The US should rethink its policy on Pakistan

The Double Game

The unintended consequences of American funding in Pakistan

It’s the end of the Second World War, and the United States is deciding what to do about two immense, poor, densely populated countries in Asia. America chooses one of the countries, becoming its benefactor. Over the decades, it pours billions of dollars into that country’s economy, training and equipping its military and its intelligence services. The stated goal is to create a reliable ally with strong institutions and a modern, vigorous democracy. The other country, meanwhile, is spurned because it forges alliances with America’s enemies.

The country not chosen was India, which “tilted” toward the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Pakistan became America’s protégé, firmly supporting its fight to contain Communism. The benefits that Pakistan accrued from this relationship were quickly apparent: in the nineteen-sixties, its economy was an exemplar. India, by contrast, was a byword for basket case. Fifty years then went by. What was the result of this social experiment?

India has become the state that we tried to create in Pakistan. It is a rising economic star, militarily powerful and democratic, and it shares American interests. Pakistan, however, is one of the most anti-American countries in the world, and a covert sponsor of terrorism. Politically and economically, it verges on being a failed state. And, despite Pakistani avowals to the contrary, America’s worst enemy, Osama bin Laden, had been hiding there for years—in strikingly comfortable circumstances—before U.S. commandos finally tracked him down and killed him, on May 2nd.

Why We're Stuck with Pakistan

So as Pakistanis processed the mission that killed Osama bin Laden, many concluded that they had been betrayed by their supposed ally. How dare the Americans sneak into the country without so much as a warning and conduct a military operation just 75 miles (120 km) from the capital? But they felt betrayed too by their military. How could it be that Pakistan's armed forces, which claim a lion's share of government spending, were clueless about the presence, a mere mile from the country's most prestigious defense academy, of the world's most wanted terrorist?

Cyril Almeida, one of Pakistan's best-known opinion writers, summed up the national anguish in a column: "If we didn't know [bin Laden was in Abbottabad], we are a failed state; if we did know, we are a rogue state."

Should U.S. Continue Aid to Pakistan?

Pakistan hedges its bets, primarily through official and unofficial support for proxy terrorist forces they use to protect what they believe are existential strategic interests in Afghanistan and India. These proxies are killing our soldiers in Afghanistan and have growing global terrorist ambitions.

How much US money is in Pakistan?

The US has provided $20.7 billion to Pakistan since 2002. A little more than two-thirds of that went to military use, the remainder to civilian.

The biggest ticket item, at $8.9 billion, is something called “Coalition Support Funds.” These are reimbursements for Pakistan’s military assistance in the war on terror.

The second largest chunk, $4.8 billion, falls under “Economic Support Funds.” Most of this has gone to shore up the government’s budget, either as revenue or to pay off debt to the US.

Is it worth it? Pakistan, U.S. weigh aid calculus

Pakistan is one of the top recipients of U.S. aid along with Egypt and Israel, but it has not bought America much popularity. Opinion surveys show an overwhelming majority of the Pakistani public holds an unfavorable view of their ostensible ally.

So, is U.S. aid to Pakistan really worthwhile? Officials say only time can tell.

"In the long run, in the historic perspective, will we be able to say it was worth it? Or will historians be able to say that?" mused the senior U.S. official. "I really don't know at this point."

It's All Your Money: U.S. Aid to Pakistan

Despite all of the aid given to Pakistan, polls show the country has a negative view of the U.S. A 2010 BBC poll found that 52 percent of Pakistanis don’t like the U.S. A majority oppose U.S. drone strikes against the Taliban, and the Pakistani Parliament on Saturday.

More than $20 billion has been given to Pakistan since Sept. 11, 2001. President Obama is proposing almost $3 billion in aid for the supposed ally in the War on Terror for fiscal year 2012. That includes:

- $1.6 billion for police and military;

- $150 million for what the State Department calls "good government and democracy building";

- $122 million for health, AIDS and "family planning";

- $145 million for education.

The rest goes to economic development and humanitarian assistance.

Congressman Dana Rohrabacher(R-Cal), who serves on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, has introduced a bill to cut off aid completely. Rohrabacher believes the discovery of bin Laden’s compound is proof that Pakistan’s leaders have been enabling al Qaida and the Taliban.

“ They’ve been arming these people to kill our troops,” said Rohrabacher. “They nuzzle up to communist China, they’ve been building nukes at our expense and now we know they have been giving aid and comfort to Usama bin Laden.”

Rohrabacher says continuing to aid Pakistan makes the U.S. look foolish.

“The fact is the Pakistanis are treating us like fools because we're acting like fools. We're giving money to someone who obviously is working against the basic interests and national security interests of our own country.”

Rushdie demands Pakistan be declared terrorist state; US lawmakers threaten aid halt

Dump Pakistan, embrace India - WWW.THEDAILY.COM

The essential problem is that a succession of cynical Pakistani presidents, generals and intelligence officials have believed the United States has had no choice but to support them, no matter how much they acted against American interests.