Skip to main content

Spearhead Analysis: CHICAGO



The NATO Summit in Chicago was held. Pakistan was invited and participated. There was no bilateral meeting between Pakistan and the US and no meeting of the Pakistan President with...The NATO Summit in Chicago was held. Pakistan was invited and participated. There was no bilateral meeting between Pakistan and the US and no meeting of the Pakistan President with the NATO Secretary General. The Southern Distribution Network for NATO logistics through Pakistan remains closed pending conclusion of ongoing discussions. The Chicago Summit, however, declared clearly and unambiguously the 2013 deadline for transition and the 2014 deadline for withdrawal. There was also commitment for continued international support to Afghanistan beyond 2014– and the US already has a bilateral agreement with Afghanistan for ‘support troops’ presence till 2024. The 28 nation NATO alliance has other issues besides Pakistan—the 2% of GDP commitment for defense by each state, the future of NATO and ‘smart defense’ as an option. Pakistan figures in the context of Afghanistan and as a nuclear weapon state in the throes of internal instability and violence.
By now it is clear that the US is unlikely to apologize for the Salala attack that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers or to stop Drone strikes against targets in FATA—the two key conditions put forth by Pakistan for reopening the Ground Lines of Communication (GLOC). The US-Pakistan interaction has declined to an extreme transactional relationship with haggling over the per- container transit fee demanded by Pakistan to compensate for damage to its infrastructure. Senator McCain has called it ‘extortion’ and US law makers have moved to cut down and even stop US aid to Pakistan if Pakistan does not open the GLOC. In the process the narrative of those in Pakistan who oppose reopening of the GLOC has found traction in public opinion—they say that the GLOC must remain closed because it provides logistics support to those who are killing Pakistanis and the Afghans fighting for their freedom. They ridicule and condemn the notion of charging transit fees.
It would have been better if decision making had been done at the Cabinet or DCC (Defense Committee of the Cabinet) level but involving the Parliamentary Committee for National Security and the Parliament has been good for the discernible movement towards civilian supremacy. Pakistan could have requested the US for up gradation of the GLOC into a multi-lane highway and the north-south rail link. This would have been a lasting, visible high impact commitment to the state and people of Pakistan by the US. Such a project would have had a positive effect on the regional environment and it could have been the starting point for a reset in US-Pakistan relations instead of the haggling that is taking the relationship to an undignified low. If the commitment was too much for the US to bear alone then the US could have led an international consortium to help Pakistan and the region. Is it too late to revisit the possibilities?
(Spearhead analyses are a collaborative effort and not attributable to a single individual).
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the SPY EYES Analysis and or its affiliates. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). SPY EYES Analysis and or its affiliates will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements and or information contained in this article.





Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Democratic Rights of Kashmiri Youth

Centre for Policy Analysis (CPA ) organized Convention on Democratic Rights of Youth in Kashmir in Srinagar By Assabah Khan On 2nd of June 2012, CPA organised Convention on Democratic Rights of Youth in Kashmir. The Venue of the Convention was Institute of Management Rural Development and Public Administration in the Kashmir Valley. On this Occasion one of the Speakers Mr. Siddiq Wahid Ex Vice Chancellor of Islamic University of Science & Technology and Currently Director of Kashmir Study Centre in Kashmir University quoted a brilliant example to bring out the real character of Kashmiri youth. Mr. Wahid said, as Vice-Chancellor of IUST he had the opportunity of taking a group of Kashmiri boys for a tour of India where they met various shades of political opinion including BJP. This group also had the opportunity of meeting with the Home Minister of India and at the end of session Home Minister of India asked for a photo session with the Kashmiri boys. In response one 2...

Pakistan can never be Madina E Saani

By Nadeem Sajjad. Pakistan is a land loved by many and lived in by millions. It has been witnessed in the past --and somewhat in the present age – that the origin of the name (word) “Pakistan” has had many different accounts of its creators/inventors. Known to be the most accurate of all accounts, is the one of the much respected Chaudhry Rehmat Ali. Others have the concept that the word “Pakistan” was given to the Muslims of India, after the success of Lahore resolution in 1940, by the Hindus of the subcontinent and was then used by Quaid e Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah in his presidential address to the All India Muslim League annual session at Delhi on 24 April 1943. Whatever may be the origin, the Muslims got their own land to practice their religion Islam, and to maintain their traditions. The thing that should be emphasized upon is that the country was created in the name of Islam.  Knowing the origin is one thing, but naming the country or the name itself to something els...

What about Israel’s nuclear weapons?

By   Patrick B. Pexton Readers periodically ask me some variation on this question: “Why does the press follow every jot and tittle of Iran’s nuclear program, but we never see any stories about Israel’s nuclear weapons capability?” It’s a fair question. Going back 10 years into Post archives, I could not find any in-depth reporting on Israeli nuclear capabilities, although national security writer  Walter Pincus  has touched on it  many times in his articles and  columns . I spoke with several experts in the nuclear and nonproliferation fields , and they say that the lack of reporting on Israel’s nuclear weapons is real — and frustrating. There are some obvious reasons for this, and others that are not so obvious. First, Israel refuses to acknowledge publicly that it has nuclear weapons. The U.S. government also officially does not acknowledge the existence of such a program. Israel’s official position, as reiterated by Aaron Sagui, spokesman fo...