US hinting at getting tough on Pakistan with new Afghan-Pak Policy

[Stephen Cohen]

US hinting at getting tough on Pakistan with new Afghan-Pak Policy

Highlights

• The US may be strongly considering cracking the whip on Pakistan on the issue of terror
• A solution to Afghanistan, is 'a broader concern that incorporates India and Pakistan', the US said
• The US state department acknowledged that the US's Afghan policy review is an issue 'a lot of people are very curious about'

In another sign that Washington is thinking of getting tough on Pakistan and terror, the US said on Friday that the ongoing review of its Afghanistan policy incorporates India and the whole South Asian region.

This assertion by the US is noteworthy, because of all the speculation that's coming out of Washington, the one that has gained the most traction is that the US is strongly considering cracking the whip on India's neighbour Pakistan on the issue of terror, something New Delhi has been demanding for a while now.

In addition to US President Donald Trump, several US lawmakers and diplomats have publicly talked of the need for Islamabad to crack down on terror safe havens in Pakistan and terror acts in Afghanistan and India being plotted on Pakistani soil.

"We are looking at this as not just a solution to Afghanistan, but also a broader concern that incorporates India and Pakistan as well as a regional solution," said US state department spokeswoman Heather Nauert in a press briefing.

She acknowledged that the US's Afghan policy review is an issue "a lot of people are very curious about".

Last month, US defence secretary James Mattis said the ongoing review of the US's Afghanistan strategy is "hard" because it has to be "wrapped into a regional context" that involves Pakistan.

When he was specifically asked whether it is " the diplomatic angle...the Pakistan angle " that was complicating matters, he acknowledged it is.

On a question about the India-China border standoff in Doklam, Nauert reiterated what she's said before, made sure to mention that the US has relationships with both India and China and was careful to not take sides.

"...we have relationships with both governments. We continue to encourage both parties to sit down and have conversations about that," said the US state department spokeswoman.

She added that the India-China border standoff is a situation the US is "closely following" since it began June 16.

http://www.defencenews.in/article/U...on-Pakistan-with-new-Afghan-Pak-Policy-283637

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...ng-tough-on-pakistan/articleshow/60014678.cms

 

[Stephen Cohen]

@Horus

WASHINGTON: US Senator John McCain has unveiled his long-promised strategy for Afghanistan, which threatens “imposing graduated diplomatic, military, and economic costs on Pakistan” if it continues to provide the alleged support and sanctuary to terrorist and insurgent groups, including the Taliban and the Haqqani Network.

The strategy, issued on Thursday afternoon as an amendment to next fiscal year’s defence bill, includes providing additional US troops for counter-terrorism missions. It also allows US advisers to work closer to the front lines with Afghan officers and giving US commanders a broader authority to target Taliban insurgents, Islamic State militants and other militias.

Senator McCain, the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, has long threatened to force a strategy on the administration if it doesn’t come up with one to win the 16-year-old war. Mr McCain said some of America’s “most experienced and respected former military and intelligence officials” contributed to this strategy.

Besides threatening Pakistan with new sanctions, the proposed policy also outlines the potential benefits of a long-term US-Pakistan strategic partnership that could result from Pakistan’s cessation of support for all terrorist and insurgent groups and constructive role in bringing about a peaceful resolution of the conflict in Afghanistan.

The plan suggests a regional dialogue including Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, India, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and other nations to promote Afghan political reconciliation.

It proposes intensifying US regional diplomatic efforts working through flexible frameworks to encourage this dialogue to advance regional cooperation on issues such as border security, intelligence sharing, counter-narcotics, transportation, and trade. Senator McCain hopes that this would “reduce mistrust and build confidence among regional states”.

Last month, the US Department of Defence also issued a report, “Enhancing Security and Stability in Afghanistan”, which recognises Pakistan as “the most influential external actor affecting Afghan stability and the outcome of both the US and Nato missions” and suggests using both carrot and stick to achieve its cooperation.

And last week, US National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster indicated that a new US strategy for Afghanistan may include this “carrot and stick” approach. The White House, which has a team of experts working on the new strategy, had promised to release it by mid-July. State Department spokesperson Heather Nauert told a news briefing on Thursday that the administration “will roll out” the plan but did not say when.

Senator McCain visited Pakistan and Afghanistan last month with a team of senior US lawmakers and in an interview to PTV emphasised the importance of Pakistan’s support for US efforts to end the Afghan war.

While announcing his new strategy, Senator McCain criticised both Presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump, saying: “President Obama’s ‘don’t lose’ strategy has put us on a path to achieving the opposite result. Now, nearly seven months into President Trump’s administration, we’ve had no strategy at all as conditions on the ground have steadily worsened.”

Mr McCain said the goal of this strategy was to “ensure that Afghanistan never again becomes a sanctuary for terrorists to plot and conduct attacks against America, our allies, or our interests”.

His integrated civil-military plan for Afghanistan suggests the following strategic objectives:

Deny, disrupt, degrade, and destroy the ability of terrorist groups to conduct attacks against the United States, its allies, or its core interests.

Prevent the Taliban from using military force to overthrow the government of Afghanistan and reduce the Taliban’s control of the Afghan population.

Improve the capability and capacity of the Afghan government to the extent of feasible and practicable to defeat terrorist and insurgent groups as well as sustainably and independently provide security throughout Afghanistan.

Establish security conditions in Afghanistan necessary to encourage and facilitate a negotiated peace process that supports Afghan political reconciliation and an eventual diplomatic resolution to the conflict in Afghanistan.

Forge a regional diplomatic consensus in support of the long-term stabilisation of Afghanistan through integration into regional patterns of political, security, and economic cooperation.

Bolster US counterterrorism efforts by: Increasing the number of US counterterrorism forces in Afghanistan.

Providing the US military with status-based targeting authorities against the Taliban, the Haqqani Network, Al Qaeda, the Islamic State and other terrorist groups.

Pursuing a joint agreement to secure a long-term, open-ended counterterrorism partnership between the United States and the Afghan government, with an enduring US counterterrorism presence in Afghanistan.

Improving the military capability and capacity of the Afghan national forces against the Taliban and other terrorist groups by:

Establishing US military training and advisory teams and significantly increasing US air power and other critical combat enablers to support Afghan operations.

Providing sustained support to Afghan forces by providing key enabling capabilities, including intelligence, logistics, special forces, air lift, and close air support.

Strictly conditioning further US military, economic, and governance assistance programmes to the Afghan government upon measurable progress in achieving joint US-Afghan benchmarks for institutional reforms, especially those related to anti-corruption, financial transparency, and rule of law.

Published in Dawn, August 12th, 2017

https://www.dawn.com/news/1351019/new-afghan-strategy-threatens-graduated-sanctions-on-pakistan

 

[DjSnake]

get tough by bombing civilians, yet they still blame pakistan lmao
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/11/world/asia/afghanistan-civilian-deaths-us-airstrikes.html

 

[Qutb-ud-din Aybak]

involving India means no peace in Afghanistan.
US is not doing us any favour . they need to do more and pay us road and port taxes or use their beloved friend port known as chabahar.

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

As if NK isn't enough to keep the US policy makers busy!!!! How they will handle Russia/China axis in full throttle is the question of the hours!!!! All of DC's men and all of DC's horses failed both in Korea and Vietnam!!! I hope President Trump denies them another chance in Afganistan. But, if he listens to the old hands, they will hand him the same results - once again!!!!

As for India, while she is facing existential threat from China is it what DC boys are offering??? "Do more" against Pak via NA thugs, TTP. BLA etc.?????

 

[idune]

indians are clamoring for some sort of sidekick role from US in its Afghan policy; that is clear. US has learned a stark lesson over last 16 years that india is polarizing 3rd party actor which uses Afghan soil to run terror network against Pakistan. US policy and mission using brute force and murderous drone mission had utterly failed in Afghanistan, just like any other power in history tried their luck in Afghanistan. If US chooses to pursue same murderous policy using its stooges like Ghani, Karzi and using indian terror network, it will not go anywhere but ultimate demise of US influence. Bottom line is, real power brokers on the ground, Taliban and Afghan people want invaders of all shades (US, indians, NATO, Arabs etc.) to leave their soil. And Real power brokers on the ground have strong regional support from Pakistan, Iran, China and even Russia.

One track of US thought is exploring option to outsource operations to "Blackwater" mercenaries where company undertake killing missions in exchange for $10 of billions. CEO of Blackwater, EriK Prince already made such proposal and his sister is serving Trump administration cabinet (education secretary, Betsy DeVos).

At the same time US pursuing another track to create mistrust between real power brokers on the ground and weaken opposition to US presence. Good old divide and concur strategy. That is why there was NYT propaganda report accusing Pakistan involvement in Mollah Mansur killing when it was US drone and missile that killed Taliban leader. Taliban as organization had gone through similar propaganda campaign before and can see through such US deception ploy.

Pakistan as a country has set policy and interests but it has to be careful about internal saboteurs who for money act on be half of US. If Pakistan can do just this one thing, existing policy and interest agenda will make sure long term goals get in place one way or another.

 

[Raider 21]

involving India means no peace in Afghanistan.
US is not doing us any favour . they need to do more and pay us road and port taxes or use their beloved friend port known as chabahar.

Not to mention their lack of experience when it comes to recent years of combat.

 

[nair]

involving India means no peace in Afghanistan.

They have been trying hard to get India involved...... Indian involvement is majorly in to building infrastructure, Training military and providing support to build military equipment,(this is more or less "0").... India will continue do that.....

@ topic.... I do not think US can do much with Pakistan, they lost the leverage which was the freebies and aid.... both have gone down significantly....

 

[idune]

Indian involvement is majorly (indian invented english) in operating terrorist network under guise of building infrastructure, training military and providing support to build military equipment,(this is more or less "0").... India will continue try its luck so long US installed stooges like Ghani and Karzai are in power.

@ topic.... I do not think US can do much without Pakistan, US lost the leverage because so called US "freebies and aid" are peanuts compared to massive Chinese and other investments ....

Your post corrected.

 

[nair]

Your post corrected.

Well with resepct to the topic, what ever you tried to do or what ever i said doesnt make much of a difference....

Now with respect to India, I do not even bother to read it, as I know your hatred and biased towards India... So i do not want to waste my time responding to it....

 

[Qutb-ud-din Aybak]

They have been trying hard to get India involved...... Indian involvement is majorly in to building infrastructure, Training military and providing support to build military equipment,(this is more or less "0").... India will continue do that.....

@ topic.... I do not think US can do much with Pakistan, they lost the leverage which was the freebies and aid.... both have gone down significantly....

US was not some one we have ever been dependent upon. it was just mutual interests.

 

[nair]

US was not some one we have ever been dependent upon. it was just mutual interests.

You were always depended on US, (may be not in last few years)...... You can continue to deny it though

 

[LeGenD]

We cannot prevent India from forging diplomatic relations with Afghanistan [if] the Afghans desire it. Afghanistan has every right to forge diplomatic relations with any state it deems as necessary.

I think this posturing is a message to Pakistan that we should stop imposing our will on Afghans in regards to its [inter-state] matters.

Anyways, I see this as a complete failure of Pakistani establishment to sell its narrative to Washington DC. We are not scheduling any high-level meetings with the US for this matter (and US-Pak relations in general) because PML(N) is too busy in its corruption-bachao campaign.

On the bright side, a clear-cut Afghan policy is welcome. It will help us understand our situation in this geopolitical spectrum and what we are supposed to do about it.

You were always depended on US, (may be not in last few years)...... You can continue to deny it though

US has the potential to influence any state; Pakistan is not an exception.

Even if entrench ourselves firmly in the Chinese camp, American decisions will continue to affect us (positively or negatively). I am hoping for a balanced political maneuvering from Pakistan because China is not a shield against US.

 

[Trango Towers]

Americans have just lost Afghanistan altogether. Pakistan will never allow india a foothold in Afghanistan and American supplies depend on us. unless they wish to go to war in which Isreal will be wiped out. They will risk America but they will never risk Israel and Pakistanis know that. we are not Iraq or Libya we have the ability to hit back.

 

[LeGenD]

Americans have just lost Afghanistan altogether. Pakistan will never allow india a foothold in Afghanistan and American supplies depend on us. unless they wish to go to war in which Isreal will be wiped out. They will risk America but they will never risk Israel and Pakistanis know that. we are not Iraq or Libya we have the ability to hit back.

Easy for you to say this in a forum.

Do you think Pakistan can endure the fallout? Israel (and US) are in the process of fielding very capable anti-ballistic missile systems and we cannot take there defenses for granted.

Absolute victory may not be possible in Afghanistan but Americans can come back at a later stage to reboot the situation on the ground like in 2001. Only Afghans can decide what course of action they want to take and how they are going to define their relations with other states; Pakistan does not have much say in these matters at present.

We have to think rationally.