Pakistanis Continue to Reject wrong war policies of the U.S . Pakistan needs Trade First, not puny aid packages that end up in Washington. Pakistan needs Trade First not Aid First Half of a aid stays in the US, and about 25% is wasted on administrative and logisitcal expenses. 25% of what is intended for the people is given to the Ambassador’s favorite NGO. After US and Pakistani corrupt officials get their paws on the amount left over, there is almost nothing that actually makes it to the people. What Pakistan needs is a Marshall Plan which would build the infrastructure and improve the standard of living of the people.

The centerpiece of Newsweek’s story is how Biden has become the chief White House skeptic on escalating the war in Afghanistan, specifically arguing against Gen. McChrystal’s request for 40,000 more troops to pursue a counterinsurgency strategy there.

The piece, by Holly Bailey and Evan Thomas, opens with details of a September 13th national security meeting at the White House. Biden speaks up:

“Can I just clarify a factual point? How much will we spend this year on Afghanistan?” Someone provided the figure: $65 billion. “And how much will we spend on Pakistan?” Another figure was supplied: $2.25 billion. “Well, by my calculations that’s a 30-to-1 ratio in favor of Afghanistan. So I have a question. Al Qaeda is almost all in Pakistan, and Pakistan has nuclear weapons. And yet for every dollar we’re spending in Pakistan, we’re spending $30 in Afghanistan. Does that make strategic sense?” The White House Situation Room fell silent. Reported by Ariana Huffington: Huffington Post

American Aid to Paksitan is peanuts. Most of it ends in the pockets of American consultants. 25% ends up in adminstrative overheads. half of what makes it to Pakistna ends up in the hands of the American Ambassador's favorite NGO. Almost none makes it for any infrastructure projects. This is the reason there are no visible signs of American aid in Pakistan--No American schools, no US hospitals, no Yankee factories, no USA roads, and no American bridges. Where does all the aid go?

• The best way America can help Pakistan is to put people to work.
• And the best way to do this would be to give duty-free treatment to Pakistan’s clothing, leather and textile industries.
• $15 Billion flowing directly into the Pakistani economy would dramatically change the war on terror.

Will ROZ help reduce extremism in Pakistan? FTA would do more! Pakistan pays more in Tarrifs than Sweden. There is something wring with this picture. Tariffs on Pakistani textile exports to the US and Europe should be eliminated. Jordan and Israel have FTAs with the USA. Pakistan should have one also. Will Reconstruction Opportunity Zones (ROZ) make a difference in Pakistan?

Total collapse in Afghanistan:-Chasing the ghosts of the “Ho Chi Minh” trail in Quetta. For signing the peace deal with Israel, the Egyptian debt of about $35 Billion was waived off. Turkey was offered more than $30 Billion for transit facilities to wage war on Iraq–which the Turkish government turned down. India was offered a role in Afghanistan and a Nuclear deal for help in Afghanistan. The aid to Pakistan has been minuscule compared to what was given to Israel, Egypt, Iraq and Afghanistan. The US wasted $143 Billion in Afghanistan and squandered $605 Billion in Iraq. Pakistan a country dozens time bigger, more crucial and more important got only $5 Billion over a decade. It also got $5 Billion as reimbursement for bases and use of the supply chain. Because of the US war in Afghanistan, Pakistan has lost about $20 Billion per year since 1980. It has lost the fast track to prosperity. After the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the US sanctioned Pakistan for the crime of survival and developing an indigenous nuclear defense.

American Aid is a waste of money. The US should see how the Chinese spend their money--creating immense goodwill

The US leadership with its multiple histrionics, beginning with Obama, has made its negative Pakistan agenda clear: it is eventually seeking control of our nuclear assets and we are playing into their hands. On the one hand, the militants are threatening the fabric of Pakistani society and on the other hand the US is creating violent dissensions within Pakistan not only amongst civil society but also between the military and civilian structures. It knows that unless it destroys the military institution, it cannot achieve its goal of targeting out nuclear assets. So, it is demanding a role for the military which will undermine its morale, bring it into conflict with its own people and create further unrest. Shireen Mazari. The News

 Kerry-Lugar Peanuts: 50% of US Aid fills pockets of US consultants

After promising a Non-transactional relationship with Pakistan why is the US blundering through it again? The breakup of the aid to Pakistan is as follows.

• Total economic support funds $1.89 billion
• Other development aid $453 million
• Foreign military financing $1.27 billion
• Other security-related aid $377 million
• Coalition support funds $5.93 billion
• Total non-food aid plus coalition support funds ($9.9 billion)
• Food aid $177 million

What is clear today is that the US aid of just over $600 million per year (the rest is based on invoices and is reimbursement for actual services rendered) is peanuts (to borrow a term from yesteryear’s Zia).

Renegotiating the US-Pakistan alliance: Correcting the price tag. GWOT counterpoints to USA

Pakistan should ask for the actual number calculated by our brilliant economists. Certainly just $1.3 Billion per year of economic aid is not the right amount, and a sycophantic and obsequious PPP government should not accept this miserly amount if compared to aid packages to Israel ($ 60 Billion), Egypt ($ 30 Billion) and if compared to what was offered to Turkey during the first Iraq war ($48 Billion). Pakistans 7 invoices from the stone age. New Pakistani Governemnt. New bill. Old aid bill was signed under duress

Strings attached to the American Aid Bill creates much resentment in Pakistan

Renegotiating the US-Pakistani alliance and the correcting the price tag for services in the ”Global War on Terror” (GWOT) should be the highest priority of the new government. The deal in 2001 was signed “under the gun” with Armitage’s threats of “we will bomb you back to the stone ages” (source: Pervez Musharraf-”In the Line of Fire”). Each time Pakistan hears a “whine”, Pakistan should offer home grown cheese with an invoice. Pakistani Cheese for Western “whine”. Market Value real Invoices for services rendered. Pakistan was given seven points. President Musharraf agreed to all seven. Now the Government of Pakistan should hand back seven points to the US government and its allies also.

In terms of security, the assistance is on a year-by-year basis, and the US president has to certify that Pakistan’s security forces – that is the military which effectively means the army – are making concerted efforts to prevent Al Qaeda and “other terrorist groups” from operating in Pakistani territory! Given how even the loss of over a thousand security personnel has failed to convince the US that our military is doing its best under trying circumstances, the US continues to put forward the mantra of “do more”, such certification would put our security forces under US pressure and “control” for a decade at least. And for what? For weapons systems that we have done without adequately for many decades. As for getting US training in counter terrorism, that is a laugh given how inadequate the US itself has proven to be – whether it was Vietnam, Latin America, Iraq or Afghanistan. Shireen Mazari. The News

Noticias de Rupiian a | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | ??????? ????? | ???? | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ??????? | Notizie di Rupia | PAKISTAN LEDGER | ???????? ????? | RUPEE NEWS | May 3rd, 2009 | Moin Ansari | ???? ??????? | ????? ????? |

American Aid is divorced from the Pakistani people--US should be visible to Pakistanis. None of it can be seen. Pakistanis can name two dozen huge Chinese mega projects--no one can name a single US project that has helped the people of Pakistan

Pakistan lost billions per annum because of war. Pakistan got 1.3 Billion Dollars during he Zia regime. That was pennies. Back dated invoices should be sent for the first Afghan war also. The world owes Pakistan a debt for destroying the USSR.

The Foreign relations Committee of the Senate of Pakistan which is a permanent body should be holding hearings and hiring economist to place a current number that needs to be billed to the USA.

1) Elimination of anti-Pakistan rhetoric from Mr. Karazi or his proposed successor Mr. Khalizad. Pakistani’s “Monroe Doctrine” dictates that no anti-Pakistani government will be tolerated in Kabul. Immediate closure of Indian consulates and Information centers in Afghanistan and closure of Indian base in Tajikistan.

2) No foreign sabotage and meddling in Pakistani affairs.

3) $150 Billion for services rendered per annum. Back invoices and infrastructure built. Retire the debt. FTA with US and the EU. See details of needs: Invoice for Defeating terror, Securing Pakistani Nukes $150 Billion per annum

4) Elimination of Indian forces in Kashmir, Siachen, Junagarh and Manavadar

5) Elimination of daily diatribes and anti-Pakistan rhetoric in the US media.

American Aid does not help the people of Pakistan. It only helps US consultants and some NGOs in Islamabad. Why doesn't the US help Pakistan with a FTA and access to US and EU markets? That would help Pakistan.

WASHINGTON: The US Congress made a friendly gesture to President Asif Ali Zardari on Monday, introducing a bill to triple American aid to Pakistan on the day he arrives in the US capital on a four-day visit.

Two influential senators – Democrat John Kerry and Republican Richard Lugar – introduced the Pakistan Enduring Assistance and Cooperation Enhancement or the PEACE Act of 2009, in the Senate on Monday afternoon after a long delay.

‘The legislation intents to help transform the relationship between the US and Pakistan from a transactional, tactically-driven set of short-term exercises in crisis-management, into a deeper, broader, long-term strategic engagement,’ said a statement issued by the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.

The bill, first introduced in the 110th Congress, proposes to give Pakistan $7.5 billion over five years —$1.5 billion a year —and an additional $7.5 billion over the following five years.

Senator Kerry, the 2004 presidential candidate who now chairs the Senate committee, is a strong supporter of US economic assistance to Pakistan.

In an earlier interview to Dawn about his efforts to increase US assistance to Pakistan, Senator Kerry argued that the military alone could not defeat the extremists. The final victory, he said, could only be achieved by removing the root-cause: economic deprivation and unemployment.

Senator Kerry also opposed imposing new restrictions on Pakistan in return for US economic assistance, recalling that similar restrictions imposed in 1990 did cause an irreparable damage to US-Pakistan relations.

Mr Kerry, however, backed the requirements that seek total commitment from Pakistan in the fight against extremists and advocate strict accountability of the funds given to Islamabad.

He also backed placing some restrictions on the military assistance but said these were not new.

The announcement came two days before US President Barack Obama hosts presidents Zardari and Hamid Karzai for a trilateral summit aimed at improving relations between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

In a news conference on Wednesday, President Obama pushed for more cooperation between these two key allies in the fight against extremism and expressed concern about the fragility of Pakistan’s eight-month-old civilian government which has made concessions to the Taliban.

Although details of the bill introduced in the Senate are still coming, it does not seem to contain too many contentious requirements.

The Pakistanis, however, fear that another bill to be introduced later in the House of Representatives would be more difficult for them.

Besides Pakistan’s compliance in the fight against terrorists, the House bill also requires Islamabad to mend its relations with India, stop all Kashmiri militant groups from operating from the Pakistani soil and to give an undertaking that it will not allow its territory to be used for any armed attack against or inside India.

Peanuts: Aid to Pakistan

 

 

 

Another provision could enable the United States to seek direct access to Dr A. Q. Khan. Dawn

Vice President Joesph Biden in an op-ed column in the New York Times talks about a “Marshall Plan for Afghanistan” but only a tripling of the US aid to Pakistan. In 1980 Zia ul Haq settled for a mere $1.2 Billion and it was not enough to compensate Pakistan for the drug and Kalashnikov culture that permeated Pakistani society. The Afghan war which led to the implosion of the USSR interrupted and then halted our progress towards Asian Tiger status.

In 2001 Musharraf was threatened on being bombed back to the stone age. Musharraf accepted all seven of the diktats presented, hoping that this would bring about American largess. It did not. Pakistan has been losing about $10 Billion per year (estimated by the US DOD), and getting only about $ 1 Billion per year. This accounting does not include the opportunity cost, or the loss to the Pakistani economy.

This simple accounting does not include the cost to the Pakistani nation, in terms of softer costs like lives, fear, loss of business, and loss of foreign investment. The resilience of Pakistan and the nation’s continuing collective refusal to do what the west would like it to do

Pakistanis have lost more than four thousand men. About 100,000 Pakistani soldiers are used to fight this inane and insane war. Blackwater gets 150,000 per soldier per annum. Pakistan gets nothing! The poor soldiers die without a reasonable pension.

The first order of business for the Paksitani economists is to put realistic price tags on Pakistan’s involvement in the “Global War on Terror” . The limits should be set on what can be done and what cannot be done.

No US troops in Pakistan and no bombing of Pakistani territory. No covert actions in Pakistan.

The American presidential team is not discussing the real long term solutions to the issues relating to the generation poverty in South Asia. Pakistan has been asking for an Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the USA for a decade. Jordan and Egypt enjoy FTA or their equivalents with America and have been able to use the low tariffs to export their products to America. Pakistan’s FTA has been blocked by the Textile growing states of the USA becuase stalwarts like Jesse Helms believed that imports from Pakistan would jeopardise the economy of the Carolinas.

Most the aid sent to Pakistan stays in the US. Its a racket to help the consulting industry in America.

The IMF, the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, the IFC, and the dozens of donor agencies sitting in Islamabad, all share the blame for throwing money at consultants, reports, presentations, and trainings which have impacted the lives of very few people in any tangible manner. Of course they have been brilliant for the “development” industry in Islamabad. Had the aid given to Pakistan over the years been used properly for the people it was intended for, this country and its social indicators would have been completely different. Aid is also a very funny thing. It implies that it is money which has been “given” to a country. This can be misleading. Aid can come in the shape of a grant, a loan and, of course, expertise. More often than not there are several conditions attached to every programme. For instance, if there is a grant to buy wheat from USAID, Pakistan can only buy wheat from the United States at a predetermined rate, and not from the international market where rates can be negotiated. This takes care of surplus production from US farmers. The wheat will only be shipped on US ships, insured by US companies, etc. If the DFID, which is the British equivalent of USAID, puts forth a “development” programme, then only British consultants will be used and they can subcontract to local consultants, etc. The gravy train starts right at the beginning. Joseph Stiglitz, a former World Bank chief economist and author of several excellent books, has gone through this entire process in several of his writings and narrates how he left the World Bank in disgust eventually.

There’s also been a push for enhancing economic opportunities inside Pakistan through trade. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the U.S.-Pakistan Business Council view expanded bilateral economic cooperation (PDF) as an essential component to achieving security goals for both countries. The United States is Pakistan’s largest investor and trading partner; however, U.S. tariffs on Pakistan’s textiles (over 50 percent of the country’s total global exports) undermine its ability to compete in the U.S. market. A 2001 bill to ease textile trade with Pakistan never passed. Reducing tariffs might be even more difficult in the current global economic crisis. CFR Senior Fellow Isobel Coleman told CFR.org that by being closed on the trade front, the United States is punishing the same poor, rural populations in Pakistan that it is trying to help through development aid. “It should be viewed in totality,” she said. CFR

The logical step is to give Pakistan a break. Waiving tariffs on Pakistan’s millions of towels and shirts – and soccer balls and everything else it makes – could boost urban employment, help Pakistan’s government cool the political temperature, and thus help the new democratic system succeed

From CFR Experts: “USAID should begin a process of transitioning from the use of ‘implementing partners’ (contractors and grantees) to direct-hire officers in order to manage programs, build USAID’s institutional memory and expertise, and demonstrate staying power to Pakistani partners. If necessary, Congress should pass legislation to facilitate these changes, specific to the Pakistan-Afghanistan context.” Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

$15 Billion flowing directly into the Pakistani economy would dramatically change the war on terror. Thomas Friedman wrote about this years ago in the New York Times. It was one of the few times when Friedman wrote about something of substance and was right.

The best way America can help Pakistan is to put people to work. And the best way to do this would be to give duty-free treatment to Pakistan’s clothing, leather and textile industries.

In earlier decades, Southeast Asia and Central America used labor-intensive exports to create jobs, promote economic growth and defang radicals. Pakistan should be able to do the same. Though it is a small exporter, it has an efficient textile industry. Household linens earn most of the hard currency Pakistan uses to buy food and fuel, and are good job creators – each container full of towels puts 500 urban residents to work.

Today, though, American trade policy hurts these industries more than it helps. Tariffs on Pakistan’s goods are far above those imposed on products from affluent countries. To choose a simple example: Pakistan’s towels and T-shirts trigger 7.5 percent and 19 percent tariffs, while tariffs on Sweden’s cars and airplane parts are only 2.5 percent and zero. So last year, Pakistan’s $3.6 billion in goods exported to the U.S. faced a $365 million tariff penalty – almost three times the $142 million penalty on Sweden’s $13 billion. Why this perverse outcome? Lobbying campaigns have kept U.S. tariffs on the textiles Pakistan makes much higher than our tariffs on rich-country goods. To make matters worse, our exemption of most African and Latin American towels and shirts from tariffs puts Pakistan at a disadvantage against its direct competitors.

The logical step is to give Pakistan a break. Waiving tariffs on Pakistan’s millions of towels and shirts – and soccer balls and everything else it makes – could boost urban employment, help Pakistan’s government cool the political temperature, and thus help the new democratic system succeed.

Retail politics has blocked such a step until now. Fear of Pakistani competition in textiles, augmented by industry lobbying, stopped the Bush administration from pushing a tariff waiver in 2001 on the grounds that Congress would never go along. But as one-time congressional staffers, we think this sells Congress short. When a grave national security interest is at stake, Congress usually responds. We think it would do so again.

Shifting support for Pakistan from “aid first” to “trade first” would require leadership from the White House and support from Democrats. But given the dangers – for Pakistanis, Afghans, Americans and others – should Pakistan fail, the Bush administration should use its remaining time in office to take on this fight. Robert M. Hathaway is Asia program director at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. His e-mail is robert.hathaway@wilsoncenter.org. Edward Gresser is director of trade and global markets at the Progressive Policy Institute. His e-mail is egresser@ppionline.org.

Pakistan has been struggling to get a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the USA. She has also been asking America free access for her Textiles to the USA. On both counts, there was a “penny-wise-pound-foolish” “No bid“.

Although Pakistan has been a leading partner of the US in the war against terrorism, in terms of trade in goods and services Pakistan falls fairly low in the list of US trade partners. The share of exports from Pakistan to the US market remained stagnant at around 0.21 per cent during the past four years. Dawn

Just imagine if the USA had agreed to the FTA and the free access of Textiles, this would have transferred more than $6 Billion per annum to the cotton producing areas of Pakistan. $42 Billion plus increased export of other commodities would have created new opportunities for the farmers. They would have sent their kids to the best schools in Pakistan and America–not to madarssas. Thomas Freidman of the New York Times suggested opening up American markets for Pakistan products this in 2001!

The cumulative affect of $40-$100 Billion would have totally transformed the entire infrastructure of the country because the money would have gone directly to the farmers without any leakage into kleptomaniac hands of government officials.

However it is now seven years later, and neither the FTA, nor the access for textiles materialized. There is still time! This could start in 2008.

When President Bush stopped over in Pakistan after his visit to India, he promised Pakistan the creation of Reconstruction Opportunity Zones (ROZ)–areas that could export products to the USA without any duty.

Later all of Afghanistan was added a a ROZ. Pakistan tried to get all of the NWFP and Baluchistan as ROZ, but it got approval for only the border areas. The districts identified for the establishment of ROZs included: Punjab: Bahawalpur, D.G. Khan, Jhang and Muzafargarh; Sindh: Badin, Jacobabad, Khairpur, Sanghar, Tharparkar and Thatta; NWFP: Bunir, D.I. Khan, Hangu, Lower Dir, Swat and Upper Dir; Balochistan: Gwadar, Kalat, Kharan, Sibi and South Waziristan

The USA is spending trillions of Dollars on wars. An FTA and access for Pakistani textile goods to America would not be aid, or help. It would be an opportunity for Pakistani farmers to sell goods in markets they did not have access to.

This is the Reconstruction Opportunity Zone (ROZ). it should be extended to all of Pakistan, which would help unite the economies of both the countries, bring them closer and reduce terror. However who can get beyond the American tin ear?

…what are the long term costs of the US assistance to Pakistan and can we do without it? Certainly, if our leadership tightened its belt, cut out its foreign trips and perks and privileges, and actually governed effectively, our resources could be generated from within. Let the parliamentarians, most of who are economically prosperous, refuse to take their bloated pay and perks packages and redirect them towards education and health in their areas. Let the wheat and sugar mafias and smugglers be apprehended and so on. And let the military continue to rely on its indigenous weapons systems and nuclear deterrence. Shireen Mazari. The News

A MARSHALL PLAN FOR PAKISTAN SHOULD INCLUDE

• Bullet Trains running from the Karakorum’s and beyond to Gwader and beyond. $ 2 Billion
• A modern train system and underground railways for our cities. $ 2 Billion
• New Water and Sewage lines in our major cities and our towns and villages. $ 5 Billion
• 1000 proper schools for our children and we want. $1 Billion
• 2500 brand new world class hospitals. $ 1 Billion.
  • Compare to the USA: (Total Number of All U.S. Registered Hospitals 5,759. Total Staffed Beds in All U.S. Registered Hospitals 955,768)
• 500 modern libraries spread all over the country. Build a library larger than the one in Alexandria. $250 million compare to 117,378 libraries in the USA
• A Motorway system to link all cities of Pakistan, North and South, East and West. Some on the West bank of the Indus and to the uninhabited remote parts of Baluchistan so that we can bring our largest province to the 21st century and make it habitable with fruit orchards and rice fields.$10 billion
• 10 new major airports linked by High Speed Trains. $10 Billion
• 50 million “$100 computers” for Pakistanis in Urdu and all local languages. $100 million
• We want “kachi abadis” to disappear from our cities. We want to see skyscrapers and government housing for all the poor. The inhabitants can be used for labor to build the buildings. Use the inhabitants to build skycrapers and parks and sell them a mortgage to pay for the subsidized housing. $ 5 Billion
• 100 power plants to eliminate the shortage of electricity in the country.$ 500 million
• 5 major dams and 100 minor dams to prevent the acute water shortage in the country. Some of the new canals need to go to Baluchistan to bring water to a thirsty land which is most of Pakistani land. Building Baluchistan brings strategic depth to Pakistan. $ 500 million
• 100 ships for the Pakistan National Shipping Corporation so that Pakistan can become a major sea faring nation able to handle the trade. Some of the ships should be cruise ships to bring millions of tourists to Mehergarh,Hapappa, Moenjodaro and Taxila and to the new “Club Meds” and Xcaret type of resorts that should be set up in the Karakurrums and the Run of Kutch areas and the deserts. $ 5 Billion
• We have to quadruple the yield for our Rice, Cotton, Milk and Wheat production benchmarked against the USA, Australia and Canada. New seeds, more fertilizer, better pesticides with combine harvesters, and refrigerated cargo from field to refrigerated vans to refrigerated ships. $1 Billion
• Teach Urdu, English, Farsi, Arabic and Chinese in all schools. Also optional languages Punjabi, Kashmiri, Pahari, Hindkoh, Saraki, Pushto, Baluchi, Brahvi, Sindhi, Darri, Potohari. $ 50 million
• Get ship load of Sri Lankan teachers to eliminate illiteracy in Pakistan. $ 10 million
• Get boatloads of Malaysian manufacturers to setup electronic manufacturing in Pakistan.
• Get train loads of Koreans to build 10 new planned cities in Pakistan. $ 10 Billion
• Get a plane load of the Swiss to build world class ski resorts and amusement parks and develop our archaeological sites as wonders of the world. (Ref. Xcaret in Cancun) $ 2 Billion
• Get busloads of Chinese to build industrial parks in Pakistan. $ 10 Billion
• We want to reclaim millions of acres of desert in Baluchistan for our future generations. $ 3 Billion

Recent polls conducted by the IRI continue to show the trend which confirms the Pakistani rejection of the US war in Afghanistan. Of particular problem is the drone bombing in FATA. The recent threats to bomb Quetta is of special concern to most Pakistan. PEANUTS: Puny US Aid to Pakistan is too little too late. Marshall Plan, & Trade concessions missing. The Kerry Lugar bill is a classic example of too little too late. Pakistan needs Trade First not Aid First. The $.15 Billion aid package is seen as “peanuts’ if compared to the $143 Billion aid package given to Afghanistan, $605 package for Iraq, and $43 Billion offered to Turkey during the first Iraq war (which was eventually rejected by the Turkish parliament). Obama’s good words compared to Napolean’s speeches

The American establishment is unable to stop itself from behaving like the “Ugly Americans’. The statements of the US Ambaassador to Pakistan are seen as egregious acts to interfere in the internal affairs of a sovereign country. The hubris of Hillary Clinton, the rudeness of Admiral Mullen, the arrogance of Richard Holbrooke, the superciliousness of Bruce Riedel and the silence of President Obama about Kashmir stir Pakistani emotions and force them to speak out against the bad foreign policy decisions of the US Administration. Nukes: Don’t mess with us–Islamabad’s defiant rebuke to threats

Selective Amnesia of Americans: Pakistan is the most mistreated friend in the world. The presence of the Blackwater (Xe worldwide) and their attitude towards Pakistanis has been hard to digest by most Pakistanis. The pugnacious Pakistanis
How long can the wink wink nod nod farce of deadly drones go on

Monitoring & Reversing Anti-Americanism-Some Solutions

Pakistan needs FTA, ROZ & end to high Tariffs from US, EU & Japan

PEANUTS: Puny US Aid to Pakistan is too little too late. Marshall Plan, & Trade concessions missing

Reconstruction Opportunity Zones and FTA with USA End rendition. Find Missing Pakistanis. Repatriate Dr. Afia Gitmo is the best recruiting tool Bush could have gifted the terrorists
Prisoner 650: Dead Nation wants sister Dr. Aafia Siddiqui freed Selective Amnesia of Americans: Pakistan is the most mistreated friend in the world

How long can the wink wink nod nod farce of deadly drones go on US aid to Pakistan should be Non-Transactional grants not loans An FTA and elimination of tariffs on Pakistani textiles would enable Pakistan to export $15 worth of textiles. Better than any aid package this would reverse extremism

In a lopsided policy the US wasted $143 Billion in aid to Afghanistan and gave Pakistan $5 Billion. Egyptian loans of around $38 Billion were forgiven. Pakistani losses due to GWOT calculated by the US DOD were $20 Billion per year in 2001. These losses have quadrupled. Aid to Pakistan is less than aid to Afghanistan. This has to be balanced with need. The US uses Pakistani infrastructure to transport supplies without building or even maintaining the roads.

Joe Biden triples US aid to Pakistan:-too little too late. Aid should be 20 times that number to compensate for usage of bases, roads and lost opportunity. Aid should create projects not be given to corrupt politicians. Reverse tracking should ensure that aid is not syphoned by corrupt politicians to Swiss accounts Needs of the Pakistan nation: These basics have to be addressed to win the hearts and minds of Pakistanis

Afghanistan-Pakistan forgotten by Joe Biden

How to help poor Pakistanis, avoid enriching corrupt officials and save US taxpayer money. Eliminate trade barriers on Pakistani goods

Holbrooke facing Khyber Poltergeist & Ganges hobgoblin

Pakistan’s “Do More” list to the USATrade First not Aid First

Pakistan: An historic realignment/