This statement is the template to be used for Pakistan soon enough.
Islamic Republic of Pakistan : News, Discussions & Updates
- Thread starter Butter Chicken
- Start date
This statement is the template to be used for Pakistan soon enough.
Yeah I don't think those Vipers are coming to Pakistan. Just my take.
AH-1Z Viper Attack Helicopters Spotted in Amarillo, Texas, With Blacked Out Pakistan Markings
July 22, 2019
By David Cenciotti
Helicopters, Military Aviation
One of the AH-1Z Viper helicopters that made a stop in Amarillo on Jul. 19, 2019. Note the partly covered Pakistan Army markings. (All images: Rodney Bastow)
The helicopters were ready for delivery when the U.S. embargoed sale and transfer to Pakistan.
Two AH-1Z Viper attack helicopters were spotted at Amarillo, Texas, last week. The choppers, serialled 786-064 and 786-066, made a stop at the base where our reader and friend Rodney Bastow photographed them on Jul. 19, 2019. What’s really interesting is the fact that the original “Pakistan Army” markings on the helicopters were partly covered with the word “Pakistan” blacked out.
The Vipers belong to the first batch of AH-1Z helicopters destined to Pakistan Army and were probably on their way from NAS Patuxent River (where they were reportedly stored) to the 309th Aerospace Maintenance And Regeneration Group (AMARG), in Tucson, Arizona, to join the nine helicopters already stored there (examples 786-061, 062, 063, 067, 068, 069, 070, 071, and 072, according to Scramble).
AH-1Z Viper 786-064. (All images: Rodney Bastow)
All the Pakistan Army helicopters will be cocooned, using “spraylat” (a white, opaque, high-tech vinyl plastic compound sprayed) that will protect the airframes and keep the interior temperatures within 15° C: U.S. State Department had approved the sale of 15 AH-1Z Viper to the Pakistan Army along with 1,000 AGM-114R Hellfire II laser-guided air-to-surface missiles in April 2015. The first out of 12 ordered helicopters carried out flight testing from Bell Helicopter Amarillo Assembly Center, Texas, in December 2017.
The Pakistan Army planned to use the AH-1Z to replace its AH-1F/S Cobra attack helicopters, extensively used in CAS (Close Air Support) role as part of Pakistan’s counterinsurgency (COIN) campaign in its northwest regions. The AH-1Z is heavier and better equipped than the AH-1F/S: it carries Lockheed Martin AN/AAQ-30 Target Sight System electro-optical and infrared (EO/IR) pods, Thales TopOwl helmet-mounted display (HMD), BAE AN/ALE-47 chaff/flare countermeasure dispensers, Northrop AN/APR-39C(v2) radar warning receivers (RWR) and Orbital ATK AN/AAR-47 missile warning receivers.
A close up view of the AH-1Z originally destined to the Pakistan Army.
In August 2017, the U.S. announced the first freeze of military aid to Pakistan. At the time, Bell had just transferred the first two Vipers to the U.S. government for delivery to Pakistan via the FMS (Foreign Military Sales) program and additional helicopters were already on the production line. In June 2018, the sale and transfer of AH-1Z helicopters were embargoed. All the 12 AH-1Z will remain at the “boneyard” in Tucson until a decision on their fate is taken.
The AH-1Z serial 786-066.
AH-1Z Viper Attack Helicopters Spotted in Amarillo, Texas, With Blacked Out Pakistan Markings
AH-1Z Viper Attack Helicopters Spotted in Amarillo, Texas, With Blacked Out Pakistan Markings
July 22, 2019
By David Cenciotti
Helicopters, Military Aviation
One of the AH-1Z Viper helicopters that made a stop in Amarillo on Jul. 19, 2019. Note the partly covered Pakistan Army markings. (All images: Rodney Bastow)
The helicopters were ready for delivery when the U.S. embargoed sale and transfer to Pakistan.
Two AH-1Z Viper attack helicopters were spotted at Amarillo, Texas, last week. The choppers, serialled 786-064 and 786-066, made a stop at the base where our reader and friend Rodney Bastow photographed them on Jul. 19, 2019. What’s really interesting is the fact that the original “Pakistan Army” markings on the helicopters were partly covered with the word “Pakistan” blacked out.
The Vipers belong to the first batch of AH-1Z helicopters destined to Pakistan Army and were probably on their way from NAS Patuxent River (where they were reportedly stored) to the 309th Aerospace Maintenance And Regeneration Group (AMARG), in Tucson, Arizona, to join the nine helicopters already stored there (examples 786-061, 062, 063, 067, 068, 069, 070, 071, and 072, according to Scramble).
AH-1Z Viper 786-064. (All images: Rodney Bastow)
All the Pakistan Army helicopters will be cocooned, using “spraylat” (a white, opaque, high-tech vinyl plastic compound sprayed) that will protect the airframes and keep the interior temperatures within 15° C: U.S. State Department had approved the sale of 15 AH-1Z Viper to the Pakistan Army along with 1,000 AGM-114R Hellfire II laser-guided air-to-surface missiles in April 2015. The first out of 12 ordered helicopters carried out flight testing from Bell Helicopter Amarillo Assembly Center, Texas, in December 2017.
The Pakistan Army planned to use the AH-1Z to replace its AH-1F/S Cobra attack helicopters, extensively used in CAS (Close Air Support) role as part of Pakistan’s counterinsurgency (COIN) campaign in its northwest regions. The AH-1Z is heavier and better equipped than the AH-1F/S: it carries Lockheed Martin AN/AAQ-30 Target Sight System electro-optical and infrared (EO/IR) pods, Thales TopOwl helmet-mounted display (HMD), BAE AN/ALE-47 chaff/flare countermeasure dispensers, Northrop AN/APR-39C(v2) radar warning receivers (RWR) and Orbital ATK AN/AAR-47 missile warning receivers.
A close up view of the AH-1Z originally destined to the Pakistan Army.
In August 2017, the U.S. announced the first freeze of military aid to Pakistan. At the time, Bell had just transferred the first two Vipers to the U.S. government for delivery to Pakistan via the FMS (Foreign Military Sales) program and additional helicopters were already on the production line. In June 2018, the sale and transfer of AH-1Z helicopters were embargoed. All the 12 AH-1Z will remain at the “boneyard” in Tucson until a decision on their fate is taken.
The AH-1Z serial 786-066.
AH-1Z Viper Attack Helicopters Spotted in Amarillo, Texas, With Blacked Out Pakistan Markings
Yeah that's how we have operated so far, kiss a-ss, get kicked, kiss more a-ss.
Let's see if this changes, Modi have all the mandate and Trump is yet to get second term, Trade war is creating more problems for him with his constituency. Cancellation of few defence deals and kicking US out from next MMRCA should be the next logical steps. Otherwise be ready to gulp down more BS and leave more on table in every negotiation.
Surrendering to a bully is never a good idea.
Trump is no fool & this is why he deliberately lied about Modi’s Kashmir request
India brought this upon itself. In the end, Modi may very well end up becoming a victim of his own successful marketing campaign.
With bated breath we await sunrise in Washington DC to see what President Donald Trump will do next. Will he double down on his claim that Prime Minister Narendra Modi asked him to mediate on Kashmir? Will he be enraged that the Ministry of External Affairs has tagged him and effectively said he lied, and then repeated it in Parliament today?
Let’s be clear about two things: first, this will blow over until the next storm in a tea cup; and second, no country – except Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar – has found reliable ways to deal with Trump. Let us be equally clear that Modi has never asked Trump or any external interloper to interfere in bilateral matters. Modi is a stickler for rules and follows the brief his bureaucrats prepare for him to the T. Trump is no one’s fool, although the Democrats would like you to believe that. Assuming that Trump is a fool is the biggest mistake one can make, something the Democrats don’t seem to understand even after their rout in the 2016 US presidential election.
That said, there is no doubt Trump is lying (no, he didn’t misunderstand what Modi may or may not have told him; he is deliberately lying). The question is why? We should be worrying not about ‘what’ he said (as Indians are at the moment), but ‘why’ he said it. The ‘what’ is not important, the ‘why’ is critical. I have discussed the more macro reasons here, but what we need to do now is understand how this episode will play out.
Let us be clear, the Indian economy is in doldrums, and the standard Indian practice has been to play ostrich at home, and the perpetually-petulant-victim abroad. In effect, our failure at domestic policy leaves our diplomats with few choices – none of them viable. But what is inexcusable is that they have either failed to read the signs in advance or haven’t been heard at the top.
Also read: After trade war, Trump wants to punish India for Russian defence purchases
Since Barack Obama’s second term (2012-16), the signs of India fatigue have only been growing, be it on patents, or a host of other issues. Trump has simply distilled that fatigue and accelerated its effects. To start with, he refused to come to India for the Republic Day celebrations citing “scheduling constraints”. That he took a month to decline the invitation should make it clear that there were no prior commitments, just higher priorities.
He has travelled to Saudi Arabia and executed a remarkable about-turn of his Saudi hate. The Saudis had to sign an agreement for US$110 billion in immediate weapons purchases with a total of US$350 billion committed over 10 years. Trump then shifted his attack to Qatar, calling it “a funder of terrorism at a very high level”. The Qataris had to buy their way out, agreeing to spend billions of dollars within months, be it in weapons purchases or oil refining. The three incidents – turning down India’s invitation, travelling to Saudi Arabia, and training and then un-training his guns on Qatar – should have flashed warning signs to India.
Yet, what did India do? It had Ivanka Trump speak at a leadership conference. The fact that India thinks it can buy off a president with intangible platitudes says a lot about how badly our assessment has gone wrong. And yet, we still fail to learn the lessons. The initial 2+2 dialogue of defence and foreign ministers was ostensibly postponed, again due to prior commitments. It pretty much forced India to sign up for COMCASA and LEMOA in order to get the 2+2 going. But there again, these foundational agreements haven’t translated into any tangible gain for the US. This is why we had Trump tweet about tariffs once more (he initially raised India’s duties on Harley-Davidson in his 2017 State of the Union speech).
Also read: Trump’s vanity makes PM Modi look stronger — and gives him a chance to fix economy at home
What was all this meant to signal to Trump? Tweet on tariffs, you won’t get anything; we’ll keep throwing sweet nothings your and Ivanka’s way. But attack us on core interests like Kashmir as Trubnikov did, actively undermine Indian interests as Kabulov had, and you would get US$9 billion. Trump clearly internalised this message. In the end, there is no conclusion other than that India has brought this upon itself. It should have read the warning signs, it didn’t. There should be no doubt that Trump has done this to extract a price. How steep that price will be, shall be determined by what Trump believes: the reality of the Indian economy or Modi’s hype. In the end, Modi may very well end up becoming a victim of his own successful marketing campaign.
The author is a senior fellow at the Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies. He tweets @iyervval. Views are personal.
Source: Trump is no fool & this is why he deliberately lied about Modi's Kashmir request
India brought this upon itself. In the end, Modi may very well end up becoming a victim of his own successful marketing campaign.
With bated breath we await sunrise in Washington DC to see what President Donald Trump will do next. Will he double down on his claim that Prime Minister Narendra Modi asked him to mediate on Kashmir? Will he be enraged that the Ministry of External Affairs has tagged him and effectively said he lied, and then repeated it in Parliament today?
Raveesh Kumar✔@MEAIndia
Let’s be clear about two things: first, this will blow over until the next storm in a tea cup; and second, no country – except Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar – has found reliable ways to deal with Trump. Let us be equally clear that Modi has never asked Trump or any external interloper to interfere in bilateral matters. Modi is a stickler for rules and follows the brief his bureaucrats prepare for him to the T. Trump is no one’s fool, although the Democrats would like you to believe that. Assuming that Trump is a fool is the biggest mistake one can make, something the Democrats don’t seem to understand even after their rout in the 2016 US presidential election.
That said, there is no doubt Trump is lying (no, he didn’t misunderstand what Modi may or may not have told him; he is deliberately lying). The question is why? We should be worrying not about ‘what’ he said (as Indians are at the moment), but ‘why’ he said it. The ‘what’ is not important, the ‘why’ is critical. I have discussed the more macro reasons here, but what we need to do now is understand how this episode will play out.
Let us be clear, the Indian economy is in doldrums, and the standard Indian practice has been to play ostrich at home, and the perpetually-petulant-victim abroad. In effect, our failure at domestic policy leaves our diplomats with few choices – none of them viable. But what is inexcusable is that they have either failed to read the signs in advance or haven’t been heard at the top.
Also read: After trade war, Trump wants to punish India for Russian defence purchases
Since Barack Obama’s second term (2012-16), the signs of India fatigue have only been growing, be it on patents, or a host of other issues. Trump has simply distilled that fatigue and accelerated its effects. To start with, he refused to come to India for the Republic Day celebrations citing “scheduling constraints”. That he took a month to decline the invitation should make it clear that there were no prior commitments, just higher priorities.
He has travelled to Saudi Arabia and executed a remarkable about-turn of his Saudi hate. The Saudis had to sign an agreement for US$110 billion in immediate weapons purchases with a total of US$350 billion committed over 10 years. Trump then shifted his attack to Qatar, calling it “a funder of terrorism at a very high level”. The Qataris had to buy their way out, agreeing to spend billions of dollars within months, be it in weapons purchases or oil refining. The three incidents – turning down India’s invitation, travelling to Saudi Arabia, and training and then un-training his guns on Qatar – should have flashed warning signs to India.
Yet, what did India do? It had Ivanka Trump speak at a leadership conference. The fact that India thinks it can buy off a president with intangible platitudes says a lot about how badly our assessment has gone wrong. And yet, we still fail to learn the lessons. The initial 2+2 dialogue of defence and foreign ministers was ostensibly postponed, again due to prior commitments. It pretty much forced India to sign up for COMCASA and LEMOA in order to get the 2+2 going. But there again, these foundational agreements haven’t translated into any tangible gain for the US. This is why we had Trump tweet about tariffs once more (he initially raised India’s duties on Harley-Davidson in his 2017 State of the Union speech).
Donald J. Trump✔@realDonaldTrump
Meanwhile, Trump saw the highly hostile statements on Kashmir, clearly sanctioned from the very top, emanating from Moscow. Former Russian Ambassador to India, Vyacheslav Trubnikov, a confidante of Russia’s Afghanistan point person Zamir Kabulov, had said, “the solution to Afghanistan lies in Kashmir“. Far from any backlash, India proceeded to give Russia close to US$9 billion worth of arms deals for the S-400 and second Akula class submarine. Contrast this with Pakistan. Pakistan can offer Trump minor tangibles in Afghanistan, which have a disproportionate political effect back in the US (Pakistan understands this well). Pakistan has Trump in a monopsony situation by being the only supply route, with Russia and Iran having been alienated.
Also read: Trump’s vanity makes PM Modi look stronger — and gives him a chance to fix economy at home
What was all this meant to signal to Trump? Tweet on tariffs, you won’t get anything; we’ll keep throwing sweet nothings your and Ivanka’s way. But attack us on core interests like Kashmir as Trubnikov did, actively undermine Indian interests as Kabulov had, and you would get US$9 billion. Trump clearly internalised this message. In the end, there is no conclusion other than that India has brought this upon itself. It should have read the warning signs, it didn’t. There should be no doubt that Trump has done this to extract a price. How steep that price will be, shall be determined by what Trump believes: the reality of the Indian economy or Modi’s hype. In the end, Modi may very well end up becoming a victim of his own successful marketing campaign.
The author is a senior fellow at the Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies. He tweets @iyervval. Views are personal.
Source: Trump is no fool & this is why he deliberately lied about Modi's Kashmir request
Former US Diplomats "Worry" Trump's Claim On Kashmir May Hit Indo-US Ties
Former State Department diplomat Alyssa Ayres, who is now with the Council for Foreign Relations think tank, said Donald Trump did not come prepared for the meeting. "I am worried about the President's lack of preparation for his meetings, and his impromptu statements," she said.
All India | Press Trust of India | Updated: July 23, 2019 08:27 IST
Donald Trump's claim that PM Modi asked him to mediate on Kashmir may hit India-US ties
WASHINGTON : President Donald Trump's claim on Monday that Prime Minister Narendra Modi sought his mediation on the Kashmir issue will "damage" Indo-US relations, former diplomats said. New Delhi has already rejected Donald Trump's claim, which he made during a meeting with Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan, saying India's consistent position has been that all outstanding issues with Pakistan are discussed only bilaterally.
Former US Ambassador to India Richard Verma told news agency Press Trust of India, "The President did a lot of damage today. His comments on Kashmir and Afghanistan were way off the mark."
According to Husain Haqqani, a former Pakistan Ambassador to the US, President Trump would soon learn the complexity of South Asian issues. "President Trump wants Pakistan's help with a deal on Afghanistan and has dangled the prospect of help with what he thinks Pakistan wants," he said.
"He praised Imran Khan like he praised North Korea's Kim Jong-un. This is his standard procedure in trying to get a deal," he noted.
"Just as he has not got a deal on the Korean peninsula, he will soon learn that South Asia's historical issues are also more complex than fashioning a real estate deal," Mr Haqqani told news agency PTI.
Both Mr Haqqani and Mr Verma were responding to questions on President Trump's remarks that he is ready to mediate between India and Pakistan on the Kashmir issue.
"I was with Prime Minister Modi two weeks ago and we talked about this subject (Kashmir). And he actually said, "would you like to be a mediator or arbitrator?" I said, "where?" (PM Modi said) "Kashmir"," Donald Trump claimed during his talks with Imran Khan, their first since the latter came to power in August, 2018.
"Because this has been going on for many, many years. I am surprised that how long. It has been going on (for long)," he said, with Imran Khan responding "70 years".
"I think they (Indians) would like to see it resolved. I think you would like to see it resolved. And if I can help, I would love to be a mediator. It should be....we have two incredible countries that are very, very smart with very smart leadership, (and they) can't solve a problem like that. But if you would want me to mediate or arbitrate, I would be willing to do that," Donald Trump said.
"So all those issues should be resolved. So, he (PM Modi) has to ask me the same thing. So maybe we'll speak to him. Or I'll speak to him and we'll see if we can do something," Donald Trump said.
Imran Khan welcomed these remarks. "President, I can tell you that, right now, you would have the prayers of over a billion people if you can mediate and resolve this issue," he said.
In New Delhi, The Ministry of External Affairs was quick to deny that Prime Minister Modi ever asked for a mediation on Kashmir. "We have seen President Trump's remarks to the press that he is ready to mediate, if requested by India and Pakistan, on the Kashmir issue. No such request has been made by the Prime Minister to the US President," MEA spokesperson Raveesh Kumar said.
Mr Kumar also reiterated India's clear stand on it, saying: "It has been India's consistent position that all outstanding issues with Pakistan are discussed only bilaterally. Any engagement with Pakistan would require an end to cross border terrorism. The Simla Agreement and the Lahore Declaration provide the basis to resolve all issues between India and Pakistan bilaterally."
Former State Department diplomat Alyssa Ayres, who is now with the Council for Foreign Relations think tank, said Donald Trump did not come prepared for the meeting.
"I am worried about the President's lack of preparation for his meetings, and his impromptu statements. His statement on Kashmir today (that PM Modi sought mediation from Trump) was categorically denied by the Indian government within hours," Ms Ayres told news agency PTI.
"Diplomacy requires careful attention to detail, to language, and to the facts of history. We did not see that today," she said in response to a question.
Nicholas Burns, who served as under Secretary of State for Political Affairs under the Bush Administration and played a key role in the Indo-US civil nuclear deal, said the Indian government has been consistent for many years in rejecting the US as a mediator in the Kashmir dispute.
"Pakistan is in favour. Difficult for the US to consider if Delhi remains opposed," Mr Burns said.
Former US Diplomats "Worry" Trump's Claim On Kashmir May Hit Indo-US Ties
Former State Department diplomat Alyssa Ayres, who is now with the Council for Foreign Relations think tank, said Donald Trump did not come prepared for the meeting. "I am worried about the President's lack of preparation for his meetings, and his impromptu statements," she said.
All India | Press Trust of India | Updated: July 23, 2019 08:27 IST
Donald Trump's claim that PM Modi asked him to mediate on Kashmir may hit India-US ties
WASHINGTON : President Donald Trump's claim on Monday that Prime Minister Narendra Modi sought his mediation on the Kashmir issue will "damage" Indo-US relations, former diplomats said. New Delhi has already rejected Donald Trump's claim, which he made during a meeting with Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan, saying India's consistent position has been that all outstanding issues with Pakistan are discussed only bilaterally.
Former US Ambassador to India Richard Verma told news agency Press Trust of India, "The President did a lot of damage today. His comments on Kashmir and Afghanistan were way off the mark."
According to Husain Haqqani, a former Pakistan Ambassador to the US, President Trump would soon learn the complexity of South Asian issues. "President Trump wants Pakistan's help with a deal on Afghanistan and has dangled the prospect of help with what he thinks Pakistan wants," he said.
"He praised Imran Khan like he praised North Korea's Kim Jong-un. This is his standard procedure in trying to get a deal," he noted.
"Just as he has not got a deal on the Korean peninsula, he will soon learn that South Asia's historical issues are also more complex than fashioning a real estate deal," Mr Haqqani told news agency PTI.
Both Mr Haqqani and Mr Verma were responding to questions on President Trump's remarks that he is ready to mediate between India and Pakistan on the Kashmir issue.
"I was with Prime Minister Modi two weeks ago and we talked about this subject (Kashmir). And he actually said, "would you like to be a mediator or arbitrator?" I said, "where?" (PM Modi said) "Kashmir"," Donald Trump claimed during his talks with Imran Khan, their first since the latter came to power in August, 2018.
"Because this has been going on for many, many years. I am surprised that how long. It has been going on (for long)," he said, with Imran Khan responding "70 years".
"I think they (Indians) would like to see it resolved. I think you would like to see it resolved. And if I can help, I would love to be a mediator. It should be....we have two incredible countries that are very, very smart with very smart leadership, (and they) can't solve a problem like that. But if you would want me to mediate or arbitrate, I would be willing to do that," Donald Trump said.
"So all those issues should be resolved. So, he (PM Modi) has to ask me the same thing. So maybe we'll speak to him. Or I'll speak to him and we'll see if we can do something," Donald Trump said.
Imran Khan welcomed these remarks. "President, I can tell you that, right now, you would have the prayers of over a billion people if you can mediate and resolve this issue," he said.
In New Delhi, The Ministry of External Affairs was quick to deny that Prime Minister Modi ever asked for a mediation on Kashmir. "We have seen President Trump's remarks to the press that he is ready to mediate, if requested by India and Pakistan, on the Kashmir issue. No such request has been made by the Prime Minister to the US President," MEA spokesperson Raveesh Kumar said.
Mr Kumar also reiterated India's clear stand on it, saying: "It has been India's consistent position that all outstanding issues with Pakistan are discussed only bilaterally. Any engagement with Pakistan would require an end to cross border terrorism. The Simla Agreement and the Lahore Declaration provide the basis to resolve all issues between India and Pakistan bilaterally."
Former State Department diplomat Alyssa Ayres, who is now with the Council for Foreign Relations think tank, said Donald Trump did not come prepared for the meeting.
"I am worried about the President's lack of preparation for his meetings, and his impromptu statements. His statement on Kashmir today (that PM Modi sought mediation from Trump) was categorically denied by the Indian government within hours," Ms Ayres told news agency PTI.
"Diplomacy requires careful attention to detail, to language, and to the facts of history. We did not see that today," she said in response to a question.
Nicholas Burns, who served as under Secretary of State for Political Affairs under the Bush Administration and played a key role in the Indo-US civil nuclear deal, said the Indian government has been consistent for many years in rejecting the US as a mediator in the Kashmir dispute.
"Pakistan is in favour. Difficult for the US to consider if Delhi remains opposed," Mr Burns said.
Former US Diplomats "Worry" Trump's Claim On Kashmir May Hit Indo-US Ties
well it has demolished us and pushed us into great depression that Modi did this. #gomodigo
Damage control is getting real......
No record of Trump-Modi conversation on Kashmir: White House sources
Donald Trump falsely claimed that he had been asked by PM Narendra Modi to mediate in the Kashmir issue. White House reportedly has no official record to prove this claim even as India has outrightly rejected it.
Written By: Zee Media Bureau
Edited By: Shubhodeep Chakravarty
Updated: Jul 23, 2019, 17:06 PM IST
President Trump(File Photo)
Donald Trump's claim that Prime Minister Narendra Modi had asked him to mediate in the Kashmir issue was not only strongly denied by New Delhi but has also been exposed by sources in the White House who say that there is no record of the said conversation in the matter.
On Monday, US President Trump had made the claim that PM Modi had asked him to mediate when the two leaders had met 'two weeks ago.' Trump was speaking to members of the press after his meeting with and in the presence of Pakistan PM Imran Khan. While he said that the US is committed to lasting peace in South Asia, he also said that he would love to mediate in the Kashmir issue. ""I was with Prime Minister Modi two weeks ago and we talked about this subject and he actually said 'Would you like to be a mediator or arbitrator', I said 'Where', He said 'Kashmir'. Because this has been going on for many, many years... I think they would like to see it resolved and you (Imran Khan) would like to see it resolved. If I can help, I would love to be a mediator," he claimed.
The rebuttal came swiftly from India's foreign ministry which underlined that no such conversation had ever taken place between Modi and Trump, and that India remains steadfast in its belief that Kashmir is a bilateral issue with no need of interference from any other country.
Sources in the White House revealed a day later that there were no official records to prove that Trump was speaking the truth and that he and Modi did discuss the possibility of US mediation in the matter. This would serve as yet another embarrassment for the US with several Congressmen already blasting Trump for his most-recent diplomatic gaffe. "I just apologized to Indian Ambassador Harsh Shringla for Trump's amateurish and embarrassing mistake," Congressman Brad Sherman tweeted. "Everyone who knows anything about foreign policy in South Asia knows that #India consistently opposes third-party mediation re Kashmir. Everyone knows PM Modi would never suggest such a thing (sic)."
Interestingly, the official statement released by the White House just moments after Trump's controversial claim made no mention of Kashmir at all. Several other US lawmakers, however, tweeted that Kashmir is a bilateral issue and there has never been any change on this from New Delhi's side.
‘Modi Would Never Suggest it’: US Congressman Calls Trump’s Kashmir Statement Amateurish, Delusional
No record of Trump-Modi conversation on Kashmir: White House sources
Donald Trump falsely claimed that he had been asked by PM Narendra Modi to mediate in the Kashmir issue. White House reportedly has no official record to prove this claim even as India has outrightly rejected it.
Written By: Zee Media Bureau
Edited By: Shubhodeep Chakravarty
Updated: Jul 23, 2019, 17:06 PM IST
President Trump(File Photo)
Donald Trump's claim that Prime Minister Narendra Modi had asked him to mediate in the Kashmir issue was not only strongly denied by New Delhi but has also been exposed by sources in the White House who say that there is no record of the said conversation in the matter.
On Monday, US President Trump had made the claim that PM Modi had asked him to mediate when the two leaders had met 'two weeks ago.' Trump was speaking to members of the press after his meeting with and in the presence of Pakistan PM Imran Khan. While he said that the US is committed to lasting peace in South Asia, he also said that he would love to mediate in the Kashmir issue. ""I was with Prime Minister Modi two weeks ago and we talked about this subject and he actually said 'Would you like to be a mediator or arbitrator', I said 'Where', He said 'Kashmir'. Because this has been going on for many, many years... I think they would like to see it resolved and you (Imran Khan) would like to see it resolved. If I can help, I would love to be a mediator," he claimed.
The rebuttal came swiftly from India's foreign ministry which underlined that no such conversation had ever taken place between Modi and Trump, and that India remains steadfast in its belief that Kashmir is a bilateral issue with no need of interference from any other country.
Sources in the White House revealed a day later that there were no official records to prove that Trump was speaking the truth and that he and Modi did discuss the possibility of US mediation in the matter. This would serve as yet another embarrassment for the US with several Congressmen already blasting Trump for his most-recent diplomatic gaffe. "I just apologized to Indian Ambassador Harsh Shringla for Trump's amateurish and embarrassing mistake," Congressman Brad Sherman tweeted. "Everyone who knows anything about foreign policy in South Asia knows that #India consistently opposes third-party mediation re Kashmir. Everyone knows PM Modi would never suggest such a thing (sic)."
Interestingly, the official statement released by the White House just moments after Trump's controversial claim made no mention of Kashmir at all. Several other US lawmakers, however, tweeted that Kashmir is a bilateral issue and there has never been any change on this from New Delhi's side.
‘Modi Would Never Suggest it’: US Congressman Calls Trump’s Kashmir Statement Amateurish, Delusional
Congressman Brad Sherman calls Donald Trump's Kashmir mediation claim 'delusional', apologises to Indian envoy
India, FP Staff, Jul 23, 2019 10:24:18 IST
File image of Congressman Brad Sherman. Reuters.
Hours after President Donald Trump claimed that Narendra Modi asked him to mediate in the Kashmir dispute, US Congressman Brad Sherman in a tweet said that everyone knows the Indian prime minister would never suggest third-party mediation on Kashmir. Sherman said that he "apologised" to the Indian ambassador to the US for the president's 'embarrassing comments'.
Calling the US president's remarks on Kashmir issue "amateurish" and "delusional", Sherman said that anybody who understands South Asian foreign policy would know that such a request was not only impossible to come from India, but also that Trump's comments were embarrassing for the United States.
"Everyone who knows anything about foreign policy in South Asia knows that India consistently opposes third-party mediation re Kashmir. Everyone knows PM Modi would never suggest such a thing. Trump's statement is amateurish and delusional. And embarrassing," tweeted Sherman.
Sherman's remarks came hours after Trump said that Modi had asked him to act as a mediator to resolve the Kashmir issue. "So I was with Prime Minister Narendra Modi two weeks ago and we talked about this subject. And he actually said, would you actually like to be a mediator or arbitrator? Did I say, where? He said because this has been going for many, many years. I was surprised at how long it has been going on," said Trump, who was hosting Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan at the White House.
"It should be resolved, so he has to think the same thing, so maybe I will speak to him and we will see what we can do," he added.
Who is Brad Sherman?
Sherman represents California's San Fernando Valley and has been in the US House of Representatives since 1997, serving his 11th term in Congress.
Sherman, who has also served as the Ranking Member of the Asia Pacific Subcommittee in the House Foreign Affairs Committee, holds vast experience on India-US ties and the situation in the subcontinent over the years. Sherman had also batted for reducing US aid to Pakistan citing the local government's insincerity in dealing with terrorism.
"We have relations with I think close to 200 countries. The default position is we don't give them money. So those who suggest aid to Pakistan have got to show that there is a strong justification for doing so. The evidence is not encouraging. General Pervez Musharraf spoke on television in February about how Pakistan supported - provided support for Lashkar-e-Taiba, also known as LeT, and to the JeM, and essentially said terrorism was fine as long as it is directed at India," Sherman said.
Arguing in favour of pulling the plug on constant US monetary support to Pakistan, that started in the wake of the war in Afghanistan, Sherman said, "Regardless of how we answer the friend or foe question, our relationship with Pakistan is important. But keep in mind, you would think we would only provide aid to those countries where we don't have to ask the question: Friend or foe?... Providing more assistance to a government that has supported terrorists and has shown itself not very capable or serious about combating terrorism may not be the very best use of taxpayer money," Sherman had argued.
He was also the US lawmaker to have led an effort along with Congressmen Ted Poe and Eni Faleomavaega to request that Congressional leadership invite Prime Minister Narendra Modi to address a joint session of Congress during Modi's June 2016 visit to the United States.
Sherman also introduced an Amendment to the US Constitution, that seeks to expand defence cooperation between the United States and India. The legislative proposal to the House FY 2020 to amend the National Defense Authorisation Act (NDAA) that would greatly enhance the US-India relationship, was co-sponsored by Congressman Joe Wilson, Ami Bera, Ted Yoho, George Holding, Ed Case, and Raja Krishnamoorthi. The amendment, which called upon the executive branch to expand defence ties with India, was passed in the House of Representatives this month.
Apart from foreign policy, Sherman, who was a tax law specialist by profession, is known as a strong advocate for fiscal responsibility, and a balanced budget including social welfare policies.
Congressman Brad Sherman calls Donald Trump's Kashmir mediation claim 'delusional', apologises to Indian envoy - Firstpost
India, FP Staff, Jul 23, 2019 10:24:18 IST
File image of Congressman Brad Sherman. Reuters.
Hours after President Donald Trump claimed that Narendra Modi asked him to mediate in the Kashmir dispute, US Congressman Brad Sherman in a tweet said that everyone knows the Indian prime minister would never suggest third-party mediation on Kashmir. Sherman said that he "apologised" to the Indian ambassador to the US for the president's 'embarrassing comments'.
Calling the US president's remarks on Kashmir issue "amateurish" and "delusional", Sherman said that anybody who understands South Asian foreign policy would know that such a request was not only impossible to come from India, but also that Trump's comments were embarrassing for the United States.
"Everyone who knows anything about foreign policy in South Asia knows that India consistently opposes third-party mediation re Kashmir. Everyone knows PM Modi would never suggest such a thing. Trump's statement is amateurish and delusional. And embarrassing," tweeted Sherman.
Sherman's remarks came hours after Trump said that Modi had asked him to act as a mediator to resolve the Kashmir issue. "So I was with Prime Minister Narendra Modi two weeks ago and we talked about this subject. And he actually said, would you actually like to be a mediator or arbitrator? Did I say, where? He said because this has been going for many, many years. I was surprised at how long it has been going on," said Trump, who was hosting Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan at the White House.
"It should be resolved, so he has to think the same thing, so maybe I will speak to him and we will see what we can do," he added.
Who is Brad Sherman?
Sherman represents California's San Fernando Valley and has been in the US House of Representatives since 1997, serving his 11th term in Congress.
Sherman, who has also served as the Ranking Member of the Asia Pacific Subcommittee in the House Foreign Affairs Committee, holds vast experience on India-US ties and the situation in the subcontinent over the years. Sherman had also batted for reducing US aid to Pakistan citing the local government's insincerity in dealing with terrorism.
"We have relations with I think close to 200 countries. The default position is we don't give them money. So those who suggest aid to Pakistan have got to show that there is a strong justification for doing so. The evidence is not encouraging. General Pervez Musharraf spoke on television in February about how Pakistan supported - provided support for Lashkar-e-Taiba, also known as LeT, and to the JeM, and essentially said terrorism was fine as long as it is directed at India," Sherman said.
Arguing in favour of pulling the plug on constant US monetary support to Pakistan, that started in the wake of the war in Afghanistan, Sherman said, "Regardless of how we answer the friend or foe question, our relationship with Pakistan is important. But keep in mind, you would think we would only provide aid to those countries where we don't have to ask the question: Friend or foe?... Providing more assistance to a government that has supported terrorists and has shown itself not very capable or serious about combating terrorism may not be the very best use of taxpayer money," Sherman had argued.
He was also the US lawmaker to have led an effort along with Congressmen Ted Poe and Eni Faleomavaega to request that Congressional leadership invite Prime Minister Narendra Modi to address a joint session of Congress during Modi's June 2016 visit to the United States.
Sherman also introduced an Amendment to the US Constitution, that seeks to expand defence cooperation between the United States and India. The legislative proposal to the House FY 2020 to amend the National Defense Authorisation Act (NDAA) that would greatly enhance the US-India relationship, was co-sponsored by Congressman Joe Wilson, Ami Bera, Ted Yoho, George Holding, Ed Case, and Raja Krishnamoorthi. The amendment, which called upon the executive branch to expand defence ties with India, was passed in the House of Representatives this month.
Apart from foreign policy, Sherman, who was a tax law specialist by profession, is known as a strong advocate for fiscal responsibility, and a balanced budget including social welfare policies.
Congressman Brad Sherman calls Donald Trump's Kashmir mediation claim 'delusional', apologises to Indian envoy - Firstpost
Ooof scathing. Realisation came too damn late, but better late than never.
Pak Is China's "Vassal", Imran Khan Xi's "Jester": Ex-Pentagon Official
Former Pentagon official Michael Rubin said Imran Khan's US visit "should be seen in the same light as (Donald) Trump's meetings with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un..."
World | ANI | Updated: July 23, 2019 17:53 IST
"Pakistan is China's vassal, and Imran Khan is Xi Jinping's jester," an ex-Pentagon official said
Washington: An ex-Pentagon official, Michael Rubin, warned the United States against falling prey to Pakistan's latest bid to revive relations, stating that the South Asian country's Prime Minister Imran Khan did not seek a new partnership, but aimed at continuing a pattern of duplicity, "the cost of which can be counted in billions of dollars of wasted aid, Chinese backslapping, and American body bags."
Rubin elaborated on this observation in an editorial written for an American magazine, The National Interest.
"Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan hopes that his visit to the White House today will jumpstart relations with the United States after years of tension. Within the US political context, President Donald Trump is a polarising figure and his political opponents usually blame him exclusively for all ills on the international stage. When it comes to Pakistan, however, they should not. Pakistan's problems are made in Pakistan and Trump should continue the recent bipartisan consensus to hold Islamabad responsible," Rubin stated.
He then charted the course of the US-Pakistan relationship, which saw Islamabad become a US ally shortly after its creation in 1947 "largely because Jawaharlal Nehru rejected US partnership."
"As India drifted closer to the Soviet Union, Pakistan grew in US strategic calculations. Between 1954 and 1965, Pakistan received more than USD one billion in arms sales and defence assistance, a huge amount for the time. Cooperation only increased after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. It was not long until Pakistan became the third-largest US aid recipient, after Israel and Egypt," Rubin added.
"Simply put, eliminating the Taliban was not a Pakistani objective and, at best, Islamabad was agnostic on Al Qaeda," said Michael Rubin
The American Enterprise Institute's resident scholar, however, highlighted that despite the close cooperation with Washington, Pakistan grew fiercely anti-American. He listed Pakistan's nuclear ambitions as one of the reasons.
"Pakistan has a knack for always labelling India the aggressor even when Pakistan - or the terrorists it shelters and funds - start wars. When war between Pakistan and India erupted in 1965 and again in 1971, Pakistan demanded the United States come to its aid. Washington instead chose neutrality and placed an arms embargo on both sides. Pakistani leaders saw this as betrayal since India was larger and had greater resources. The bitterness of that time colours Pakistani anti-Americanism today," Rubin wrote.
"Pakistan's nuclear ambitions contributed to the tension. Pakistan initiated its nuclear program in 1955 and participated in the Eisenhower administration's 'Atoms for Peace' program. A decade later Pakistan inaugurated her first nuclear reactor with US assistance. Pakistani leaders long kept their desire to acquire nuclear weapons private but that changed in 1965," he stated.
"That was the year that Pakistani politician Zulfikar Ali Bhutto declared: 'If India builds the bomb, we will eat grass and live, can even go hungry. But we will get one for our own. We have no alternative.' Still, aside from Bhutto's outburst, the Pakistani government was willing to tell American officials what they wanted to hear: 'Pakistan will neither acquire nor produce a nuclear bomb,' Zia ul-Haq said. His formula - technology but no bomb - became the mantra for states like North Korea and perhaps also Iran, which sought covert programs. It also became the reason that an entire generation of American officials began to see Pakistani officials as duplicitous," Rubin wrote.
The Gwadar Port today is solidly among China's 'string of pearls', the former Pentagon official said
"Pakistan's overt drive toward and later acquisition of nuclear weapons led to the periodic imposition of US sanctions suspended or lifted only when Washington needed something from Islamabad. This reinforced the perception among Pakistani officials and broader society that the United States was a fair-weather friend and a selfish partner," the scholar and former Pentagon official said.
"The coup de grace for anti-Americanism, however, was the decision Pakistani military and intelligence leaders took upon East Pakistan (Bangladesh) loss in 1971 to embrace and promote Islamist extremism within Pakistani society as a glue to hold together Pakistan's ethnically-diverse society. The number of madrasas teaching radicalism exploded. It was Pakistan's fear of ethnic (and specifically Pashtun) nationalism that led Pakistan to exclusively support Islamist groups among the anti-Soviet resistance in 1979 when Pakistani authorities monopolised the distribution of aid," he stated.
"After the September 11, 2001, terror attacks, the United States needed Pakistan desperately. On September 22, 2001, Bush waived nuclear sanctions and declared Pakistan 'America's closest non-NATO ally.' Former president Pervez Musharraf publicly pledged to 'unstinted cooperation' to the United States in the fight against terrorism but, privately, Pakistan continued its support for the Taliban," he added.
"Simply put, eliminating the Taliban was not a Pakistani objective and, at best, Islamabad was agnostic on Al Qaeda. Musharraf partnered with the United States for four reasons: security, economic revival, the safety of nuclear and missile assets, and the hope that the United States would support Pakistan on the Kashmir dispute," Rubin stated, noting that Pakistan's double-game on terror spelt deadly for the United States. It also de-stabilises South Asia and risks catalysing Pakistan's descent into state failure. He also outlined Pakistan's sponsorship of terrorism.
Pakistan has a knack for always labelling India the aggressor even when Pakistan - or the terrorists it shelters and funds - start wars, the former Pentagon official said
"The US Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC) has declared that 143 Pakistan-based individuals or organizations were guilty of engaging in terror activity. State Department terror lists are populated with Pakistan-based or supported groups, even if diplomatic considerations obscure mention of Pakistan in many of their profiles. Almost two thousand American servicemen have died in Afghanistan as a result of Taliban attacks and, by extension, Pakistani actions. In short, this has put Pakistan on the same level as - or even a level above - Iran when it comes to responsibility for the deaths of American servicemen. That alone is the reason not to forgive Pakistan or buy into the fiction that Pakistani authorities are not culpable," Rubin warned.
"Nor should Congress or the White House do anything to obscure Pakistan's aggression by proxy toward India and Afghanistan. This year Pakistani-backed terrorists have taken their terrorism to a new level. On January 22, 2019, Taliban terrorists - supported by Pakistan - attacked an Afghan army camp in Wardak and killed more than 120 people," he added.
He also mentioned the February 14 Pulwama terror attack, which claimed the lives of over 40 CRPF personnel.
"In February 2019, a member of the Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) terrorist group attacked a police convoy in Pulwama... killing forty people. In just the past three years, there have been at least seven major attacks on Indian targets by Pakistan-based terrorists. Certainly, Pakistani groups have repeatedly promised to crack down on terrorism, but the record is clear: they lie," Rubin elaborated.
"Prominent ministers and allies of former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, as well as his brother Shehbaz Sharif, openly rallied with banned militants. While Trump may praise Pakistan's recent arrest of the mastermind of the Mumbai terror attacks, he ignores that Pakistani authorities have repeatedly arrested Hafiz Saeed - and always released him once the spotlight moved on," the former Pentagon official pointed out.
"As the United States prepares to cut-and-run from Afghanistan, Trump and his allies may believe that now is the time to reset relations with Pakistan. They are wrong. Under Imran Khan, Pakistan has continued its move to become an instrument of Chinese strategic policies. Successive Pakistani leaders have fallen victim to China's debt trap. Thus, even if Khan wished to chart an independent course, it would have been impossible for him to do so," he noted.
Rubin also outlined Pakistan's silence on the Chinese crackdown on the Uighur Muslims and said, "The simple fact, however, is that Khan willingly casts his lot with Beijing. The Gwadar Port today is solidly among China's 'string of pearls.' For all his cynical embrace of Islam as a political tool rather than a deep faith, Pakistan has not only remained quiet on China's mass-incarceration of its Uighur population into concentration and 're-education' camps but also endorsed China's strategy at the United Nations."
The American Enterprise Institute's resident scholar highlighted that despite the close cooperation with Washington, Pakistan grew fiercely anti-American
"Pakistan's recent crackdown on army officials on spurious corruption and other charges have less to do with countering the country and military's endemic corruption and more to do with a People's Liberation Army-directed purge of pro-American elements within Pakistan's army. This undertaking was designed to make the Pakistani military more acceptable for long-term Chinese partnership. Simply put, Pakistan is now China's vassal, and Khan is President Xi Jinping's jester," he said.
He further highlighted how Imran Khan continues to fan an anti-American narrative in Pakistan.
"Perhaps Khan feels he has no choice but to kowtow to China. That simply shows his and Pakistan's weakness. But, Khan had a choice about whether to encourage or discourage anti-Americans, and he chose to fan its flames. He has encouraged a consistent anti-American image in Pakistan, and the Pakistani government and officials continue to suggest the United States is 'anti-Islamic' even as Pakistan receives billions of dollars in US aid. Recent attacks by Pakistan's proxies in Afghanistan show that Islamabad is not simply anti-American in rhetoric, but also in action. Khan may relish what a photo-op in the Oval Office might do for foreign investment, but he should recognize that what condemns Pakistan to its current plight is its continued use terrorism as an instrument of foreign policy," Rubin stated.
Rubin then observed that Imran Khan's meeting with the US President should be seen in the same light as those with North Korea, Turkey and Russia.
"Trump has reversed decades of diplomatic practice by putting summits with adversarial leaders ahead of diplomatic progress. Khan's visit, therefore, should be seen in the same light as Trump's meetings with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and Russian President Vladimir Putin. That's unfortunate, but the greater danger is that Trump and the State Department take Khan at his word or put wishful thinking ahead of reality. Khan seeks not a new partnership, but to continue a pattern of duplicity, the cost of which can be counted in billions of dollars of wasted aid, Chinese backslapping, and American body bags," he wrote.
Pak Is China's "Vassal", Imran Khan Xi's "Jester": Ex-Pentagon Official
Pak Is China's "Vassal", Imran Khan Xi's "Jester": Ex-Pentagon Official
Former Pentagon official Michael Rubin said Imran Khan's US visit "should be seen in the same light as (Donald) Trump's meetings with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un..."
World | ANI | Updated: July 23, 2019 17:53 IST
"Pakistan is China's vassal, and Imran Khan is Xi Jinping's jester," an ex-Pentagon official said
Washington: An ex-Pentagon official, Michael Rubin, warned the United States against falling prey to Pakistan's latest bid to revive relations, stating that the South Asian country's Prime Minister Imran Khan did not seek a new partnership, but aimed at continuing a pattern of duplicity, "the cost of which can be counted in billions of dollars of wasted aid, Chinese backslapping, and American body bags."
Rubin elaborated on this observation in an editorial written for an American magazine, The National Interest.
"Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan hopes that his visit to the White House today will jumpstart relations with the United States after years of tension. Within the US political context, President Donald Trump is a polarising figure and his political opponents usually blame him exclusively for all ills on the international stage. When it comes to Pakistan, however, they should not. Pakistan's problems are made in Pakistan and Trump should continue the recent bipartisan consensus to hold Islamabad responsible," Rubin stated.
He then charted the course of the US-Pakistan relationship, which saw Islamabad become a US ally shortly after its creation in 1947 "largely because Jawaharlal Nehru rejected US partnership."
"As India drifted closer to the Soviet Union, Pakistan grew in US strategic calculations. Between 1954 and 1965, Pakistan received more than USD one billion in arms sales and defence assistance, a huge amount for the time. Cooperation only increased after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. It was not long until Pakistan became the third-largest US aid recipient, after Israel and Egypt," Rubin added.
"Simply put, eliminating the Taliban was not a Pakistani objective and, at best, Islamabad was agnostic on Al Qaeda," said Michael Rubin
The American Enterprise Institute's resident scholar, however, highlighted that despite the close cooperation with Washington, Pakistan grew fiercely anti-American. He listed Pakistan's nuclear ambitions as one of the reasons.
"Pakistan has a knack for always labelling India the aggressor even when Pakistan - or the terrorists it shelters and funds - start wars. When war between Pakistan and India erupted in 1965 and again in 1971, Pakistan demanded the United States come to its aid. Washington instead chose neutrality and placed an arms embargo on both sides. Pakistani leaders saw this as betrayal since India was larger and had greater resources. The bitterness of that time colours Pakistani anti-Americanism today," Rubin wrote.
"Pakistan's nuclear ambitions contributed to the tension. Pakistan initiated its nuclear program in 1955 and participated in the Eisenhower administration's 'Atoms for Peace' program. A decade later Pakistan inaugurated her first nuclear reactor with US assistance. Pakistani leaders long kept their desire to acquire nuclear weapons private but that changed in 1965," he stated.
"That was the year that Pakistani politician Zulfikar Ali Bhutto declared: 'If India builds the bomb, we will eat grass and live, can even go hungry. But we will get one for our own. We have no alternative.' Still, aside from Bhutto's outburst, the Pakistani government was willing to tell American officials what they wanted to hear: 'Pakistan will neither acquire nor produce a nuclear bomb,' Zia ul-Haq said. His formula - technology but no bomb - became the mantra for states like North Korea and perhaps also Iran, which sought covert programs. It also became the reason that an entire generation of American officials began to see Pakistani officials as duplicitous," Rubin wrote.
The Gwadar Port today is solidly among China's 'string of pearls', the former Pentagon official said
"Pakistan's overt drive toward and later acquisition of nuclear weapons led to the periodic imposition of US sanctions suspended or lifted only when Washington needed something from Islamabad. This reinforced the perception among Pakistani officials and broader society that the United States was a fair-weather friend and a selfish partner," the scholar and former Pentagon official said.
"The coup de grace for anti-Americanism, however, was the decision Pakistani military and intelligence leaders took upon East Pakistan (Bangladesh) loss in 1971 to embrace and promote Islamist extremism within Pakistani society as a glue to hold together Pakistan's ethnically-diverse society. The number of madrasas teaching radicalism exploded. It was Pakistan's fear of ethnic (and specifically Pashtun) nationalism that led Pakistan to exclusively support Islamist groups among the anti-Soviet resistance in 1979 when Pakistani authorities monopolised the distribution of aid," he stated.
"After the September 11, 2001, terror attacks, the United States needed Pakistan desperately. On September 22, 2001, Bush waived nuclear sanctions and declared Pakistan 'America's closest non-NATO ally.' Former president Pervez Musharraf publicly pledged to 'unstinted cooperation' to the United States in the fight against terrorism but, privately, Pakistan continued its support for the Taliban," he added.
"Simply put, eliminating the Taliban was not a Pakistani objective and, at best, Islamabad was agnostic on Al Qaeda. Musharraf partnered with the United States for four reasons: security, economic revival, the safety of nuclear and missile assets, and the hope that the United States would support Pakistan on the Kashmir dispute," Rubin stated, noting that Pakistan's double-game on terror spelt deadly for the United States. It also de-stabilises South Asia and risks catalysing Pakistan's descent into state failure. He also outlined Pakistan's sponsorship of terrorism.
Pakistan has a knack for always labelling India the aggressor even when Pakistan - or the terrorists it shelters and funds - start wars, the former Pentagon official said
"The US Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC) has declared that 143 Pakistan-based individuals or organizations were guilty of engaging in terror activity. State Department terror lists are populated with Pakistan-based or supported groups, even if diplomatic considerations obscure mention of Pakistan in many of their profiles. Almost two thousand American servicemen have died in Afghanistan as a result of Taliban attacks and, by extension, Pakistani actions. In short, this has put Pakistan on the same level as - or even a level above - Iran when it comes to responsibility for the deaths of American servicemen. That alone is the reason not to forgive Pakistan or buy into the fiction that Pakistani authorities are not culpable," Rubin warned.
"Nor should Congress or the White House do anything to obscure Pakistan's aggression by proxy toward India and Afghanistan. This year Pakistani-backed terrorists have taken their terrorism to a new level. On January 22, 2019, Taliban terrorists - supported by Pakistan - attacked an Afghan army camp in Wardak and killed more than 120 people," he added.
He also mentioned the February 14 Pulwama terror attack, which claimed the lives of over 40 CRPF personnel.
"In February 2019, a member of the Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) terrorist group attacked a police convoy in Pulwama... killing forty people. In just the past three years, there have been at least seven major attacks on Indian targets by Pakistan-based terrorists. Certainly, Pakistani groups have repeatedly promised to crack down on terrorism, but the record is clear: they lie," Rubin elaborated.
"Prominent ministers and allies of former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, as well as his brother Shehbaz Sharif, openly rallied with banned militants. While Trump may praise Pakistan's recent arrest of the mastermind of the Mumbai terror attacks, he ignores that Pakistani authorities have repeatedly arrested Hafiz Saeed - and always released him once the spotlight moved on," the former Pentagon official pointed out.
"As the United States prepares to cut-and-run from Afghanistan, Trump and his allies may believe that now is the time to reset relations with Pakistan. They are wrong. Under Imran Khan, Pakistan has continued its move to become an instrument of Chinese strategic policies. Successive Pakistani leaders have fallen victim to China's debt trap. Thus, even if Khan wished to chart an independent course, it would have been impossible for him to do so," he noted.
Rubin also outlined Pakistan's silence on the Chinese crackdown on the Uighur Muslims and said, "The simple fact, however, is that Khan willingly casts his lot with Beijing. The Gwadar Port today is solidly among China's 'string of pearls.' For all his cynical embrace of Islam as a political tool rather than a deep faith, Pakistan has not only remained quiet on China's mass-incarceration of its Uighur population into concentration and 're-education' camps but also endorsed China's strategy at the United Nations."
The American Enterprise Institute's resident scholar highlighted that despite the close cooperation with Washington, Pakistan grew fiercely anti-American
"Pakistan's recent crackdown on army officials on spurious corruption and other charges have less to do with countering the country and military's endemic corruption and more to do with a People's Liberation Army-directed purge of pro-American elements within Pakistan's army. This undertaking was designed to make the Pakistani military more acceptable for long-term Chinese partnership. Simply put, Pakistan is now China's vassal, and Khan is President Xi Jinping's jester," he said.
He further highlighted how Imran Khan continues to fan an anti-American narrative in Pakistan.
"Perhaps Khan feels he has no choice but to kowtow to China. That simply shows his and Pakistan's weakness. But, Khan had a choice about whether to encourage or discourage anti-Americans, and he chose to fan its flames. He has encouraged a consistent anti-American image in Pakistan, and the Pakistani government and officials continue to suggest the United States is 'anti-Islamic' even as Pakistan receives billions of dollars in US aid. Recent attacks by Pakistan's proxies in Afghanistan show that Islamabad is not simply anti-American in rhetoric, but also in action. Khan may relish what a photo-op in the Oval Office might do for foreign investment, but he should recognize that what condemns Pakistan to its current plight is its continued use terrorism as an instrument of foreign policy," Rubin stated.
Rubin then observed that Imran Khan's meeting with the US President should be seen in the same light as those with North Korea, Turkey and Russia.
"Trump has reversed decades of diplomatic practice by putting summits with adversarial leaders ahead of diplomatic progress. Khan's visit, therefore, should be seen in the same light as Trump's meetings with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and Russian President Vladimir Putin. That's unfortunate, but the greater danger is that Trump and the State Department take Khan at his word or put wishful thinking ahead of reality. Khan seeks not a new partnership, but to continue a pattern of duplicity, the cost of which can be counted in billions of dollars of wasted aid, Chinese backslapping, and American body bags," he wrote.
Pak Is China's "Vassal", Imran Khan Xi's "Jester": Ex-Pentagon Official
Hey @Arsalan123 whats up with this humiliation man ,Ooof scathing. Realisation came too damn late, but better late than never.
Pak Is China's "Vassal", Imran Khan Xi's "Jester": Ex-Pentagon Official
Former Pentagon official Michael Rubin said Imran Khan's US visit "should be seen in the same light as (Donald) Trump's meetings with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un..."
World | ANI | Updated: July 23, 2019 17:53 IST
View attachment 8376
"Pakistan is China's vassal, and Imran Khan is Xi Jinping's jester," an ex-Pentagon official said
Washington: An ex-Pentagon official, Michael Rubin, warned the United States against falling prey to Pakistan's latest bid to revive relations, stating that the South Asian country's Prime Minister Imran Khan did not seek a new partnership, but aimed at continuing a pattern of duplicity, "the cost of which can be counted in billions of dollars of wasted aid, Chinese backslapping, and American body bags."
Rubin elaborated on this observation in an editorial written for an American magazine, The National Interest.
"Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan hopes that his visit to the White House today will jumpstart relations with the United States after years of tension. Within the US political context, President Donald Trump is a polarising figure and his political opponents usually blame him exclusively for all ills on the international stage. When it comes to Pakistan, however, they should not. Pakistan's problems are made in Pakistan and Trump should continue the recent bipartisan consensus to hold Islamabad responsible," Rubin stated.
He then charted the course of the US-Pakistan relationship, which saw Islamabad become a US ally shortly after its creation in 1947 "largely because Jawaharlal Nehru rejected US partnership."
"As India drifted closer to the Soviet Union, Pakistan grew in US strategic calculations. Between 1954 and 1965, Pakistan received more than USD one billion in arms sales and defence assistance, a huge amount for the time. Cooperation only increased after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. It was not long until Pakistan became the third-largest US aid recipient, after Israel and Egypt," Rubin added.
"Simply put, eliminating the Taliban was not a Pakistani objective and, at best, Islamabad was agnostic on Al Qaeda," said Michael Rubin
The American Enterprise Institute's resident scholar, however, highlighted that despite the close cooperation with Washington, Pakistan grew fiercely anti-American. He listed Pakistan's nuclear ambitions as one of the reasons.
"Pakistan has a knack for always labelling India the aggressor even when Pakistan - or the terrorists it shelters and funds - start wars. When war between Pakistan and India erupted in 1965 and again in 1971, Pakistan demanded the United States come to its aid. Washington instead chose neutrality and placed an arms embargo on both sides. Pakistani leaders saw this as betrayal since India was larger and had greater resources. The bitterness of that time colours Pakistani anti-Americanism today," Rubin wrote.
"Pakistan's nuclear ambitions contributed to the tension. Pakistan initiated its nuclear program in 1955 and participated in the Eisenhower administration's 'Atoms for Peace' program. A decade later Pakistan inaugurated her first nuclear reactor with US assistance. Pakistani leaders long kept their desire to acquire nuclear weapons private but that changed in 1965," he stated.
"That was the year that Pakistani politician Zulfikar Ali Bhutto declared: 'If India builds the bomb, we will eat grass and live, can even go hungry. But we will get one for our own. We have no alternative.' Still, aside from Bhutto's outburst, the Pakistani government was willing to tell American officials what they wanted to hear: 'Pakistan will neither acquire nor produce a nuclear bomb,' Zia ul-Haq said. His formula - technology but no bomb - became the mantra for states like North Korea and perhaps also Iran, which sought covert programs. It also became the reason that an entire generation of American officials began to see Pakistani officials as duplicitous," Rubin wrote.
The Gwadar Port today is solidly among China's 'string of pearls', the former Pentagon official said
"Pakistan's overt drive toward and later acquisition of nuclear weapons led to the periodic imposition of US sanctions suspended or lifted only when Washington needed something from Islamabad. This reinforced the perception among Pakistani officials and broader society that the United States was a fair-weather friend and a selfish partner," the scholar and former Pentagon official said.
"The coup de grace for anti-Americanism, however, was the decision Pakistani military and intelligence leaders took upon East Pakistan (Bangladesh) loss in 1971 to embrace and promote Islamist extremism within Pakistani society as a glue to hold together Pakistan's ethnically-diverse society. The number of madrasas teaching radicalism exploded. It was Pakistan's fear of ethnic (and specifically Pashtun) nationalism that led Pakistan to exclusively support Islamist groups among the anti-Soviet resistance in 1979 when Pakistani authorities monopolised the distribution of aid," he stated.
"After the September 11, 2001, terror attacks, the United States needed Pakistan desperately. On September 22, 2001, Bush waived nuclear sanctions and declared Pakistan 'America's closest non-NATO ally.' Former president Pervez Musharraf publicly pledged to 'unstinted cooperation' to the United States in the fight against terrorism but, privately, Pakistan continued its support for the Taliban," he added.
"Simply put, eliminating the Taliban was not a Pakistani objective and, at best, Islamabad was agnostic on Al Qaeda. Musharraf partnered with the United States for four reasons: security, economic revival, the safety of nuclear and missile assets, and the hope that the United States would support Pakistan on the Kashmir dispute," Rubin stated, noting that Pakistan's double-game on terror spelt deadly for the United States. It also de-stabilises South Asia and risks catalysing Pakistan's descent into state failure. He also outlined Pakistan's sponsorship of terrorism.
Pakistan has a knack for always labelling India the aggressor even when Pakistan - or the terrorists it shelters and funds - start wars, the former Pentagon official said
"The US Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC) has declared that 143 Pakistan-based individuals or organizations were guilty of engaging in terror activity. State Department terror lists are populated with Pakistan-based or supported groups, even if diplomatic considerations obscure mention of Pakistan in many of their profiles. Almost two thousand American servicemen have died in Afghanistan as a result of Taliban attacks and, by extension, Pakistani actions. In short, this has put Pakistan on the same level as - or even a level above - Iran when it comes to responsibility for the deaths of American servicemen. That alone is the reason not to forgive Pakistan or buy into the fiction that Pakistani authorities are not culpable," Rubin warned.
"Nor should Congress or the White House do anything to obscure Pakistan's aggression by proxy toward India and Afghanistan. This year Pakistani-backed terrorists have taken their terrorism to a new level. On January 22, 2019, Taliban terrorists - supported by Pakistan - attacked an Afghan army camp in Wardak and killed more than 120 people," he added.
He also mentioned the February 14 Pulwama terror attack, which claimed the lives of over 40 CRPF personnel.
"In February 2019, a member of the Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) terrorist group attacked a police convoy in Pulwama... killing forty people. In just the past three years, there have been at least seven major attacks on Indian targets by Pakistan-based terrorists. Certainly, Pakistani groups have repeatedly promised to crack down on terrorism, but the record is clear: they lie," Rubin elaborated.
"Prominent ministers and allies of former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, as well as his brother Shehbaz Sharif, openly rallied with banned militants. While Trump may praise Pakistan's recent arrest of the mastermind of the Mumbai terror attacks, he ignores that Pakistani authorities have repeatedly arrested Hafiz Saeed - and always released him once the spotlight moved on," the former Pentagon official pointed out.
"As the United States prepares to cut-and-run from Afghanistan, Trump and his allies may believe that now is the time to reset relations with Pakistan. They are wrong. Under Imran Khan, Pakistan has continued its move to become an instrument of Chinese strategic policies. Successive Pakistani leaders have fallen victim to China's debt trap. Thus, even if Khan wished to chart an independent course, it would have been impossible for him to do so," he noted.
Rubin also outlined Pakistan's silence on the Chinese crackdown on the Uighur Muslims and said, "The simple fact, however, is that Khan willingly casts his lot with Beijing. The Gwadar Port today is solidly among China's 'string of pearls.' For all his cynical embrace of Islam as a political tool rather than a deep faith, Pakistan has not only remained quiet on China's mass-incarceration of its Uighur population into concentration and 're-education' camps but also endorsed China's strategy at the United Nations."
The American Enterprise Institute's resident scholar highlighted that despite the close cooperation with Washington, Pakistan grew fiercely anti-American
"Pakistan's recent crackdown on army officials on spurious corruption and other charges have less to do with countering the country and military's endemic corruption and more to do with a People's Liberation Army-directed purge of pro-American elements within Pakistan's army. This undertaking was designed to make the Pakistani military more acceptable for long-term Chinese partnership. Simply put, Pakistan is now China's vassal, and Khan is President Xi Jinping's jester," he said.
He further highlighted how Imran Khan continues to fan an anti-American narrative in Pakistan.
"Perhaps Khan feels he has no choice but to kowtow to China. That simply shows his and Pakistan's weakness. But, Khan had a choice about whether to encourage or discourage anti-Americans, and he chose to fan its flames. He has encouraged a consistent anti-American image in Pakistan, and the Pakistani government and officials continue to suggest the United States is 'anti-Islamic' even as Pakistan receives billions of dollars in US aid. Recent attacks by Pakistan's proxies in Afghanistan show that Islamabad is not simply anti-American in rhetoric, but also in action. Khan may relish what a photo-op in the Oval Office might do for foreign investment, but he should recognize that what condemns Pakistan to its current plight is its continued use terrorism as an instrument of foreign policy," Rubin stated.
Rubin then observed that Imran Khan's meeting with the US President should be seen in the same light as those with North Korea, Turkey and Russia.
"Trump has reversed decades of diplomatic practice by putting summits with adversarial leaders ahead of diplomatic progress. Khan's visit, therefore, should be seen in the same light as Trump's meetings with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and Russian President Vladimir Putin. That's unfortunate, but the greater danger is that Trump and the State Department take Khan at his word or put wishful thinking ahead of reality. Khan seeks not a new partnership, but to continue a pattern of duplicity, the cost of which can be counted in billions of dollars of wasted aid, Chinese backslapping, and American body bags," he wrote.
Pak Is China's "Vassal", Imran Khan Xi's "Jester": Ex-Pentagon Official
Like increased pressure on Pakistan , some favourable weapons deals sort off
Now it's in their hands to control the damage so some sort of deal in exchange we forget what trump said
It seems IK gifted Trump some home grown high quality weed whichmade him lose his brain and make such a stupid statement.