Rupee News

US panel repeats call to give Pakistan access to US markets

Share

The recommendations that would allow Pakistani textile products into the US have repeatedly run into the powerful textile lobby in the US. Once again a bi-partisan panel has suggested that Pakistani textiles be allowed more access to US markets. This would increase exports to the US to rise by an additional $4 billion.

WASHINGTON: A leading US think tank study has recommended Washington to ease trade restrictions on Pakistani textile exports and increase the military’s capacity to defeat militants on the battlefield as part of efforts to strengthen a cooperative partnership to defeat extremists operating in the region.

“The US commitment to a long-term strategic partnership with Pakistan is a critical step in securing Pakistani action against the militant groups within its borders,” a report by an independent task force for the Council on Foreign Relations says.

“The Obama administration’s strategy in Pakistan has resulted in stronger relationships with civilian and military authorities more substantial and targeted aid,” it notes.

Meanwhile, al-qaeda militants are being increasingly targeted in the tribal border regions.

“To reinforce US-Pakistan ties and contribute to Pakistan’s economic stability in the aftermath of an overwhelming natural disaster, the Obama administration should prioritize and the Congress should enact agreement that would grant preferential market access to Pakistani textiles,” former deputy Secretary of State Richard L. Armitage and former national security adviser Samuel R. Berger, stress in the report.

This agreement would help revive the Pakistani industry and all of the associated sectors of the economy, including Pakistan-grown cotton, the report adds.

“To further enhance Pakistan’s stability, the United States should maintain current levels of economic and technical assistance to help military and civilian leaders reconstruct and establish control over areas hard-hit by the flood, including those contested by militant forces. American assistance should also encourage private sector investment in conflict-prone and flood-ravaged regions.”

As part of efforts to build Pakistani support for the U.S.-Pakistan relationship, the United States “must move rapidly to implement high-profile assistance projects and should also reach out on a sustained basis to nontraditional allies in Pakistani society, including business interests, educators, local media, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs).”

The authors of the report particularly highlight that a continuing robust response to this summer’s epic floods is necessary to prevent Pakistan from sliding into economic and political troubles.

Washington’s first order of business in Pakistan must be to help address the extreme humanitarian suffering and dislocation caused by this summer’s floods. The best way for the United States to address the challenges of terrorism and security is by working shoulder to shoulder with a stable partner in Islamabad.

The report says as it cultivates a closer partnership with Islamabad and contributes to shoring up the Pakistani state and national economy, the United States should seek action against Afghan, Pakistani and other related militant groups.

“By demonstrating American generosity and assistance at a time of grave Pakistani peril, the United States will also make a better case for the strategic benefits of its partnership.”

One of the greatest challenges to improving relations between the people of Pakistan and the United States is the perception that America does not welcome Pakistani visitors, the chairs of the task force note.

“This perception has been reinforced by heavy-handed US border security policies and clumsy implementation,” the authors point out.

Other miscommunications and security precautions have even disrupted official Pakistani travel within the United States. “Although the US government must do what is necessary to secure the borders, future decisions regarding travel restrictions and airport security should do far more to take Pakistani sensitivities, as well as the diplomatic implications of new regulations, into consideration. As a practical matter, an interagency liaison team should be established to manage and avert diplomatic incidents related to security procedures at US airports.”

Focusing on the regional dimensions of the ongoing tensions, the report proposes “to reduce regional tensions that distract from counter terror operations and undermine Pakistan’s stability, the United States should encourage progress in the Indo-Pakistani relationship.”

“Washington should not attempt to impose itself in Indo-Pakistani negotiations.

An indirect approach is better. The United States should help to build new constituencies for peace by helping to fund international development schemes that benefit businesses and people on both sides of the Indo- Pakistani border.”

The United States, the report suggests, should seek creative new ways to encourage Indo-Pakistani trade and investment, including US technical assistance for infrastructure development along the international border and the Kashmir divide.

Related articles

• US proposes G-20 membership for Pakistan (stapins.org)
• US Panel wants Pakistan included in G-20 (newpakistantimes.com)
• US panel recommends Pakistan’s membership of G-20 (timesofislamabad.com)
• US recommends G-20 membership for Paksitan (rupeenews.com)
• Obama mishandled Delhi and Islamabad (pakistanakhbar.com)
• UNSC: Obama put ‘foot in mouth’ in Delhi (timesofsrinagar.com)
• Obama’s blunders in Delhi
• Can Obama recover from his mistakes in Delhi (pakpunch.com)
• Obama is confused about is South Asian policy (timesofislamabad.com)
• Blunders: Obama waffles on Hyphenation (thedawn.com.pk)

US panel repeats call to give Pakistan access to US markets

Share

American's sick of war recommend speedy Afghan withdrawal

Share

The independent panels brought under the umbrella of CFR has recommended that the US withdraw from Afghanistan–if the current policy fails, and it recommends that the US withdraw if the current policy succeeds.

We have always maintained that the US will begin its withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2011. We have also maintained that as the withdrawal begins, the 150,000 or so mercenaries will be the first to flee. Their funds cut off the Balckwater/Xe and others will simply disappear rapidly. Then as the US begins its withdrawal, it will reach a tipping point rapidly. It will be impossible to sustained operations with 100,000 troops. Once the tipping point is reached, the withdrawal will not wati for the magical date of 2014–the end date will be moved up. The occupation of Afghanistan could end as early as 2012 or 2013.

• US experts have called for President Barack Obama to consider narrowing the mission in Afghanistan unless there is progress, and warn that success is impossible without a shift by Pakistan.
• An independent task force at the Council on Foreign Relations said on Friday the Obama administration will need to take hard decisions after it conducts its own review of war strategy next month.
• “If progress is being made, the United States should be able to draw down its forces starting in July 2011, based on conditions on the ground,” it said, supporting the timeline set last year by Obama.
  Advertisement: Story continues below .
• “However, if US efforts are not working, a more significant drawdown to a narrower mission that emphasises counterterror objectives with fewer US forces will be warranted,” it said.
• Under such a plan, some 10,000 to 20,000 US troops led by Special Operations Forces would fight militants – a sharp drop from the 100,000 now deployed. But it warned of major risks, including a greater chance Afghanistan would plunge into civil war. AFP

VoA News: An independent panel is urging U.S. President Barack Obama to sharply curtail the military’s mission in Afghanistan if there are no signs of progress.

A task force created by the Council on Foreign Relations, a Washington-based research group, issued a report Friday saying that the current approach to Afghanistan is at a critical point.

The report says the outcome of the 9-year Afghan war remains “uncertain” and that militants present a direct threat to the U.S. and its allies.

The 25-member panel is urging Mr. Obama to consider the high costs of the mission as it determines whether its efforts have been successful.

The Obama administration will conduct a thorough review of its Afghan war strategy next month. The independent panel says if progress is being made, the administration can proceed with its stated goal of withdrawing forces beginning in July 2011. But panel members say if U.S. efforts are not working, a more significant drawdown will be warranted.

But Armitage emphasized that Obama needs to have a “very deep, clear-eyed review of the situation,” and that if “real progress is not deemed to have been made, a majority of us suggest that we change the mission to a much different mission, one of counterterror and continued training of the Afghan National Security Forces.” more by Richard Armitage

Mr. Obama decided last year to increase the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan by 30,000 [short of the General's Request] 100,000 to battle Taliban and al-Qaida forces, while training Afghan security forces.

The administration has begun to suggest it is backing away from the July 2011 withdrawal date, instead stressing the goal of fully handing over control to Afghan security forces by 2014.

The task force also gave recommendations on Pakistan, suggesting the U.S. expand military ties and deepen economic cooperation following the devastating July floods. The report says the U.S. should continue to warn Pakistan that bilateral relations hinge on the government’s action against internal militant groups.

• The study warned that frontline partner Pakistan “has not made a decisive break with all militants”, with some security elements backing extremists that target Afghanistan and historic rival India.
• “One of the benefits of (a smaller mission in Afghanistan) is that we would actually be less dependent on Pakistan because our logistics needs would be smaller,” Armitage said as he presented the report.
• “To be clear, we cannot be successful in Afghanistan if we can’t get a changed attitude in Pakistan,” said Armitage, a key US interlocutor with Pakistan following the September 11, 2001 attacks.

Any conversation with Richard Armitage on Pakistan always comes with threats. The CFR reports also comes with the usual vintage Armitage bluster that doesn’t hold water–and he knows it. The consequences of these threats are colossal and no one can contemplate the worst case scenario.

Related articles

• 2014: What happens in Afghanistan afterwards? (rupeenews.com)
• Task force warns Obama over high cost of Aghan war (capitolhillblue.com)

American's sick of war recommend speedy Afghan withdrawal

Share

US recommends G-20 membership for Paksitan

Share

WASHINGTON: The United States should seek Pakistan’s membership or at least observer status in major international forums, such as the Group of Twenty, a US task force recommended on Friday.

The panel – led by Richard Armitage and Samuel Berger, top aides to former presidents George W. Bush and Bill Clinton – notes that Pakistan’s presence in such groups would enable it “to connect with new power structures and familiarise it with emerging norms”.

In a report released on Friday, the task force, which enjoys support of the administration, endorses the Obama administration’s effort to cultivate cooperation with Pakistan as the best way to “secure vital US interests in the short, medium, and long run”.

It recommends that this approach should include significant investments in Pakistan’s own stability, particularly after this summer’s floods.

Washington (CNN) — The United States should consider drastically cutting the number of troops in Afghanistan unless the current strategy starts to show signs of progress, a new report says.

The 98-page independent task force report, sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations, also says the United States should invest in a long-term partnership with Pakistan, but only if Pakistan takes action against all terrorist organizations.

The report encompasses analysis and recommendations on U.S. policy in Afghanistan and Pakistan from a 25-member bipartisan task force composed of high-profile military and national security experts. It was chaired by former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage and former National Security Adviser Samuel “Sandy” Berger.

The group “conditionally” endorses the current U.S. policy in Afghanistan, including plans for a conditions-based military drawdown in July 2011, but warns that America “cannot afford to continue down this costly path” without the potential for lasting progress.

At a news conference Friday discussing the report, Armitage, who served as deputy secretary of state under President George W. Bush, was critical of his former boss.

“After acknowledging that President Obama got a bad lie from the Bush administration regarding Afghanistan, we do salute his attempt at the surge to rectify the situation,” Armitage said.

But Armitage emphasized that Obama needs to have a “very deep, clear-eyed review of the situation,” and that if “real progress is not deemed to have been made, a majority of us suggest that we change the mission to a much different mission, one of counterterror and continued training of the Afghan National Security Forces.”

Regarding Pakistan, Armitage said the government there needs to do a better job pursuing and disabling Pakistan-based terror groups such as the Haqqani Network and Lashkar-e-Tayyiba, in the same way that it worries about the Pakistani Taliban.

“If we can’t be successful in either jaw-boning, pressuring, or ‘sticks-and-carroting’ them into this (fighting the Haqqani Network and Lashkar-e-Tayyiba), then in the long run we are dealing with a very dangerous situation,” he warned.

The independent report, titled “U.S. Strategy for Pakistan and Afghanistan,” precedes the Obama administration’s planned review of U.S. policy in Afghanistan, due in December.

The task force panel asks whether the “cloudy picture and high costs” should push the United States to “downsize its ambitions and reduce its military presence in Afghanistan.”

“After nine years of U.S. war in the region, time and patience are understandably short,” the report reads, acknowledging America’s huge budget deficits and sluggish economic recovery.

The task force recommendations for Afghanistan include, among others, shifting a greater burden of that country’s security to Afghan forces, and encouraging political reform, national reconciliation, and regional diplomacy.

Regarding Pakistan, the panel recommends that the United States maintain existing levels of economic and technical assistance for reconstruction efforts after that country’s devastating summer floods, and expanding training and equipment for police, paramilitaries, and the Pakistani army. CNN. Draw down U.S. troops if Afghanistan progress lags, panel recommends
By Laurie Ure, CNN
November 12, 2010 5:06 p.m. EST

Related articles

• Liberal CFR: If Afghan Strategy is Working, Drawdown, If Not, Drawdown (waronterrornews.typepad.com)
• Report cautions Obama on high cost of Afghan war (reuters.com)
• Draw down U.S. troops if Afghanistan progress lags, panel recommends (cnn.com)
• Musharraf: India responsible for terror in Pakistan (rupeenews.com)
• Islamabad to Washington: ‘Its not our war’ (pakistanindependent.com)
• ‘Hunooz Dilli door ast’: FM Qureshi to India on UNSC quest (timesofislamabad.com)
• US-Taliban talks vindicates Pakistani position (pakistanledger.com)
• ‘Hunooz Dilli door ast’: FM Qureshi to India on UNSC quest (pakpunch.com)
• FM Qureshi to India on UNSC: ‘Hunooz Dilli door ast’ (timesofsrinagar.com)
• ‘Hunooz Dilli door ast’: FM Qureshi to India on UNSC quest (newpakistantimes.com)
• ‘Hunooz Dilli door ast’: FM Qureshi to India on UNSC (kashmirpunch.com)

US recommends G-20 membership for Paksitan

Share