Living to its reputation, the US House of Representatives decided to block aid to Pakistan.
Really? What "reputation" is that? The one that expectes meaningful assistance in return for shitloads of money?
The previously approved aid would not be released until Pakistan accepts the US dictates. Also, the US Secretary of State should certify to the Congress that Islamabad is “ fully assisting the United States with investigating the existence of an official or unofficial network in Pakistan for Obama bin Laden, including by providing the United States with direct access to Osama bin Laden’s relatives in Pakistan and to Osama bin Laden’s former compound in Abbotabad.”
I know, right? I mean, how unreasonable of the Americans to demand that several billion dollars in aid get us an ally who actually, y'know, helps us with stuff.
(more after the jump...)
The decision is timed with the visit of the US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to India to hold the so-called “Strategic dialogue,” that is largely viewed as a vehicle to surround and isolate Pakistan and to create US-Indo axis to contain People’s Republic of China.
So let's see here: "surround and isolate Pakistan" somehow means that we can "contain People’s Republic of China"? I would've thought that "surround and isolate People’s Republic of China" meant that we can "contain People’s Republic of China". Silly me, confusing Pakistan with the PRC.
Following the failure of arms twisting US tactics against Islamabad, the Indian card is being used to increase the pressure on the civilian dispensation. Earlier, the Obama administration suspended $800 million military aid. Now, the civilian government is not spared. It has dared to show of solidarity with the armed forces of Pakistan.
Here, let me edit this for you: "It has dared to show of solidarity with the armed forces of Pakistan for the first time the nation's entire history without the barrel of a gun being shoved in its ass by the military". Fixed it.
Presently, Pakistan is facing many fronts: the hostile Afghan front, the internal front and the Indian front. Pakistan, which is described the “ most sanctioned US ally” is now gaining the reputation,” the most punished US ally.”
How about we instead label them as "most useless US ally"? Don't like that? How about "most useless vacuum of US aid while pretending to be an ally"? Better? No? What about "largest recipient of US foreign aid while dealing with jihadi misadventures of their own making grown out of religious paranoia, lack of respect for civilian rule and human rights, and continual beligerence against its neighbors"? Are getting any closer?
The Obama administration continues to rely on military force to achieve its foreign policy objectives.
Yeah, because peaceful engagement with the supposedly-allied country housing our most wanted terrorist criminal worked out soooooo well for us for over a decade, eh? Don't worry, I'm sure that MoveOn.org and Michael Moore are ready to man the protest barricades with you.
India is used as a military ally. Ms Hilary Clinton speaks on trade and development but conceals the military aspect of the relationship. The framework of the US-India defence relations includes massive arms deals.
And the framework of the US-Pak relations didn't?! Dear Kettle, you're black. Love, the Pot.
It envisages outsourcing of several function to India, including joint-military operations in third countries, patrolling of sea lanes, rescue operations, cooperation in nuclear and ballistic missile technology and research, and joint operation in combating WMD( Weapons of Mass Destruction).
The obvious joke here is that we've outsourced everything else to India, so why not global defense, too... The truth is, if you pressed the author to actually name a single operation, with date, time, location, and forces involved, for any of the above operations, he couldn't do it. No way, no how, notgonnahappen. It's partisan xenophonic rhetoric built from street whispers into "fact" by editorials like this that are promulgated by "news" organizations whose wide readership and daily trust grow largely out of a lack of alternative, but who contribute more greatly to any problem than they purport to solve.
The Americans should be congratulated for the feat they achieved in handling and taming New Delhi. India has never signed such a comprehensively one-sided agreement with any other country. Every country envies American for such feat especially its traditional ally, the Russian Federation.
The Russian Federation is our traditional ally? Really? I hadn't noticed... (cue grammar note about vague pronouns).
Under the new “strategic partnership,” the US would use India as a puppet state to extend Washington dominance on South Asia in the face of rising China. Evidently, this framework of cooperation is one-sided since it seeks to achieve US objectives in the region by undermine regional peace and security.
Hahahaha... HAHAHAHAHA! HAHAHAHA!! Really?! It's the US agreement with India that's "undermin[ing] regional peace and security". So it's not the ISI funding terrorists blowing up hotels in Mumbai? It's not Pak-supported insurgents trying to "liberate" Kashmir? It's not the madrassas in the borderlands preaching jihad against the west? It's not AQ Khan selling nuke-tech to whoever he damn well pleases? It's not the Pakistani military establishment who let's OBL camp out under their noses for 5 years? It's not Pakistani infiltrators triggering the Kargil War in '99? Y'all were fucking up just fine "undermin[ing] regional peace and security" before we ever showed up.
Following the failure of US "military diplomacy" in Afghanistan, the Obama administration fails to concede defeat. The US militarism is coming to the region through another course and in different form.
1. It hasn't failed. Maybe you haven't noticed, but in 2001 there was a Taliban government in charge. Today there is not. It's not been all unicorns and rainbows, but the Afghans aren't stuck under Sharia law...
2. How much of that failure is due to the safe haven granted the Taliban under Pakistani governments (yes, plural)? (don't believe us... check out this article, or this one.)
Yet, Washington is trying to fool the international community by claiming the so-called strategic “partnership” with India. This is mere rhetoric because there cannot be any sort of partnership between two states with huge military and technological asymmetry.
SO by that logic, (a) there never was a partnership with Pakistan. Y'all just sucked off as much cash you could siphon and then ran away when we actually asked y'all to, y'know, do something. Oh, and (b) find us anyone who can be a US partner given the "huge military and technological asymmetry" we have with, well, the rest of the world, because we actually care about things like national defense, strategic policy, technological R&D (as opposed to the Chinese/Russian/Indian/Pakistani/Nork model of "steal it from the Americans and create our own cheap knockoffs).
If this is what passes for "widely read & trusted daily", then it's no wonder our partnership with Pakistan is well and truly fucked.
By: Brant
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment