Sunday, August 20, 2017

Foreign Policy Report: President Trump Wants To Cut Off All U.S. Military Aid To Pakistan

U.S. President Donald Trump steps from Air Force One as he arrives in Morristown, New Jersey, U.S., after visiting Camp David in Maryland August 18, 2017 (Photo: Reuters)

Daily Times: Trump to ‘cut all military aid to Pakistan’

* Report says US president believes Washington is being 'ripped off' by Islamabad

WASHINGTON: US President Donald Trump is mulling over cutting off all military aid to Pakistan because 'Washington is being ripped off by Islamabad', claims a Foreign Policy report.

As Trump reviewed an array of options for a strategy on Afghanistan with his top national security aides at Camp David, he made no decision on whether he would commit more troops to America's longest war. Committing more troops would also significantly affect the United State's relationship with Pakistan.

The FP report quoted a White House official as saying that "the president thinks we're being ripped off by Pakistan. The president wants to cut off all military aid to Pakistan. That's part of the strategy". The official further said that the Department of Defence views Pakistan and the United State's relationship as 'troubled'.

Read more ....

WNU Editor: The Foreign Policy article that is reporting the possibility that the U.S. may cut aid to Pakistan is here .... Inside Trump’s Tortured Search for a Winning Strategy in Afghanistan (Foreign Policy).

More News On Reports That President Trump Wants To Cut Off All U.S. Military Aid To Pakistan

Trump wants to cut off all military aid to Pakistan: report -- Samaa TV
No good news for Pakistan in US new Afghan policy -- The International News
US to ‘cut all military aid to Pakistan’: FP report -- Pakistan Observer
Trump wants to cut military aid to Pak, increase troops in Afghanistan: US -- Business Standard

14 comments:

jimbrown said...

Not the worst idea.

James said...

" The president wants to cut off all military aid to Pakistan."
If this is done then the die is cast. By doing this it may be possible to turn Afghanistan around, if it isn't done, then Afghanistan is lost. No guarantees.

fred said...

Pakistan has many problems for us, for sure.
But to cut off aid is to stop the money we presently send to help protect their nuke sites...though we have no access to them. To cut off aid is to suggest, rightly or not, that we care more about India, their enemy. And then there is the Taliban, in camps in Pakistant, going over into Afghanistan. We have for sometime been secretly or not so secretly been going after the bad guys in the mountsina of Pakistan...will we cease to do that and thus strengthen Taliban Afghanistan connection? If we stop helping Pakistan, then we ought to leave Afghanistan asap

AZuLike said...

Should of left Afghanistan long time ago but, your remember that picture? The one where Pakistan transported its nukes in regular old vans.

AZuLike said...

https://www.livescience.com/47682-rare-earth-minerals-found-under-afghanistan.html

Unknown said...

Both James and Fred have good points. Just another foreign policy mess we're into because there is no strategic thinking By most occupants of the white house. After all what is the goal with Afghanistan? First it was some kind of warped revenge and then it was trying to rescue a favorable outcome from another U.S. loss. Neither have or will happen.

If the U.S. is so bent on further antagonizing the Russians getting out of Afghanistan would help.

Pakistan? There is nothing good we can do there. Sure they will take our money and the ISI will go about it's business as usual. They'd just be another casualty of supporting the dictatorship (oh, OK they have elections for a fig leaf) du jour. And we just can't figure out why we don't have many long-term friends and allies.

aaa said...

If US stays in Afghanistan, we'll need a more efficient way of fighting. After spending trillions of dollars and 16 years there what have we really achieved? Maybe there have been gains and I'm just not seeing them. I'd be curious to hear the opinion of anybody who's been there.

From my perspective though, the Taliban is on the rise and if the US leaves the situation will be the same as before they arrived. Maybe the resurgence of the Taliban is from lowering the troop levels. If that's the case then how many troops are enough, how long will it take to train the Afghans to defend themselves, and is it even possible to get the Afghans to the point where they can defend themselves? So many more questions on this too.

In writing this, I'm thinking Afghan is a lost cause. We have no allies in the region or even worldwide who are willing to make serious commitments to the effort; I don't think the US is even willing to make the necessary commitments.

B.Poster said...

"If the US is so bent on further antagonizing the Russians getting out of Afghanistan would be a big help." Careful Jason. I think I know where you may be going with this.

I've essentially pointed this out for quite some time here. Essentially American leaders have gone out of their way to antagonize Russia and FOR NO GOOD REASON. are they insane? Enter Donald Trump who has the good sense to try and back us away from that.

When I pointed this out, I was accused of being a Russian agent and being a non native American. Now that comment moderation has been implemented, such vile insults probably won't make it through. I said some things that wouldn't have made it through either. Nevertheless be aware of what you are openning yourself up to.

With that said whether we continue in Afghanistan or redeploy removing all aid from Pakistan has huge upside potential along with minimal downside risks. It's long past time to end this "aid." Of course redeployment from Afghanistan is the proper course. To do so will require strategic thinking.

Unknown said...

Is pseudo cooperation with Pakistan worth it.

Privately they may assent to some droning of some Taliban; publically they denounce us.

Do they really privately support us taking out some Taliban? After all they support the Taliban.

It is really hard to have two allies that hate each other.

- See The USSR and Somalia & Ethiopia
- See NATO and Greece & Turkey. That seemed to work when Turkey was more liberal and a Democracy. Under Erdogan not so much

So how could we have India & Pakistan? India is more important. To be sure they have all sort of problems but name a country that does not. India is a Democracy. It is not the best functioning Democracy, but the U.S. has slipped in that regards also. Pakistan might have competition, but I would not call it too much of a Democracy.

Do not forget the 'Airlift of Evil' Pakistan has been screwing us for a long time.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kunduz_airlift

They are still screwing us. Read "Operation Darkheart" page 67

www.amazon.com/Operation-Dark-Heart-Frontlines-Afghanistan/dp/0312612176

Pakistan can close the supply lines. So Fred is probably correct.

Pakistan Closes NATO Supply Line to Afghanistan. Again.
weeklystandard.com/pakistan-closes-nato-supply-line-to-afghanistan.-again./article/27317

Pakistan and China could start some joint ventures. China gets resources and Pakistan gets money and a reliable ally. So long Russia, China, Iran and Pakistan can divide up Afghanistan, this would work. It would also be a very large, dangerous alliance. Pakistan wants at least Pashtunland. Once they get it the Pashtuns would be very important if not key players in Pakistani politics. That might upset current other key players. Nit rocket science, but it would take people, who have been really studying Pakistan to surmise how much friction there would be.

Iran and Pakistan get along on their border although I wonder if Pakistan allows Baluchis to sneak over and shoot things up. then if Iran complains too much they make a show of cracking down, which they like doing because the Baluchis want to be free of Pakistan too.

Iran has an interest in Afghanistan of the 15% Shia. They certainly use them as a manpower pool to fight in Syria. Do they care more than that? Or do they care as much as Beijing cared about the genocide of Chinese in their ally Kampuchea?

If Pakistan to Pashtunland, then Kirghizstan & Turkmenistan would take their respective ethnic chunks and anything more people would let them take. All in all that might leave a rump state or no state at all.

The Chinese want the minerals and would cut the Pakistanis in. They would have to. That and they want an overland road to Iran and any sea port in Pakistan that they use as a base.

India, Australia & the U.S. need Vietnam as an ally.

Malaysia would go with Pakistan at some point unless that alliance was losing.

Russia and China would stay with such an alliance unless internal problems with Muslims get to be too much. Russia certainly pays careful attention to Kazan. That will work out for the foreseeable future. We'll see what demographics does. Changing demographics always has people feeling their oats.

fred said...

Odd that we have not noted that Pakistan most probably knowingly hid Osama Ben Ladin, and we sneaked in and got him without letting Pakistan what we were up to as we invaded their air space

aaa said...

WNU, food for thought. What are the odds that this cut in aid has to do with the Awan family that worked for Debbie Wasserman Shultz (and about 80 other Democratic lawmakers)? It's now being reported that the Awans may have stolen sensitive information from democratic computers, sold it to foreign entities (including Pakistan), and blackmailed the DNC.

Yes, the investigation is still ongoing, but the pieces seem to fit...not only with the possible cut in aid to Pakistan but also with other current events. The entire Awan story stinks, something is going on here.


http://nypost.com/2017/08/19/it-staffers-may-have-compromised-sensitive-data-to-foreign-intelligence/amp/

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/08/18/case-against-wasserman-schultz-ex-it-aide-expands-with-4-count-indictment.html

http://www.sunshinestatenews.com/story/what-key-will-imran-awan-sing-against-debbie-wasserman-schultz

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/article167933277.html

War News Updates Editor said...

aaa,
I read the same reports on the Awans Sunday evening. A lot of speculation, that is why I did not post anything on them yet. As for Pakistan .... I do not see a link. The Awans may become a big story .... but Pakistan, military aid, the Afghan war .... that is at an entirely different level, and no individual or family can change that.

aaa said...

Thanks for the response. The reason I asked is because Pakistan was specifically mentioned as one of the supposed benefactors of this intel. Like you said though, lots of speculation and loose ends. This could just be my anti-DNC bias showing (:

James said...

aaa,
Yes, the thing stinks, but I'm with WNU on this one. To accuse sitting representatives of a major party of the inferred crimes you need much more than what has been reported. Virtually the entire lot (Dem and Rep) in DC are useless and if not criminal, then bordering on it and need to be replaced, but that is not the way of the world.