— File Photo

ISLAMABAD: Soon after the unconscious teenage activist, Malala Yousufzai, flew out of the country for treatment in the United Kingdom, all the hype about long anticipated North Waziristan operation surreptitiously began to dissipate.

Expediencies, both on civilian and military side, emerged as the roadblock to any major operation for clearing North Waziristan — home to a variety of terrorist groups where the army had all through the decade of war on terror avoided going on one pretext or the other.

But, strikingly the military looked to be passing the buck for the crunch time dithering to the civilian leadership.

Talking to journalists on Monday, Interior Minister Rehman Malik conceded that no operation in the area was being planned.

His response followed military’s statement over the weekend that a political decision was needed to launch the offensive for dislodging Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TPP) and its local affiliates from their headquarters in the tribal agency, where they moved in 2007 after being targeted by the army in South Waziristan and elsewhere in Fata.

The army, while putting the ball in the civilian leadership’s court, had noted that its commanders had time and again reiterated their resolve to rid the country of the menace. No mention, however, was made to the longstanding stance of the army that it would enter North Waziristan at a time of its own choosing or whether the moment had arrived.

Back to back statements by Army Chief Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani and Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, after Malala shooting, on carrying on the fight against terrorism were taken as a pointer to a looming operation in Waziristan.

What missed everyone’s sight while reading the army’s new found resoluteness was that beyond the rhetoric timed to match the national angst, nothing was said of the army’s assessment of the situation crossing the threshold.

Erroneous as it may be, the obvious inference drawn from the arising situation is that the government ultimately balked at the proposal for going all out against virulent militant groups holed up in North Waziristan.

Sceptics, however, say the military didn’t at any stage unequivocally indicated that North Waziristan operation was inevitable.

Had it done so everyone would have fallen in line, they observed and pointed to previous military offensives in Swat, Bajaur and elsewhere.

The government’s disclosure that it wasn’t contemplating North Waziristan operation coincided with a resolute fightback by the right wingers to regain the space lost due to sudden outpouring of sympathy for Malala after the TTP attacked her in Mingora last Tuesday.

Military-backed groups like Difa-i-Pakistan Council, which had been hibernating since the impasse over Nato supply routes was resolved in July, suddenly sprung back into action to oppose the proposed military operation. Some analysts believe that the DPC’s return itself suggested that either there were differences within the army on the issue or the army through its tough statements only meant to mollify revulsion against Taliban.

A military commander, who previously served in the region, insisted that it was only the political will that was lacking and there were no other operational obstacles.

He pointed out that despite overwhelming grief and anger over the assassination bid on Malala, a national consensus could not be achieved.

“It’s not only about the operation. There have to be large number of IDPs (internally displaced persons) and other implications for which there should be clear political backing.”

Asked what was preventing the political parties from agreeing on the military operation, he said it were only the political expediencies. “You know we are into the election year and no political party wants to hurt its prospects.”

He emphasised that once the political decision is in place other challenges could be addressed.

The army, which for long avoided taking on militants in North Waziristan because of strategic compulsions, doesn’t want to be seen as obstructing the operation in view of the world’s anti-terror resolve.

In addition to TTP, which is based in and around Mirali, and Lashkar-i-Jhangvi, North Waziristan plays host to Haqqani Network, Al Qaeda and a number of other foreign fighters mostly from Arab and Central Asian countries.

US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta (L), and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey speak to the media during a briefing at the Pentagon, on August 14, 2012 in Arlington, Virginia. — Photo by AFP

WASHINGTON: The Pakistani army chief sounded “the right themes” in his Independence Day speech, says the US military chief as the US defence secretary acknowledged that militants in Afghanistan were conducting cross-border attacks into Pakistan.

In a similar conciliatory note, the US State Department dismissed as ‘hypotheticals’, media reports claiming that Pakistani troops might enter Afghanistan while pursuing Taliban militants.

The statements – at news briefings in Washington – follow Secretary of Defence Leon Panetta’s AP interview on Monday, saying that Pakistan was all set to launch a military operation in North Waziristan.

And on Wednesday, reports in the US media claimed that Pakistan might launch this operation sometime next month.

At a Pentagon briefing, Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen Martin E. Dempsey highlighted Gen Kayani’s Independence Day speech in Kakul as very significant.

“I’d encourage you to take a look at (this speech),” said the US military chief, “because it sounds the right themes in seeing his understanding of the challenge”.

In his speech Gen Kayani acknowledged that all state institutions in Pakistan, including the army, had made mistakes, recognised militancy as the main threat to the country and sought public support for dealing with the threat.

At the same briefing, Secretary Panetta pointed out that relations between the two countries had improved rapidly since the reopening of Nato supply lines to Afghanistan.

He also acknowledged one of Pakistan’s major complaints that Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) militants were using bases in Afghanistan to attack Pakistani military posts and other targets inside Fata.

“There’s no question that there are terrorists that are coming across from Pakistan who wind up in Afghanistan and then cause some cross-border incidents across the way,” he told an Afghan journalist who wanted the US to persuade Pakistan to stop shelling suspected militant hideouts.

In a pre-briefing statement, Secretary Panetta noted that Pakistan had “now taken a more positive, visible step to advance our shared objective of a secure and peaceful Afghanistan”.

Pakistan’s decision to open up the Nato supply lines, “means a great deal to us in terms of our ability to transit containers and materiel that are now moving across the border into Afghanistan”, he added.

Secretary Panetta also noted that cross-border cooperation with Pakistan was increasing and the top US commander in Afghanistan, Gen John Allen, was meeting Gen Kayani on a regular basis.

“And it’s helping us try to confront the challenge of these insurgent sanctuaries, which exist on both sides of the border,” he said.

Deputy US ambassador in Islamabad, Richard Hoagland, (L) and head of Pakistani delegation Rear Admiral Farrukh Ahmed shake hands as they exchange an document after an agreement ceremony held in the Pakistan Defence Ministry in Rawalpindi on July 31, 2012. – Photo by AFP

ISLAMABAD: The government signed with the United States on Tuesday a memorandum of understanding (MoU) governing supplies to and from American troops in Afghanistan.

The signing of the accord for ‘Transit of cargo to and from Afghanistan through Pakistan’ paved the way for the release of $1.18 billion in Coalition Support Fund reimbursements held up for over two years.

The only new feature of the arrangement, which in essence is reportedly similar to the existing practice, is that it is in black and white.

The agreement was concluded on the eve of ISI chief Lt-Gen Zaheerul Islam’s maiden trip to the US for renewing ties with the CIA.

Analysts say the signing of the agreement and Gen Islam’s visit to the US may be significant steps towards rapprochement after months of acrimony but are unlikely to resolve the underlying contentious issues that from time to time cause strains.

“This MoU is a demonstration of increased transparency and openness between our governments in respect of Pakistan’s sovereignty as requested by the Pakistani parliament,” US Charge d’Affaires Richard Hoagland said after signing the agreement with Defence Ministry’s Additional Secretary Rear Admiral Farrokh Ahmed. Newly appointed Defence Secretary Lt-Gen (retd) Asif Yasin Malik attended the signing ceremony.

Pakistani and American negotiators took 90 days to conclude the six-page agreement and its two annexures – one on a negative list (goods not allowed to be transported through the country) and the other detailing interlocutors at various levels.

Nato supply routes through the country, suspended after the Nov 26 Salala attack, were reopened earlier this month under a mechanism that existed before the seven-month blockade because the agreement on transit of cargo was still to be concluded.

It will take a few more weeks for the new arrangement to become fully functional as the two sides will sit down to settle the terms of reference on the basis of the MoU.

Both Ambassador Hoagland and Secretary Malik hailed the signing of the accord as a “landmark event” and praised the work put in by the negotiating teams for finalising it.

Secretary Malik said that after the MoU there were no “foggy areas” and “crystal clear guidelines” had been set for the process. He said the pact would contribute to regional and global peace and security.

Details of the agreement were not shared with the media even though most of its contents have already been reported through leaks.

Talking to Dawn, a senior defence official said Pakistan had fully secured its interests under the new transit system. “Under this MoU we have the right of rejection, refusal of cargo that doesn’t comply with the requirements and revoking the agreement,” he noted.

The new system functions under a Central Coordination Authority. The chief liaison officers for the two countries are the defence secretary of Pakistan and the head of the US office of defence representative in Pakistan. At the working level, the mechanism is two tiered — policy and oversight; and operations and implementation.

All containers will be scanned twice — at the port of entry (Port Qasim) and the port of exit (Torkham / Chaman) — to ensure the implementation of the condition barring transportation of lethal equipment through Pakistani territory. Shipments of some categories of weapons may be allowed on the way back from Afghanistan.

Consignments for Afghan Security Forces may include weapons and ammunition.

Vehicles carrying the containers will be fitted with radio frequency identification (RFID) trackers.

Asked if there was some built-in arrangement to reduce the chances of suspension of the routes in the aftermath of any unpleasant incident or accident, Mr Hoagland said the MoU was about logistics and did not cover many other issues that were still being discussed.

He said that despite presence of a provision for either side to walk away from the agreement, he did not see any reason for the MoU to be revoked in the near future.

Trucks transporting Nato supplies. — File Photo

RAWALPINDI: Pakistan on Tuesday signed a deal with the United States governing arrangements for Nato convoys travelling to Afghanistan, seeking to draw a line under a seven-month border blockade.

Islamabad agreed to reopen land routes for Nato goods on July 3 after ordering the longest border closure of the 10-year war in neighbouring Afghanistan in protest at botched US air raids that killed 24 Pakistani troops.

The agreement is part of efforts by the “war on terror” allies to patch up their fractious relationship, which plunged into crisis last year over the US raid that killed Osama bin Laden hiding in Pakistan and the air strikes.

It comes just one day before the head of Pakistani intelligence, Lieutenant General Zaheer ul-Islam, begins a three-day visit to Washington for talks with the head of the CIA, which has been interpreted as another sign of a gradual rapprochement.

Under the agreement inked in Rawalpindi, the home of Pakistan’s powerful military, the United States will release $1.1 billion under the Coalition Support Fund to reimburse the troubled nation for fighting militants within its borders.

Officials at the ceremony gave no details of the Memorandum of Understanding or MoU, nor did they release a copy at a news conference.

Guidelines laid out by the Pakistani parliament earlier this year insisted that in future no weapons and ammunition be transported through the country, though Western officials say this never happened in the first place.

A Pakistani security official said the agreement gave Islamabad the right to refuse or reject any shipment and special radio chips would be fitted to containers for monitoring.

Richard Hoagland, the deputy US ambassador to Islamabad who signed the agreement on behalf of Washington, hailed it as a “demonstration of increased transparency and openness” between the two governments.

The Pakistan government relented in its blockade after US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said sorry for the air raid deaths, but few supply trucks have made it across the border in the weeks since then.

Officials closed the Torkham border crossing, the quickest route to Kabul from the port city of Karachi, to Nato traffic on Thursday over security fears.

The Pakistani Taliban have vowed to attack Nato supplies and last Tuesday, one of the truck drivers was shot dead in the northwestern town of Jamrud.

Pakistani Defence Secretary Asif Yasin Malik, who attended the ceremony, said the deal would contribute to the stability of the region and hailed it as a “landmark event”.

Trucks containing Nato supplies. — Reuters Photo

KANDAHAR: As the United States trumpeted its success in persuading Pakistan to end its seven-month blockade of supplies for Nato troops in Afghanistan, another group privately cheered its good fortune: the Taliban.  

One of the Afghan war’s great ironies is that both Nato and the Taliban rely on the convoys to fuel their operations — a recipe for seemingly endless conflict.

The insurgents have earned millions of dollars from Afghan security firms that illegally paid them not to attack trucks making the perilous journey from Pakistan to coalition bases throughout Afghanistan — a practice the US has tried to crack down on but admits likely still occurs.

Militants often target the convoys in Pakistan as well, but there have been far fewer reports of trucking companies paying off the insurgents, possibly because the route there is less vulnerable to attack.

Pakistan’s decision to close its border to Nato supplies in November in retaliation for US air strikes that killed 24 Pakistani troops significantly reduced the flow of cash to militants operating in southern and eastern Afghanistan, where the convoys travel up from Pakistan, said Taliban commanders.

Pakistan reopened the supply route in early July after the US apologised for the deaths of the soldiers.

”Stopping these supplies caused us real trouble,” a Taliban commander who leads about 60 insurgents in eastern Ghazni province told The Associated Press in an interview.

”Earnings dropped down pretty badly. Therefore the rebellion was not as strong as we had planned.”

A second Taliban commander who controls several dozen fighters in southern Kandahar province said the money from security companies was a key source of financing for the insurgency, which uses it to pay fighters and buy weapons, ammunition and other supplies.

”We are able to make money in bundles,” the commander told the AP by telephone.

”Therefore, the Nato supply is very important for us.”

Both commanders spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of being targeted by Nato or Afghan forces, and neither would specify exactly how much money they make off the convoys.

The US military estimated last year that $360 million in US tax dollars ended up in the hands of the Taliban, criminals and power brokers with ties to both. More than half the losses flowed through a $2.1 billion contract to truck huge amounts of food, water and fuel to American troops across Afghanistan.

The military said only a small percentage of the $360 million was funnelled to the Taliban and other insurgent groups. But even a small percentage would mean millions of dollars, and the militants, who rely on crude weaponry, require relatively little money to operate.

The military investigated one power broker who owned a private security company and was known to supply weapons to the Taliban.

The power broker, who was not named, received payments from a trucking contractor doing business with the US Over more than two years; the power broker funnelled $8.5 million to the owners of an unlicensed money exchange service used by insurgents.

A congressional report in 2010 called ”Warlord, Inc.” said trucking contractors pay tens of millions of dollars annually to local warlords across Afghanistan in exchange for guarding their supply convoys, some of which are suspected of paying off the Taliban.

The military instituted a new, roughly $1 billion trucking contract last September with a different set of companies that it claims has reduced the flow of money to insurgents by providing greater visibility of which subcontractors those firms hire, said Maj Gen Richard Longo, head of a US anti-corruption task force in Afghanistan.

But it’s very difficult to cut off the illegal transfers completely, he said.

”I think it would be naive on my part to suggest that no money is going to the enemy,” said Longo.

”I think there is still money flowing to criminals, and I think that the nexus between criminals and the insurgency is there.”

Rep John Tierney, the Democrat from Massachusetts who led the Warlord, Inc report, said the new contract has resulted in some increased contractor oversight and accountability, but ”the Department of Defense must take more aggressive steps to keep our military personnel safe and to protect taxpayer dollars from going to our enemies in Afghanistan.”

The US pushed Pakistan hard to reopen the Nato supply line through the country because it had been forced to use a longer route that runs into northern Afghanistan through Central Asia and costs an additional $100 million per month.

The Taliban commanders interviewed by the AP said the northern route was less lucrative for them because fewer trucks passed through southern and eastern Afghanistan, and contractors seemed to have less money to direct toward the insurgents. It’s unclear if that is a result of the new trucking contract implemented by the military.

But the commanders said they were determined to get their cut as the flow of trucks resumes from Pakistan — a process that has been slowed by bureaucratic delays, disputes over compensation and concerns about security.

“We charge these trucks as they pass through every area, and they are forced to pay,” said the commander operating in Ghazni. “If they don’t, the supplies never arrive, or they face the consequence of heavy attacks.”

Prior to the November attack, the US and other Nato countries shipped about 30 per cent of their non-lethal supplies from Pakistan’s southern port city of Karachi through two main crossings on the Afghan border.

The route through Pakistan will become even more critical as the US seeks to withdraw most of its combat troops by the end of 2014, a process that will require tens of thousands of containers carrying equipment and supplies.

“We have had to wait these past seven months for the supply lines to reopen and our income to start again,” said the Taliban commander in Ghazni. “Now work is back to normal.”

Pakistan’s Director-General of Inter Services Intelligence (ISI), Lieutenant-General Zaheer-ul-Islam (R), attends a function with Governor of Sindh Ishrat-ul-Ebad (C) and Chief Minister Sindh, Syed Qaim Ali Shah (L) in Karachi, December 25, 2011. — Reuters File Photo

ISLAMABAD: Director General Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) Lieutenant General Zaheer-u-ul Islam will hold talks in Washington on August 1-3 with his CIA counterpart, a military statement said, with drone strikes expected to be a major issue.

It is the first time in a year that the chief of the Pakistan military’s powerful ISI will make the trip, signalling a thaw in relations after US troops found and killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan in May 2011.

Lieutenant General Islam, who was appointed in March, “will visit USA from 1st to 3rd August. This will be a service-to-service bilateral visit,” the statement said.

“He will meet his counterpart General David Petraeus, director CIA.” The short statement gave no other details, but a senior Pakistani security official earlier told AFP that the pair would discuss counter-terror cooperation and intelligence sharing.

The ISI chief would also demand an end to US drone attacks against the Taliban and al Qaeda, and again ask for the means for Pakistan to carry out the attacks instead, the security official said.

It had been expected that Islam would visit the US in late July. It was not immediately clear why that trip did not happen.

Islamabad has been increasingly vocal in its public opposition to the drones. Pakistan’s leaders had quietly approved initially but now say they are a violation of sovereignty and insist they fan anti-US sentiment.

US officials are understood to believe the attacks too important to give up, although the number declined as relations between the nominal allies plunged to their lowest in a decade.

But on July 3 Islamabad agreed to end a seven-month blockade on Nato supplies travelling overland to Afghanistan after the United States apologised for the deaths of 24 Pakistani soldiers in botched air strikes last November.

The resumption of Nato traffic has been temporarily suspended over fears of right-wing militants’ attacks.

Nato supply trucks pass through Pak-Afghan border . -File Photo

PESHAWAR: Gunmen in the outskirts of Peshawar Tuesday attacked a container truck carrying supplies to Nato troops in Afghanistan, killing the driver, officials said.

It is the first such attack since Pakistan reopened its border to Nato supply convoys three weeks ago after a seven-month blockade staged in protest at a botched US air raid that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers at a border post.

Tuesday’s attack took place near the market in Jamrud town on the outskirts of Peshawar, the main city in the troubled northwest, local administration official Bakhtiar Khan said.

“Two armed men riding on a motorbike opened fire on a container carrying supplies for Nato troops across the border and killed its driver,” Khan told AFP, adding that the driver’s helper was seriously wounded.

Another administration official said the truck was part of a convoy of three or four vehicles travelling without security protection when they came under attack.

A hospital official in Jamrud confirmed the casualties.

“The driver was shifted to our hospital in serious condition, he died later,” doctor Azam Khan of the state-run Jamrud hospital told AFP.

He received one bullet in the head and two in the chest, he added.

No one has claimed responsibility of the attack as yet.

However, the Pakistani Taliban had threatened earlier to attack the supply trucks and kill its drivers if they tried to resume supplies to troops in Afghanistan, and right-wing and extremist religious groups have held large demonstrations against the resumption of supply lines.

Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) spokesman Ehsanullah Ehsan had told AFP that the Taliban “will not allow any truck to pass and will attack it,” hours after Pakistan confirmed it had decided to reopen vital Nato supply routes into Afghanistan which have been closed since November.

“We will not only attack the supply truck but will also kill the drivers (of Nato supply trucks),” Ehsan had said.

Pakistan on July 3 decided to reopen overland routes to Nato convoys crossing into Afghanistan, after US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said sorry for the air strike deaths last November.

The crisis was the worst episode in Pakistan’s decade-long partnership with Washington in the war in Afghanistan, with both sides still struggling to overcome a breakdown in trust.

So far relatively few Nato trucks have actually trickled across the border, with owners awaiting a deal on compensation for seven months’ missed work and security guarantees in the southern port city of Karachi.

The convoy attack came a day after a US drone attack on a compound in the northwest killed at least 10 militants, according to officials — the first drone strike in the Muslim holy fasting month of Ramadan.

There has been a dramatic increase in US drone strikes in Pakistan since May when a Nato summit in Chicago could not strike a deal to end the blockade on NATO supplies travelling to Afghanistan.

Washington considers Pakistan’s northwestern tribal belt the main hub of Taliban and al Qaeda militants plotting attacks on the West and in Afghanistan.

Oil tankers, which were used to transport Nato fuel supplies to Afghanistan, are parked, in Karachi on Monday. – Photo by AP

KABUL: The Taliban said they detonated a bomb on a fuel tanker Wednesday and then opened fire on other Nato  supply trucks in a morning attack that destroyed 22 vehicles loaded with fuel and other goods for US-led coalition forces in Afghanistan.  

In western Afghanistan, a Nato helicopter crashed, injuring two troops serving with the US-led military coalition, Nato said.

The helicopter went down early Wednesday at an undisclosed location in the relatively peaceful west. No other information has been released about the crash, which is under investigation.

The Taliban said they attacked Nato supply trucks parked overnight in Samangan province in the north.

”We put explosives on a fuel tanker. When it exploded, we fired on the trucks,” Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid told The Associated Press in a telephone call.

Sidiq Azizi, a spokesman for the province, said many tankers and semi-trailers caught fire after the bomb went off around 2 a.m.

By mid-day, heavy black smoke still poured from the Rabatak area of the province where the truckers had stopped to rest. Firefighters were spraying water on the burning vehicles.

”There was a big boom,” Azizi said.

”It’s possible that is was a magnetic bomb from insurgents. We are investigating.”

”I counted 20 fuel tankers burning. There is still a very big fire,” said Azizi, who was at the scene. ”The weather is very hot and it’s hard to get close to the fire.”

The tankers in the convoy were transporting fuel south toward the Afghan capital, Kabul, from neighboring Uzbekistan to the north.

Earlier this week, three Nato supply trucks were destroyed by militants in Sayd Abad district of Wardak province in eastern Afghanistan.    Convoy traffic in the east has gotten heavier since Pakistan reopened its border crossings about two weeks ago.

Islamabad blocked Nato supply trucks for seven months in retaliation for US airstrikes that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.

Separately, Nato reported that two coalition troops have been killed, one Tuesday during an insurgent attack in the south and another on Wednesday in a roadside bombing in the east.    The troops’ nationalities have not yet been released.

So far this year, 239 coalition service members have been killed in Afghanistan, including at least 172 Americans.

ISLAMABAD – As the United States and Pakistan inch closer to sign a vital agreement on the “formalisation of NATO supplies”, Islamabad has refused to accept the US demand for the long term use of these supply lines through its soil beyond 2014, a deadline set by Washington for the withdrawal of bulk of its troops from Afghanistan.

The Obama administration had been urging Pakistan for months to accede to its demand for the prolonged use of NATO routes so that Washington could meet the needs of its military bases in Afghanistan in terms of provision of goods, including food and oil, for coming months and years, a period that could stretch to decades.

However, Islamabad expressed its inability to accept this US demand as it finally unblocked the NATO supplies a few days ago after keeping them closed for over seven months in the wake of NATO strikes on Pakistani border posts in November. “However, despite the refusal by Islamabad regarding the acceptance of American demand for the long term use of NATO supplies, which are also called Ground Lines of Communications (GLOCs), the Obama administration is more than happy over the unblocking of supplies to Afghanistan, which will save it now from the millions of dollars’ in losses that it had to bear while using the alternative route through Russia and Central Asian states,” said a diplomatic source on Sunday, seeking anonymity. He said another important matter that the two sides had discussed for long was the matter of security of the NATO supply lines after their reopening. He added that the US was asking Pakistan to provide security to NATO supplies in both settled and Tribal Areas, but Islamabad had agreed to do that only in settled regions.

A Pakistani official refused to comment on Islamabad’s refusal to accept the US demand for the long term use of its soil for NATO supplies to Afghanistan. However, he confirmed that Pakistani security forces would provide the GLoCs with proper security in settled areas. He said both sides were close to signing an MoU on the formalization of NATO supplies once consensus was reached between Islamabad and Washington. He said under the MoU, the US would not use the NATO supply trucks for the provision of arms and ammunition to the international forces in Afghanistan. “Scanners would be installed at Pakistani ports for the detection of lethal supplies through GLoCs,” he said. He said as per the agreement, Pakistan would not charge any fee for NATO supplies, but the US had agreed to help Pakistan in carpeting the roads and highways which were in dilapidated conditions after being used for years by heavy NATO vehicles.

The protest was the largest so far against the reopening of the routes. Shops closed early in Islamabad and police set up barricades and cordoned off roads.

Pakistan suspended Nato supply routes to Afghanistan last November after a cross-border Nato air attack killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.

They were re-opened last week after US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton apologised for the strike.

A survey by the Pew Research Center last month found that three out of four Pakistanis consider the US an enemy, up from 69 per cent last year and 64 per cent three years ago.

Relations have been hurt by a series of events – the border strike, the killing of Osama bin Laden in a unilateral US raid on Pakistani soil, and the fatal shooting of two armed Pakistanis by a CIA contractor.

The march was organised by the Defence of Pakistan Council, an alliance of religious political parties and organisations campaigning for a break in ties with the United States and India.

One of the group’s main leaders is Hafiz Saeed, whom India suspects of masterminding attacks on India’s financial capital Mumbai and its parliament.

Saeed denies any involvement in the attacks.

http://dawn.com/2012/07/10/thousands-of-pakistanis-protest-opening-of-nato-supply-route/

Getting closer, amidst laughter interspersed with a volley of abuse in Pushto over blaring music, you see a group of mechanics heaving a heavy metal part on to a truck. The distant sound of an ice-cream vendor’s bell reminds one of the scorching heat. As if on some cue, a bearded man on a bicycle appears from nowhere and begins filling out glasses of juice – a concoction of gur and water – from a water cooler and passes it to the men, who wipe the sweat off their brow and finish the sweet liquid in a gulp. — Zofeen  Ebrahim

Men walk near a road sign showing the distance to cities in Afghanistan, as trucks drive past in the northwest town of Torkham, at the border crossing to Pakistan, July 4, 2012. Pakistan and the U.S. reached a deal on Tuesday to reopen land routes that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) uses to supply troops in Afghanistan, ending a seven-month crisis that damaged ties between the two countries and complicated the U.S.-led Afghan war effort. – Reuters Photo

ISLAMABAD: Foreign Office spokesman Moazzam Ahmad Khan at the weekly news briefing said that the decision to reopen the Nato supply lines was made in national interest and the US had clearly said ‘sorry’ to Pakistan for the Salala incident.

Replying to questions, the spokesman said Nato supplies have actually resumed following decision by Pakistan to restore them after suspension of seven months.

Khan said that Pakistan had not permitted the Nato to transport of lethal weapons.

He said the decision to block Nato supplies was taken to ensure that our sovereignty is not violated and red-lines are respected.

Foreign Office spokesman said that Pakistan and the United States are working on an arrangement as to how to facilitate the process of re-engagement.

He said Pakistan attaches great importance to a stable, prosperous and a peaceful Afghanistan.

He said the Afghan government would present a national priority programme and the participants of the conference would look at it as to how to offer support.

Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar will visit Japan on Sunday to attend Tokyo conference on Afghanistan as Pakistan attaches great importance to a stable and peaceful Kabul, Khan added.

“During the telephonic conversation with Khar, US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton not only expressed sorry but also categorically stated that her country respects Pakistan’s sovereignty,” he added

To another question he said Pakistan and the United States are continuing talks on drone attacks with the objective of reaching on some sort of mutually acceptable solution.

He said Pakistan has a clear position on drone attacks that these are counter production, violation of our territorial integrity and against international law.

The spokesman said that the entire process of re-engagement with the United States and Nato was undertaken in a transparent manner.

It was perhaps for the first time that the government took the foreign policy issues to the parliament for guidance.

Responding to a question he said the US would soon release substantial amount to Pakistan under Coalition Support Fund (CSF).

Pakistan-India ties

Replying to question regarding the statement of Indian Foreign Minister SM Krishna, he said Pakistan totally rejects allegations and insinuations against its institutions.

He said terrorism is a common enemy and both Pakistan and India have an on-going cooperation in the field of terrorism.

He said Pakistan was willing to cooperate and investigate if concrete evidence is provided against any individual or with regard to a particular incident.

Dr Shakeel Afridi

In answer to a question about sentencing of Dr Shakeel Afridi – who worked as part of a CIA campaign to trace whereabouts of Osama bin Laden, the Pakistani envoy said the doctor has been indicted on account of his links with a web of militant groups.

Dr Afridi, she said, has the option of recourse to three tiers of courts.

She also noted that Dr Afridi did not know that he was assisting in search of bin Laden.

He has not been indicted on charges of working for a foreign intelligence agency, she added.

Ambassador Sherry Rehman, who has been striving to convince the Capitol Hill of Pakistan’s position and perspective on some contentious issues in Pakistan-US relations, said her country is aware of Congressional concerns on the issue of sentencing of the Pakistani doctor.

The sources said the arrangement was not announced with the agreement to reopen supply routes because it was not finalised yet.— AFP

WASHINGTON: The United States and Pakistan are trying to work out a separate arrangement for rebuilding the highway used for carrying supplies to Afghanistan, diplomatic sources told Dawn.

On Tuesday, the United States and Pakistan reached an agreement to reopen Nato supply routes to Afghanistan seven months after Islamabad blocked them following a US air raid that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.

While announcing the agreement, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said: “Pakistan will continue not to charge any transit fee in the larger interest of peace and security in Afghanistan and the region.”

The announcement angered many in Pakistan and political commentators demanded that Islamabad should urge the Americans to at least rebuild the highway unpaved by Nato supply vehicles.

When Dawn checked with sources in Washington, it learned that the United States and Pakistan were already working on such an arrangement. The sources said the arrangement was not announced with the agreement to reopen supply routes because it was not finalised yet.

“It’s part of the mix but not confirmed yet,” said one of the sources.

Meanwhile, the US State Department has also confirmed that the United States would not pay any transit fee to the government of Pakistan for using the supply routes, as Secretary Clinton said in her statement.

The statement caused some confusion in Washington where US authorities had earlier said that Pakistan was charging $250 a container before it closed the ground communications lines or the GLOCs. And now it wanted to increase the transit fee to $5,000 a container.

Asked to comment on the secretary’s statement, State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland said: “Well, there are regular commercial costs associated with this transit as there were before the GLOCs were closed. In reopening them, we will be back at that regular commercial level. There will be no additional fees to Pakistani authorities.”

In a letter to congressional defence committees earlier this week, the Pentagon requested “reprogramming” $8.2 billion in funds previously approved to finance more urgent priorities.

A large portion of the request was due to the costs “associated with the extended closure of the ground lines of communication” in Pakistan, Pentagon spokesman Captain John Kirby told reporters.

When an Indian reporter suggested that Pakistan may not be happy with an arrangement that brought no money to them, State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland said: “The statement speaks for itself, and we’re pleased that we can now move on.”

Asked what led Secretary Clinton to say “we are sorry for the losses”, Ms Nuland said: “The statement makes clear, there were mistakes made on both sides that led to the tragic loss of life, and we are both sorry for those.”

But a journalist pointed out that the US did not apologise for the Salala incident and said sorry only for the lives lost in fighting the terrorists.

“I think the intent here is that we are both sorry for the losses suffered by both our countries in this fight against terrorists,” Ms Nuland responded.

Meanwhile, lawmakers from both Republican and Democratic parties welcomed the deal which, they said, would not only help the US save $100 million a month but would also help improve relations with Pakistan.

True, the standoff over supply routes was not advisable and something Pakistan could have ill afforded. But, the manner in which the entire thing happened was one of the biggest diplomatic retreats by Islamabad in recent times. This left everyone, even the supporters of good relations with the US, confused and bewildered.

The journey from Pakistan Army’s insistence that the “Salala incident was deliberate” to Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar’s conversation with Hillary Clinton in which both “acknowledged the mistakes that resulted in the loss of Pakistani military lives” was long and troubling. It not only threatened Pakistan’s interests abroad, but cost both the political and military leadership credibility.

If it was known that there were mistakes on the part of the Pakistani forces than why did we take the confrontation with the US to these levels? No one in Islamabad or Rawalpindi is interested in answering that. What they would, at best do is play around with the interpretation of Secretary Clinton’s statement.

But, more important than the debate over whether the word “sorry” satisfied the demand for apology; and if the permission to transport lethal equipment consigned for Afghan security forces was in conformity with the parliamentary resolution; it is now time to deliberate as to what extent the Pakistani side itself followed/respected the much cherished parliamentary resolution of April 12, 2012.

The parliamentary resolution had clearly stated the SOPs for making new agreements/MoU with any foreign government that included vetting by Law ministry, circulation of the draft of the accord among members of the parliament’s committee on national security, approval by the federal cabinet and a policy statement by the concerned federal minister in both houses of the parliament. As I understand, the resumption of Nato supplies happened under a new agreement. Was the proper procedure recommended by the parliament’s joint sitting followed? Certainly not. The federal cabinet too was briefed about the decision taken by the Defense Committee of the Cabinet a day after for its concurrence.

Secretary Clinton’s statement on having been assured about the reopening of routes while the DCC meeting was in progress left no doubt that the decision had already been taken and the session was a mere formality.

Clinton’s rush to making the announcement on routes knowing that Pakistan’s military and political leadership were meeting to take the decision revealed the underlying mistrust between the two allies. She clearly did not want to take the risk of leaving the final announcement to the Pakistani leaders once she had said “sorry”.

The whole debate would now come down to what forced Pakistan to climb down from its initial demands. Fear of isolation, losing its role in the Afghan endgame, aggravating the economy; and the threats of designating Haqqani Network and Lashkar-e-Taiba as terrorist organisations – a move that would have had serious repercussions for Pakistan, all contributed to the decision to allow reopening the supply routes.

As I conclude, I remember one of my sources telling me almost 10 days ago that the deadline for concluding a deal was July 4. I regret not having paid attention to that, but now I understand that some of the above listed fears could have materialised if the leadership would have delayed it further.

Moral: Never bite off more than you can chew.

The writer is a member of the staff at Dawn Newspaper. 

Oil tankers, which were used to transport NATO fuel supplies to Afghanistan, are parked, in Karachi, Pakistan, Monday, July 2, 2012. – Photo by AP

KARACHI: Thousands of Pakistani truck drivers Wednesday prepared to resume key Nato supply convoys into Afghanistan and end a bitter seven-month standoff, after Washington apologised over a botched air raid.

Islamabad agreed to reopen the land routes into its war-torn neighbour after US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said she was sorry for the deaths of 24 Pakistani soldiers in an air strike in November.

The incident enraged Pakistan, prompting the closure of the supply lines and plunging ties with the US to a new low, after the American raid to kill Osama bin Laden.

As part of the deal, Washington will release about $1.1 billion to the Pakistani military from a US “coalition support fund” designed to reimburse Pakistan for the cost of counter-insurgency operations.

The supply line breakthrough, announced by Clinton after she spoke by telephone with Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar, follows months of negotiations.

Islamabad, a key but wary US ally in the fight against Taliban militants, had steadfastly insisted on an apology for the November attack, but Washington had previously only expressed regret.

In Karachi on Wednesday, drivers and their helpers were cleaning and polishing hundreds of trucks that have stood idle during the seven-month layoff.

Driver Mohammad Hassan, 45, said he was pleased the Nato supply routes would be resumed.

“We were unemployed for a long time. Many vehicles broke down due to prolonged parking. Now we shall have our livelihood again,” he told AFP.

“This job is dangerous, but we have to make a living in the given situation, but hope that government will provide us more protection than before.”

The deal drew a swift warning from the Pakistani Taliban that they would attack the supply trucks and kill the drivers if they resumed ferrying supplies to Afghanistan.

The president of the All Pakistan Oil Tankers Owners Association Akram Khan Durrani said the move would be welcome news for his 10,000 drivers and crew, but he urged the government to take action on security.

“The government should issue a regulation under which all Nato supply vehicles have a different colour and are given security cover, so that other vehicles are not attacked by militants and we do our work without any fear,” he told AFP.

Durrani said before the ban there were 5,000 oil tankers supplying Afghanistan, but this figure has fallen to 3,000 after many vehicles were dumped or converted to other uses.

The land routes into Afghanistan are vital as the US and its Nato allies withdraw troops and equipment built up in Afghanistan since the 2001 invasion, ahead of a 2014 deadline.

The blockade had forced the United States and its allies to rely on longer, more expensive northern routes through Central Asia, Russia and the Caucasus, costing the US military about $100 million a month, according to the Pentagon.

Initial hopes of a deal on reopening the routes fell apart at a Nato summit in Chicago in May amid reports that Pakistan was demanding huge fees for the thousands of trucks that rumble across the border every year.

Clinton stressed “Pakistan will continue not to charge any transit fee,” adding it was “a tangible demonstration of Pakistan’s support for a secure, peaceful and prosperous Afghanistan.”

The deal was announced just days before a donor meeting on Afghanistan in Tokyo, when Afghan President Hamid Karzai will seek at least $3.9 billion in annual international aid to rebuild the economy.

Clinton is due to attend the Tokyo talks, as some of the international focus now shifts to rebuilding in Afghanistan with almost all foreign combat troops due to withdraw by the end of 2014.

The US commander of Nato-led forces in Afghanistan, General John Allen, who held talks in Islamabad twice in the last six days, praised the deal as “a demonstration of Pakistan’s desire to help secure a brighter future for both Afghanistan and the region at large.”

While Islamabad had demanded a formal apology for the deaths of its border troops, a US and Nato investigation said the killings were the result of mistakes made on both sides.

A US official said that as part of the deal Washington will release about $1.1 billion to the Pakistani military from a US “coalition support fund” designed to reimburse Pakistan for the cost of counter-insurgency operations.

The money had been frozen due to the tensions between the two countries.

The agreement ends a seven-month diplomatic row that had seen US-Pakistan ties, already soured by the US killing of al Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden, plunge to a new low and gravely impede US and Nato efforts in Afghanistan.

The breakthrough, announced by Clinton after she spoke by telephone with Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar, follows months of negotiations.

Islamabad, a key but wary ally in the fight against Taliban militants, had steadfastly insisted Washington should apologise for the November attack when a US aircraft mistakenly killed 24 Pakistan soldiers.

“Foreign Minister Khar and I acknowledged the mistakes that resulted in the loss of Pakistani military lives,” Clinton said in a statement.

“We are sorry for the losses suffered by the Pakistani military. We are committed to working closely with Pakistan and Afghanistan to prevent this from ever happening again.”

Pakistan confirmed it had decided to reopen the routes into Afghanistan, which are vital as the US and its Nato allies withdraw troops and equipment from Afghanistan ahead of a 2014 deadline.

“The meeting of Pakistan’s defence committee (DCC) of the cabinet has decided to reopen the Nato supplies,” the minister of information, Qamar Zaman Kaira, told reporters in Islamabad.

Pakistan’s new Prime Minister Raja Pervaiz Ashraf, who chaired the meeting, also acknowledged it was time to end the blockade.

“The continued closure of supply lines not only impinge our relationship with the US, but also on our relations with the 49 other member states of Nato,” he told top civilian and military leaders.

But underlining ever-present security fears, the deal drew a swift warning from the Pakistani Taliban that they would attack Nato supply trucks and kill the drivers if they tried to resume ferrying in supplies to Afghanistan.

Spokesman Ehsanullah Ehsan told AFP the Taliban “will not allow any truck to pass and will attack it.” The blockade had forced the United States and its allies to rely on longer, more expensive northern routes through Central Asia, Russia and the Caucasus, costing the US military about $100 million a month, the Pentagon has said.

Initial hopes of a deal on reopening the routes had fallen apart at a Nato summit in Chicago in May, amid reports that Pakistan was demanding huge fees for the thousands of trucks that rumble across the border every year.

Clinton stressed that “Pakistan will continue not to charge any transit fee,” adding it was “a tangible demonstration of Pakistan’s support for a secure, peaceful and prosperous Afghanistan.”

The deal was announced just days before Tokyo hosts a donor’s meeting on Afghanistan this weekend, when Afghan President Hamid Karzai will reportedly seek $3.9 billion in annual international aid to rebuild the economy.

The deal sends “a strong signal going into… the Afghan conference in Tokyo that we are back on track in terms of being able to support the Nato mission,” State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said.

Clinton is due to attend the Tokyo talks, as some of the international focus now shifts to rebuilding in Afghanistan with almost all foreign combat troops due to withdraw by the end of 2014, some 13 years after the 2001 US invasion.

The US commander of Nato-led forces in Afghanistan, General John Allen, who held talks in Islamabad twice in the last six days, praised the deal as “a demonstration of Pakistan’s desire to help secure a brighter future for both Afghanistan and the region at large.”

Pakistan’s ambassador to the US, Sherry Rehman, also stressed that it showed Islamabad was “playing our role as responsible global partner in stabilizing the region.”

We appreciate Secretary Clinton’s statement, and hope that bilateral ties can move to a better place from here,” she said.

While Islamabad had demanded a formal apology for the deaths of its border troops, a US and Nato investigation said the killings were the result of mistakes made on both sides.

http://dawn.com/2012/07/03/closure-of-nato-routes-harms-us-ties-pm-ashraf/

Prime Minister Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani, left, speaks as US President Barack Obama listens.—AP Photo

United States of America remains one of the first countries to have established diplomatic ties with Pakistan. Although the relationship dates back to October 20, 1947, it can be extrapolated that the relations have been based strictly on military and economic support.

During the initial years of Pakistan, the country had the options of building allegiance with Soviet Union or United States, however, Pakistan opted for the latter.

1950-1953:
Pakistan’s first prime minister, Liaquat Ali Khan visited United States to meet president Harry S Truman. It is alleged that during PM Khan’s first visit to US, president Truman requested Pakistan’s premier to let the CIA formulate a base in Pakistan, strictly to keep an eye on the activities of Soviet Union—a request which was not granted by Khan.

Throughout the course of these years many officials from Pakistan such as commander-in-chief Ayub Khan, foreign minister Zafrullah Khan, foreign secretary Ikramullah, finance minister Ghulam Muhammad, defence secretary Sikander Mirza and special envoy Mir Laiq Ali visited US, aiming to receive financial aids from the country.

1954:
Pakistan signed Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement with the United States in May. Under the agreement, many Pakistani soldiers went to United States for training whereas US also established a Military Assistance Advisory Group (Maag) in Rawalpindi.

1956:
President Dwight Eisenhower requested prime minister Suhrawardy to lease Peshawar Air Station to the American Army for keeping an eye on soviet Union and its ballistic missile programme. The request was granted by the prime minister.

1960s:
During the decade, the pro-American sentiments in Western side of Pakistan were at an all time high. However, the military and financial assistance was directed more towards West Pakistan, which caused an uproar and feeling of distrust in East Pakistan.

Ayub Khan allowed United States to fly spy mission to Soviet Union from Pakistan’s territory and accompanied by his daughter visited United States of America.

United States increased the amount of aid Pakistan was designated to receive from the consortium of Pakistan, half a billion dollars of which were lost in 1965’s Indo-Pakistan war—war staged to cause a rebel in Indian occupied Kashmir. The war also led US to place economical and military embargoes on Pakistan, which resulted in an economic collapse.

1971-1974:
Being an important ally for US during the cold war, United States supported Pakistan, despite the arms embargo. Pakistan also assisted president Richard Nixon in making his first visit to Peoples’ Republic of China.

During 1971’s war, US is speculated to have provided Pakistan with arms and military aid, in order to discourage India from penetrating further into the cities of Pakistan because losing Pakistan meant losing an important ally in the soviet war.

Moreover, as per the elections result, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was elected as the president of Pakistan and later on became the prime minister in 1974.

Although Bhutto was considered a socialist, he was a close and respected friend of president Nixon, which went in Pakistan’s favour.

1976-1979:
President Jimmy Carter, an anti-socialist, won the presidential election of US and announced to seek a ban on nuclear weapons.

Bhutto lost the favours he enjoyed whilst Nixon was US president as Carter did not appreciate his policies and tightened already placed embargoes on Pakistan. However, Bhutto managed to procure items to enhance his atomic bomb project. President Carter and his administration allegedly threatened Bhutto to disrupt the process of atomic proliferation and research to which the latter did not agree, leading to his differences with the Americans.

1979-1988:
During Zia ul Haq’s regime, Pakistan and United States enjoyed a warm and congenial relationship, which was primarily based on military ties and advancements. During the decade, US, along with CIA and ISI, launched billions of dollars worth of operations to prevent Soviet forces from further advancing into the region.

It is during this period that United States granted billions of dollars to Pakistan in the name of military and economical aid. By the year 1981, Pakistan was discussing a $3.2-billion aid package with United States and in 1987 Pakistan became the second largest recipient of aid after Israel.

However, by the end of General Zia’s regime, Congress adopted Pressler amendment. The amendment banned major military and economical aid to Pakistan unless the state was able to justify and provide sufficient evidence that the funds are not being used for nuclear proliferation.

However it is alleged that although Pakistan disclosed that it could enrich uranium and assemble a nuclear device in 1984 and 1987 respectively, the sanctions were not imposed till 1990.

1990:
US, under the Pressler amendment, imposed sanctions on Pakistan, as the country by then had lost its strategic importance in soviet war.

1992:
The relations between US and Pakistan plummeted further when US ambassador Nicholas Platt, warned Pakistan of being included into state sponsors of terrorism list, in case it continued to support militants causing trouble in India.

1995:
Benazir Bhutto visited United States and requested president Bill Clinton to lift the embargoes on Pakistan and launch a joint operation to eradicate militancy from the region. As a reaction to Bhutto’s proposal, Brown amendment, which provided for the delivery of $368 million of military equipment purchased but not received by Pakistan before the imposition of Pressler amendment sanctions in 1990, was passed; however, the sanctions on arms were not lifted.

1998:
Prime minister Nawaz Sharif conducted nuclear test in Balochistan, in retaliation to similar tests conducted by India, which invited the wrath of Clinton’s administration on both the countries. President Clinton imposed sanctions under Glenn amendment on India as well as Pakistan.

Glenn amendment included suspension of aid, including economic development assistance, credits and credit guarantees by the US government, US bank loans to the governments of India and Pakistan, loans from international financial institutions, such as the IMF and World Bank, and exports of dual-use nuclear or missile items.

However, in July of 1998, US lifted the sanctions on both the countries for purchasing agricultural products from US farmers. Later in the year President Clinton exercised his waiver on lifting restrictions on the activities of US banks in Pakistan.

2001:
After the 9/11 attacks and US’s invasion in various countries to eradicate militancy, Pakistan became one of the most important strategic allies for United States.

Initially Pakistan tried to strike a negotiation deal with Taliban and al Qaeda members to handover Osama bin Laden to American authorities. However, when negotiations failed, Pakistan allowed American army to use its military bases for launching attacks on Afghan soil.

However, President Pervez Musharraf confessed that the country had no option but to support United States as it had threatened Pakistan of “bombing it into stone age” if it did not join the fight against al Qaeda.

Simultaneously in 2001, US officials introduced a bill to lift all the sanctions, previously imposed on Pakistan under Pressler and Glenn amendments.

2003:
United States officially forgave $1 billion worth of loan it had granted to Pakistan in a goodwill gesture and appreciation for Pakistan’s cooperation.

2004:
President George Bush officially declared Pakistan as a non-Nato ally granting it the authority to purchase strategic and advanced military equipments.

Since 2004, US army has launched various drone strikes on the north-western side of the country. The drone strikes aim to target Pakistani Taliban and supporters of al Qaeda, however, the strikes have also resulted in latge civilian deaths and caused much opposition from Pakistanis.

2007:
A report was issued in which Pakistan was accused of using aid money provided by US to Pakistan for its cooperation on war on terror, for strengthening its defence against India.

2008:
The trust, on both sides, has been missing since the war on terror started as US on several occasions has accused Pakistan Army to tip the Taliban and pro-Taliban factions off on US operations.

In the June of 2008, an air strike by the US Army killed 11 paramilitary soldiers of Pakistan Army Frontier Corps, along with eight Taliban. The strike and deaths instigated a fierce reaction from Pakistani command calling the act to have shaken the foundations of mutual trust and cooperation.

2009:
President Musharraf confessed that the billions of dollars of aid that Pakistan received from United States, for being a partner in war against terror, were diverted and channelled in order to build better defence mechanism against India.

The famous Kerry-Lugar Bill, which invited much controversy and criticism, was passed in the October of 2009. The bill entailed the approval of granting $7.5 billion of non-military aid, if the command of the country accepted certain condition. The bill clearly showed US’s distrust in Pakistan’s military command and considered Pakistani Taliban more threatening than Afghan Taliban, amongst many other essential points.

2010:
In the beginning of the year, Pakistan Army in a joint operation with US intelligence agencies captured Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, a famous Taliban commander, from the tribal belt of Pakistan. The success of the operation was hailed by the United States and Pakistan was praised for its utmost cooperation.

2011:
In the beginning of 2011, Raymond Davis, a CIA agent in Pakistan killed two Pakistani men in Lahore, claiming that they came to rob him. Davis was taken into custody for killing civilians, however, American officials claimed that he was entitled to diplomatic immunity and must be released immediately.

Raymond Davis was later acquitted of the murder charges and was sent to United States.

In the May of 2011, Osama bin Laden was killed in an operation conducted by US Navy Seals in Abbottabad, Pakistan.

President Barrack Obama claimed that the information pertaining to the operation conducted in Abbottabad was not shared with Pakistan Army. However, ISI claimed that the operation was conducted jointly, a claim which was blatantly denied by President Asif Ali Zardari.

Since the war on terror started in 2001, Pakistan has received an estimated amount of $20 billion from United States; however, in the wake of OBL’s raid US withheld $800 million of aid to Pakistan.

US-Pakistan relations plummeted again when 24 Pakistani soldiers died in an air strike by the US Army. Afghan and US officials claimed that the firing was a result of the attack launched from the Pakistani side of the border, however, the Pakistani military and government denied the claims.

As a result of the attack, Pakistani government ordered US army to evacuate Salala air base which was being used to launch offensive on Taliban and militants. Moreover, the government also halted Nato supplies for United Sates.

2012:
Since the beginning of 2012, various political parties along with the military command of the country, met and held discussions on restoring Nato supplies. Diplomats from United States also tried to reduce the friction.

Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani said that the supplies were blocked without any pressure and will be restored with consensus.

Moreover, Nato Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen urged Pakistan to reopen Nato ground supply routes to Afghanistan. However, Rasmussen also said that Pakistan had not been invited to the crucial 25th Nato summit to be held in May in Chicago.

Simultaneously, US Senator John Kerry, a leading proponent of US aid for Pakistan, said that Pakistan needs to be more cooperative, in order to eliminate Taliban sanctuaries from the country.

However, top Pakistani leaders decided to meet on May 15,  in order to discuss ending a blockade of foreign military supply routes into Afghanistan and repairing US relations, signaling a rapprochement ahead of a Nato summit.

Simultaneously, in a sudden shift in events, Nato, on May 15, said that it will invite President Zardari to the alliance’s summit in Chicago, after the country’s foreign minister proposed reopening its Afghan border to Nato military supplies. President Zardari accepted the invitation and decided to attend the summit.

However, on May 18, US lawmakers in the House of Representatives debating the National Defence Authorisation Act voted 412-1 for an amendment that could block up to $650 million in proposed payments to Pakistan unless Islamabad lets coalition forces resume shipment of war supplies across its territory.

However, on the same day, four containers laden with supplies for the US Embassy in Kabul crossed into Afghanistan from Pakistan via Torkham border post.

A local official while confirming supplies to the US Embassy via Torkham said he could not say when the cargo had been transported.

“Pakistan government has never put restriction on the transportation of supplies for the diplomatic missions, including the American Embassy in Kabul,” a senior official, who was dealing with the matter, said.

“Ban on the transportation of Nato supplies is still intact.”

Simultaneously President Zardari arrived in Washington on May 19 to attend the Nato summit in Chicago. However, both the countries were unable to strike a conclusive deal on the restoration of Nato supplies as the summit ended.

In a fresh warning to Pakistan, a Senate panel on May 23 approved a foreign aid budget for next year that slashes US assistance to Islamabad by more than half and threatens further reductions if it fails to open supply routes to Nato forces in Afghanistan.

Sen Patrick Leahy, a Democrat and the chairman of the subcommittee, and the panel’s top Republican, Sen Lindsey Graham, said money for Pakistan was cut 58 per cent as lawmakers questioned Islamabad’s commitment to the fight against terrorism.

Moreover, the Senate Appropriations Committee, on May 24, voted to cut aid to Pakistan by a symbolic $33 million – $1 million for each year of jail time handed to Shakil Afridi, a Pakistani doctor who allegedly assisted the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in finding Osama bin Laden.

However, the United States agreed to reimburse $1.18 billion or almost 75 per cent of the claims Pakistan has submitted for the expenses incurred in the fight against militants along the Afghan border.

The approval showed that despite increased tensions, the US financial assistance to Pakistan has continued although it is becoming increasingly difficult to get congressional support for helping Pakistan.

Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, on June 7, said that the United States was running out of patience with Pakistan over safe havens of insurgents who attack US troops across the border in Afghanistan.

Panetta spoke after talks with Afghan Defence Minister Abdul Rahim Wardak on the latest leg of an Asian tour that has taken him to India, but not Islamabad in a sign of how dire US-Pakistan relations are.

On June 8, US Assistant Defence Secretary Peter Lavoy arrived in Islamabad, in a fresh attempt to bring an end to a six-month blockade on Nato supplies, crossing into Afghanistan.

However, on June 11, the United States withdrew negotiators from Pakistan after talks failed to produce a deal on reopening vital Nato supply routes into Afghanistan. Sherry Rehman, Pakistan’s ambassador to the United States, still sounded optimistic and said that the return of an American negotiating team from Islamabad, where it worked with Pakistani counterparts on revival of the Nato supply routes, does not represent an institutional US pullout.

Moreover,  Panetta ruled out an apology over an air strike last year that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers and badly set back efforts to improve US-Pakistani ties, saying it was “time to move on.”

Gen John Allen, the top commander of American and Nato forces in Afghanistan, visited Pakistan on Wednesday, amidst heightened tensions between the two countries.

The agenda of the talks remained to restore Nato supply routes and cross-border attacks launched on Pakistani soil from Afghanistan.

Pakistan, on July 3, agreed to reopen key supply routes into Afghanistan ending a bitter stand-off after US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said she was sorry for the loss of life in a botched air raid.

A US official said that as part of the deal Washington will release about $1.1 billion to the Pakistani military from a US “coalition support fund” designed to reimburse Pakistan for the cost of counter-insurgency operations.

Moreover, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on July 8 that the United States and Pakistan were putting past tensions behind them to focus on the future, after meeting her Pakistani counterpart Hina Rabbani Khar in Tokyo.

It was the first meeting between Clinton and Khar since the two countries last week struck a deal to re-open supply routes, closed for seven months following a US attack in which 24 Pakistani soldiers died.

President Barack Obama, on July 17, named Richard G Olson to be the US ambassadors to Pakistan, tasking him with shaping highly sensitive relationships after US troops pull out.

The US commander in Afghanistan Gen John Allen visited GHQ to hold talks in Pakistan on August 2 for the first time since Islamabad ended a seven-month blockade on Nato supplies destined for the 10-year war effort.

Moreover, Pakistan received $1.1 billion dollars from the United States for its fight against militants, the first installment of its kind since December 2010 on the same day.

The agenda of the meeting was focused on improving security along the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Pakistan’s Ambassador to the United States Sherry Rehman met with Congressman Dan Burton on August 3, a Republican from Indiana, and discussed ways to enhance Pakistan-US relationship.

The United States and Pakistan reached an understanding on joint operations against the Haqqani network on August 5, However a joint decision could not be agreed upon.

The sources said the issue of cross-border attacks, by the Haqqani network into Afghanistan and by TTP into Pakistan, was discussed in a series of meetings between senior US and Pakistani officials during the week.

The US State Department confirmed on August 23 that an American diplomat had a meeting with Pakistani officials at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Islamabad as Pakistan lodged its first formal protest with the United States over drone strikes.

Maulana Samiul Haq, Prof. Hafiz Saeed, Maulana Tahir Mehmood Ashrafi and others join hands to show solidarity during Difa-e-Islam Conference organized by Difa-e-pakistan Council. — ONLINE PHOTO by Ahmad Kakar

QUETTA: The Difa-i-Pakistan Council (DPC), a group of right-wing parties, has threatened to launch a long march if the government reopens Nato supply routes to Afghanistan.

Addressing a public meeting at the Sadiq Shaheed football ground here on Thursday, the DPC leaders said they would not accept any decision of any forum, including the parliament, regarding the reopening of the routes. They claimed that restoration of Nato supplies was in conflict with Islamic teachings and, therefore, the government should not allow it.

They severely criticised the parliamentary resolution on the issue and warned the government to be ready for a civil war if it implemented the resolution.

The meeting was addressed by Maulana Samiul Haq, Maulana Asmatullah, Hafiz Saeed, Syed Munawwar Hasan, Maulana Fazlur Rehman Khalil, Mohammad Ahmed Ludhianvi, Ejazul Haq, Gen (retd) Hamid Gul and Allama Tahir Ashrafi.

The DPC leaders said that the United States was not a friend of any nation or country of the world, including Pakistan, and accused Washington of trying to destabilise Pakistan by tabling a resolution in the US Congress on the Balochistan issue.

They appealed to Baloch leadership to hold talks to resolve the Balochistan issue peacefully.

They said that United States, in collaboration with India, wanted to trap Baloch separatists to sow disunity and discord in the country, but expressed the hope that Baloch leadership would frustrate designs of the United States.

“I am not afraid of jails, but yes, a jail is a good place to write a book,” said the prime minister. Mr Gilani wrote his first book, ‘Chahe Yousuf’, when he was imprisoned by General Pervez Musharraf in 2000. — File Photo by AFP 

ISLAMABAD: Under a heavy Islamabad sky, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani and the legal team representing his accused son in the ephedrine drug scandal put on a brave face and defended their position on Monday: That the accusations against Ali Musa Gilani did not hold.

When asked whether he felt the Supreme Court was treating him and his family unfairly, the prime minister dismissed the question. “They are my friends,” he answered.

The prime minister kept on parrying questions on the perceived tension between the PPP government and the apex court.

When a reporter asked whether the prime minister was ready to author another book in Adiala Jail in the event that he is sentenced to prison in the contempt of court case, Mr Gilani replied in the affirmative.

“I am not afraid of jails, but yes, a jail is a good place to write a book,” said the prime minister.

Mr Gilani wrote his first book, ‘Chahe Yousuf’, when he was imprisoned by General Pervez Musharraf in 2000.

The seriousness of the sessions hosted by the prime minister on Monday was brought home by his decision to invite electronic and print media, and hold separate back-to-back sessions with them focusing on the fast-developing ephedrine scam.

According to a PPP source, the ephedrine drug scandal was turning out to be a game changer for the Gilani family. The prime minister was making extra efforts to get out of the scandal scratch free.

Earlier, on the eve of the April 11 cabinet meeting, Mr Gilani put on a defiant defence for his son. During repeated media interactions, he indirectly warned officials against implicating his son in the case.

Two defence counsel for Ali Musa, Salman Akram Raja and Fawad Chaudhry; the former health secretary and incumbent Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister, Khushnood Lashari; and the Social Welfare Adviser to the Prime Minister, Begum Shehnaz Wazir Ali, responded to the media’s questions.

The prime minister announced that he “decided to brief media with the help of legal experts” given that the ephedrine drug scandal had become a national issue.

“They are here to respond to your questions on the scandal.”

Other issues: Budgets, Bhoja and Balochistan

Alongside the drug scandal, the prime minister spoke on a wide range of issues, ranging from the tragic Bhoja Air crash, to talks with the US and India, the ever worsening law and order condition in Balochistan and the new budget proposals.

Mr Gilani said an investigation aimed at ascertaining international standards had already begun. The prime minister said a judicial commission had also been set up to ensure a fair inquiry, at the behest of the victims’ relatives.

The prime minister went on to comment on the re-opened Nato supply routes. He announced that the government was talking to the US and other stakeholders in light of the parliament’s recommendations. All decisions taken uphold the national interest, and he said that a number of top-level meetings were scheduled with US officials to fine-tune terms
for future engagements.

Mr Gilani said defence secretaries of India and Pakistan were engaging after the tragedy in Siachen. According to him, they are planning to meet again in the near future.

The prime minister said his economic team had been directed to prioritise the energy crisis, the creation of 100,000 jobs and relief for the common people in the next budget.

During the session with the prime minister, the younger Gilani’s legal team — led by the chief defence counsel, Salman Akram Raja — looked upbeat, indicating that they were hopeful in their attempts to get Ali Musa out of the drug scandal unscathed.“I was more than sure that the prosecution is standing on very weak ground,” Mr Raja said when explaining his observations of the evidence that had been submitted before the apex court against Ali Musa Gilani.

The available evidence only mentions Mr Musa once, according to Mr Raja. Namely in a statement made by Federal Health Director-General Rasheed Juma, where Musa allegedly calls Juma once.

“This does not prove anything. However, there is plenty of evidence suggesting how Mr Juma and his associates have misused their authority.

Chief Minister Punjab Shahbaz Sharif

LAHORE: Chief Minister Punjab Shahbaz Sharif has said on Friday that the resolution passed by the parliament regarding reopening of Nato supply routes represents the mutual view of the parliament and the public.

Addressing the convocation ceremony of College of Physicians and Surgeons Pakistan in Lahore, the chief minister said that “we are keeping our fingers crossed about how the present government will implement the resolution pertaining to the new rules of engagement with the United States.”

“The parliamentary resolutions in the past have been impudently disregarded but if this time the resolution is not implemented, our party will hold the present government accountable for it,” the PML-N leader added.

Answering a question about foreign aid, Sharif said that, despite the approval of the resolution, he stands by his party’s stance of not taking foreign assistance or foreign aid.

Sharif’s remarks came after the parliament reached a consensus to no more let Pakistan serve as conduit of arms to Afghanistan, but gave a green signal for a resumption of non-lethal Nato supplies to the war-ravaged country.

Pakistan's Director-General of Inter Services Intelligence (ISI), Lieutenant-General Zaheer-ul-Islam (R), attends a function with Governor of Sindh Ishrat-ul-Ebad (C) and Chief Minister Sindh, Syed Qaim Ali Shah (L) in Karachi, December 25, 2011. — File Photo by REUTERS/Arif Hussain

ISLAMABAD: As the government struggles to evolve a consensus on terms of engagement with the United States, the new chief of Inter-Services Intelligence, Lt Gen Zahirul Islam, is planning to visit some European countries, along with his predecessor Lt Gen (retd) Shuja Pasha, for exchanging views with intelligence and military officials of those countries on matters relating to ties with the US and supplies to Nato forces in Afghanistan.

Officials aware of the visit say that Gen (retd) Pasha will be accompanying Gen Islam to help him with the transition at the ISI as the latter familiarises himself with global and regional issues.

Experts are of the opinion that despite the fact that parliament has to take a final decision, Gen Islam is likely to discuss, besides US-Pak relations, the issue of reopening Nato supply routes which may come up again and again.

Some opposition politicians have alleged that the government is keen to reopen the Nato supply routes because of considerable American pressure.

It has been reported that the issue was being discussed behind the scenes by Pakistan and the US, especially their militaries.

A federal government official says that it is more or less certain that this time around the Nato supply will be managed by the National Logistics Cell and Pakistan Railways.

“The army will ensure that the incidents such as Nato containers going missing will not happen again.”He suggested that the reason for army’s interest in the reopening of Nato supply routes was economic wellbeing of Pakistan and Afghanistan in the long run.

When asked to comment on the ISI chief’s planned trip to European countries, the official said: “It is part of discussions that regularly take place on strategic issues. These dialogues are routinely held between defence and intelligence departments of different countries.”

Defence analyst Lt Gen (retd) Talat Masood does not see anything unusual in Gen (retd) Shuja Pasha accompanying Gen Islam.

“Former spy chiefs can assist the new ones; CIA chiefs tend to follow a similar practice.

“This is not something unusual. They (spy chiefs) keep a low profile and travel whenever they need to. This trip to Europe is a case in point.”

When asked about the possibility of Islamabad and Washington coming to an agreement on drone attacks, he said: “It is clear that the US government will not stop using drones because they have found the policy beneficial.”

Any move to share intelligence (on drone attacks) would be seen as a confidence-building measure and an understanding on the issue would be of help to both the countries, he said. NLC’s control over transportation of Nato supplies will prove beneficial.

When approached, US embassy spokesman Mark Stroh said: “At the moment every engagement we have with Pakistan is mainly attached with the parliamentary review committee. Once they are done with their recommendations the US will move forward.”

He refused to comment on the drone attacks because of their policy of “not commenting on the affairs of the intelligence”.

About economic activities between Pakistan and Afghanistan, he said: “The US always appreciates transit trade between the regional countries.”

When asked about the planned trip of the ISI chief, ISPR director general Maj Gen Athar Abbas said he did not comment on intelligence affairs.

Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan threatens to quit his office if Nato supplies resumed.- File Photo

ISLAMABAD: The Parliamentary Committee on National Security (PCNS), working on a consensus report on new terms of engagement with the United States, suffered another setback when the Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam – Fazl (JUI-F) decided to detach itself from the committee.

Maulana Fazlur Rehman, the chief of the JUI-F, told media representatives on Friday that the government had already decided to reopen supply routes for Nato forces through Pakistan.

“It was not possible for me to attend the committee meetings,” he added.

Earlier today, Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly, Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan, warned that he would quit his office if the supply routes were reopened.

The Pakistan Mulsim League-Nawaz (PML-N) stalwart said that he had made his stance clear to his party and the leadership of other parties in the opposition about not resuming the supply to the Nato forces.

He urged the opposition leaders to take all the stake holders on board before taking any decision in this regard.

“Sources have revealed that there are certain federal ministers who are lobbying for the resumption of the Nato supply through Pakistan,” he added.