five countries – including Pakistan. In 2016, Pakistan experienced a substantial decline of 27% and 12% in terrorist attacks and total deaths respectively.
More surprisingly, terrorist attacks and total deaths in Afghanistan also fell considerably by 22% and 14% correspondingly – thanks to border management services by Pakistan on its western borders – to control arms and terrorist movements, and drug trafficking.
In an epitome of great successes against terrorism in both Afghanistan and Pakistan, according to US State Department itself – United States must have had acknowledged Pakistan vital role and great successes in fighting terror. Instead, Pakistan is being accused for safe havens, using proxies, and supporting terrorism by US administration – contradictory to its own certified reports, posing serious concerns over Pakistan’s trust on United States.
Military and economic sanctions is an old tactic, Trump is trying to sell Americans in a new pack. Ash Carter, Obama’s secretary of defense, had before refused to certify Pakistan over the same paranoid basis to cease $300 million. Pentagon, under leadership of current secretary of defense, James Mattis, withheld another $50 million. Last year, Congress put on hold the proposed sale of eight F-16 to Pakistan as well.
This amount is ridiculously low to challenge Pakistan economic and defense challenges. US is threatening to ‘act’ much latter when Pakistan has already made a major strategic shift to getting close to China and Russia.
According to a report ‘Direct Overt U.S. Aid Appropriations for and Military Reimbursements to Pakistan, FY2002-FY2016’ prepared by Congressional Research Service (CRS) for distribution to multiple congressional offices, a total of $33.4 billion was appropriated for US aid to Pakistan for 15-years. Trump’s catchphrase of ‘billions and billions of dollars” centers this report so as most of the analysts’.
It distinctly shows a vertical decline in US aid appropriations to Pakistan over the period of 5-years on account of economic, security-related, and Coalition Support Fund (CSF) Reimbursements. These are just appropriations which have been subject to obligations and final disbursements, which are generally far lower than these appropriations.
As Note ‘f’ expounds, CSF Reimbursements are disbursed to Pakistan for logistics and operational support of US-led military operations – a bias to overvalue the aid. In total, US appropriations for FY2016 totaled just $322 million and $226 million on account of a number of economic-related and security-related programs. Actual releases are even lower than this.
foreignassistance.gov is State-owned institution that provides information of US assistance to other countries including planned, obliged, and actually spent. It also demonstrates an invariable declining trend in US aid to Pakistan over the years – spending values too have been much lesser than allocation.
For example, US apportioned $742 million to Pakistan for FY2017 (ending 30-September-2017) but obligated just $142 million and spent only $130 million for the fiscal year on various programs such as: Humanitarian Assistance, Economic Development, Education and Social Services, Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance, Health, Program Management, and Peace and Security.
Trump stance on funding Pakistan is entirely opposite to the state’s data and seriously doubts US intent to resolve issues to bring peace and stability in the region. In nutshell, Trump announced a plan to ‘ditch’ Pakistan which was devised much before his road to the White House.
Praising India, a country with literally no contribution toward ensuring peace in the region, hints at the changing US tactics in the region, Pakistan realized quickly and reciprocated valiantly by tying with Russia along with China. United States repeatedly stunk Pakistan after obtaining its objectives and in the last few years, US tilt to India already warned Pakistan of ‘inclined US approach’ in the region.
Galvanizing distant India into Afghanistan is ‘lesson’ meant to convey Pakistan for actively supporting and partnering China’s Silk Road aiming to connect 4.4 billion people, more than 60 countries, and share 30% of the global economy. US hopes that India could downgrade Chinese growing influence in the region.
But Trump invitation to India to help US in resolving the Afghanistan puzzle would draw a more bizarre situation that would only tremor peace in the South-Asia. US is seeking support from a country that has failed to prevent riots in its own territory – Indian held Kashmir – despite deploying almost a million security forces.
The United States is relying on a country that is unwilling to have any combatting forces’ footprints in Afghanistan and at a place, where 150,000 NATO and US troops failed to achieve country’s national security interests and goals over a period of 16-years. Whatever kind of support Trump is seeking from India; it is going to be an inevitable flaw of his strategy in this part of the world.
At the same time, Trump might bully on Pakistan but options scant! Pakistan is the only source for the United States from where it can resupply its troops and other supplies to land-locked Afghanistan. US officials fret if Pakistan becomes an active foe, it could further destabilize Afghanistan and more importantly jeopardize lives of US soldiers on the Afghan soil.
Talking to ABC News, Brookings Fellow Vanda Felbab-Brown said ‘The president says this is a strategy for victory – I don’t think this is a strategy for victory. I think it’s a strategy of avoiding catastrophe, but essentially it’s a strategy of buying us hope'.
Former Defense Secretary and CIA Director Leon Panetta responded, ‘the words that concern me the most that we are going to win this war and I think the reality is that Afghanistan is not a war that is going to be won in traditional sense’.
‘If we try to somehow tell the American people that there is going to be a military victory here, I think frankly that’s going to mislead the American Public’, Panetta added.
In an interview with RT, former Congressman and presidential candidate blasted Trump for his ‘U-Turn’ and also detonated his speech in a Tweet storm:
If Americans are tired of 16 year war, how will they feel about another decade or two? When will they wake up?— Ron Paul (@RonPaul) 22 August 2017
Shorter Trump: "Afghanistan: give us your minerals!"— Ron Paul (@RonPaul) 22 August 2017
Terrorism is one thing, but what about massive collateral damage? Killing civilians creates more terrorism. Round and round we go.
— Ron Paul (@RonPaul) 22 August 2017
Remember: there was no al-Qaeda until our foolish invasion of Iraq based on neocon lies.— Ron Paul (@RonPaul) 22 August 2017