101 replies to this topic

[Tipu-786]

sabre2, on 06 July 2012 - 10:29 AM, said:

What you should be asking is do they have x-ray scanners in sufficient numbers, and secondly are the customs staff sufficiently trained in threat and item identification. Using material discrimination, it is easy to discriminate food and plastic from aluminium and steel. Weapons, shells artillery, etc... can be identified.

Do they really have the ability to perform 100% scanning.... I doubt it, unless they have a number of portal scanners installed at Karachi, Port Qasim etc...

The absence of advanced cargo information and submission of electronic manifests does not help matters at all.

i was watching news last night on Dunya tv  they mentioned the long loader trucks waiting in line one can see  tanks and other heavy equipments  ........

[MoThSmOkE]

You guys seriously think that Pakistan's condition of no lethal weapon allowed across the border would be implemented. Its just for political consumption.

Everything from burger kings to artillery shells would pass through the corridor.

[faizan khaliq]

I think imran has lost here in a big way ,If he want compromises then why him? his only qualification would be he has not been tried and that is it.The long march against NATO supply has started without Imran Khan

[platinum786]

faizan khaliq, on 05 July 2012 - 05:05 PM, said:

just listen to the interview of munafiq khan  repeatedly  being asked would he go with long march of defa e Pakistan and he repeatedly ducked the question, Moment a politician see the chance of geting power yeh forun bilo kay saath mil jaatay hain , very disapointing Mr Imran khan

rungroot you are right we all have the same opinion on supply routs

sounds dodgy to me. I agree with the principle, but there is no harm in showing support to Difa-e-Pakistan by providing numbers.

[KudosBot]

If we have democracy why was it not debated in parliament and voted  by mna'mpa's etc?????

[saleem79]

interesting ----this lady asma shirazi had some fotos, with other "jouros" some time back ----- i would not listen much to the foreign agenda she is promoting ----spreading dissent and despondency --------

[faizan khaliq]

saleem79, on 08 July 2012 - 09:57 PM, said:

interesting ----this lady asma shirazi had some fotos, with other "jouros" some time back ----- i would not listen much to the foreign agenda she is promoting ----spreading dissent and despondency --------

it was a simple question and now it is proven Imran did not participate in the protests , Ms Shirazi,s photo,s have nothing to do with the issue

[Dizasta]

OmaR UK, on 08 July 2012 - 08:03 PM, said:

If we have democracy why was it not debated in parliament and voted  by mna'mpa's etc?????

That is because we don't have a democracy. The people in power lie outta their @$$e$ when they call it democracy, because it ain't. What we see before us, is nothing more than Jahil Feudalism of the 21st Century. They can wear expensive clothes, drive big SUVs, send their children to Western Universities and have billions of dollars worth of properties, wealth and investments in the West ...... but they still are the same Jahil, Gawaar, Kanjar, Bayghairat, Bayhiss, Kuttay Wadayray, Sardar aur Zameendars.

[rungroot]

There is no such thing as true democracy anywhere in the world.  True democracy is nothing but chaos that you see in Pakistan.  But it is successful in britain, america, europe and else where because behind the curtains BANKERS RUN THE SHOW!  That means that even in those countries, there is no such thing as democracy, it is JUST A CHARADE TO MAKE THE IDIOT MASSES THINK THAT THEY ARE RUNNING THE SHOW WHEN THEY AREN'T RUNNING ANYTHING!!!

[S.U.P.A.R.C.O]

Pakistan begins work to speed up NATO supply transit
Tuesday July 10, 2012



TORKHAM: Pakistan is doubling the capacity for NATO trucks at a key border crossing, officials said Monday, to speed up processing for an expected influx of supplies for troops in Afghanistan.

Customs officials at Torkham border crossing in the country's troubled northwest told that work had begun to expand dedicated parking space for NATO containers.

Islamabad agreed to reopen overland routes to NATO convoys last week after a seven-month blockade sparked by a botched US air raid on a border post that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.

"After expansion the parking capacity for NATO trucks will be doubled," Obaidullah Khan, a customs official at Torkham, the closest border crossing to Kabul, told.

"Prior to the closure the terminal had a parking capacity of 250 vehicles and now we are expanding it to 500."
Khan said work was also under way on two dedicated rooms for customs officers dealing with paperwork for NATO vehicles, to speed up their transit into Afghanistan.

The terminal remained quiet on Monday as no NATO supply trucks were able to reach Torkham from the Arabian Sea port of Karachi, where they have languished for the past seven months.

A bulldozer had begun work at the site, uprooting trees while workers spread barbed wire around the back of the terminal.
Security at the crossing is being boosted, Khan said, to foil Taliban militants who have vowed to attack NATO trucks and kill their crews.

Four checkpoints are being set up around the Torkham terminal and the number of security personnel will be raised from the previous level of 550.

"No NATO supply vehicle will be allowed to pass a night at Torkham, even if we need to work for extra time," Khan said.
"We are ready to receive any NATO truck here, you will see more arrangements after the trucks reach here," Meraj Khan, the administrative official at Torkham told.

The land routes into Afghanistan are vital as the United States and NATO withdraw troops and equipment that has built up since the 2001 invasion.

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

http://www.geo.tv/Ge...l.aspx?ID=58137

[Dizasta]

^^ Of course they will start speeding up the process, Uncle Sam has paid that thief, traitor zardari-ppp govt enough money and wants results. Why else would anything be sped up by the Govt of Pakistan. Education reform is going at snails pace, Electricity reforms are going nowhere but load-shedding 16 hours a day and there is no sign of inflation stopping and receding. So of course, GOP will speed up the transports for its masters, US-NATO!!!

[rungroot]

Appwet

Dizasta, on 10 July 2012 - 04:30 PM, said:

^^ Of course they will start speeding up the process, Uncle Sam has paid that thief, traitor zardari-ppp govt enough money and wants results. Why else would anything be sped up by the Govt of Pakistan. Education reform is going at snails pace, Electricity reforms are going nowhere but load-shedding 16 hours a day and there is no sign of inflation stopping and receding. So of course, GOP will speed up the transports for its masters, US-NATO!!!

Bro, it really hurts me to say this but it's pretty obvious that our illustrious generals are as guilty as the pee pee pee zardari led traitors.  Frankly, my heart goes out to our soldiers, airmen and sailors who know that the generals are corrupt but have to remain silent and can't say anything due to military discipline.

[KudosBot]

Viewpoint: US and Pakistan alliance is for good

Secretary Hillary Clinton and Pakistan Foreign Minister Hina Khar recently met at the Tokyo Conference on Afghanistan

Last week, a carefully choreographed apology by Hillary Clinton resolved the latest crisis in relations between the US and Pakistan, an alliance she termed "challenging but essential".

The shovels may be down for the moment, but it remains to be seen whether the two countries can establish common cause going forward.

As late as 2010, Pakistan and the United States were engaged in a high-level strategic dialogue focused on building a long-term partnership.

Since then, the governments have spent most of their time on crisis management, from the Raymond Davis affair and the Osama Bin Laden raid and its aftermath to the Salala border incident in November that left 24 Pakistani soldiers dead.

After the friendly fire incident, Pakistan halted the resupply of Nato forces in Afghanistan through Pakistan's border crossings, forcing goods to travel through a northern distribution network that raised logistical costs for the United States and its allies by upwards of $100m (£64.5m) per month.

Trading blame
The Pakistani parliament reviewed the US relationship in light of the tragedy, and demanded among other things an apology before the ground lines of communication (Glocs) would reopen.

While the state department reportedly favoured an apology, the US military resisted, pointing to mistakes made on both sides.

Continue reading the main story
US-Pakistan downturn

30 Sept 2010: Nato helicopters kill two Pakistani soldiers, prompting nearly two-week border closure in protest
22 April 2011: Supplies to Nato forces in Afghanistan halted for three days in protest over drone attacks
2 May: US announces Bin Laden's death and says Pakistan not warned of raid
2 June: Top US military chief Adm Mike Mullen admits "significant" cut in US troops in Pakistan
10 July: US suspends $800m of military aid
22 Sept: Outgoing US Adm Mullen accuses Pakistan of supporting Haqqani militant group in Afghanistan; denied by Pakistan
26 Nov: Nato air strikes hit Pakistani border post, killing 24 soldiers
New crisis for US-Pakistani ties
Given ongoing Taliban and Haqqani attacks on Afghan and US forces, with at least perceived implicit support from Pakistan, the Obama administration expressed its regret, but not sorrow.

Not good enough.

"For us," said a Pakistani diplomat, "it was 2,000% about an apology."

There was no ability for the government to justify the reopening, and the managing of its chaotic politics without it.

For the Americans, it eventually became about the bottom line. The Gloc closure not only raised existing operational costs, but also complicated the Pentagon's ability to efficiently move forces and equipment out of Afghanistan later this year.

They reopened when US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton issued a carefully worded statement that "we are sorry for the losses suffered by the Pakistani military".

Mistakes were made, she said, without specifying who made them.

Given the complex and convoluted nature of the relationship, this qualifies as momentum.

Yes, the bar is low. Turning things around will be a long process, but there is a basis to start.

As a senior US official directly involved in the effort noted: "Both parties have something they want, a working relationship."

But there is so little trust and transparency on both sides - two essential ingredients to creating such a relationship.

Rebuilding trust
Not only did the United States withhold its discovery of Bin Laden from Pakistan prior to the Navy Seal raid, but as Jim Mann details in his book The Obamians, it added forces to be able to fight its way out of Pakistan - ostensibly an ally - if necessary.

Continue reading the main story
“
Start Quote

The Obama administration needs to shift its priority from AfPak to PakAf”

Despite the furious reaction within Pakistan, there has been remarkably little outreach to the Pakistani people in the year since, despite the administration's emphasis on international engagement and strategic communication.

And vice versa.

Pakistan's rushed conviction of Dr Shakil Afridi, who provided some assistance to the CIA prior to the raid, incensed legislative leaders in Washington, resulting in the withholding of millions of dollars in aid.

And to the extent Pakistan has investigated how Bin Laden arrived in Abbottabad, who supported him and who else knew, they have not shared that information with the United States.

None of this will be easy.

The two countries have overlapping interests, but there are dramatically different views of the threat. The United States worries about violent extremists. Pakistan obsesses about India.

Trust cannot be rebuilt overnight, but can be nurtured over time through greater transparency.

Joined at hip
The United States said in April that it seeks with Pakistan a relationship that is enduring, strategic and more clearly defined. How can this occur?

The Obama administration needs to shift its priority from AfPak (its existing nickname for the challenge) to PakAf.

The two challenges are joined at the hip, but ultimately Pakistan is of far greater long-term strategic importance than whatever "good enough" results can be achieved in Afghanistan before 2014.


US-Pakistan relations have to go beyond opening supply routes, PJ Crowley argues
That said, increased co-operation with Pakistan on Afghanistan is possible and necessary. While the United States has long encouraged a role for Pakistan in an Afghan-led reconciliation process, this needs to be more formalised and more public.

It is unclear whether the Taliban is prepared to negotiate with the Karzai government or the US but no-one has more influence with the Taliban than Pakistan.

It is better to have Pakistan inside the process with a real role and stake in the outcome than pursuing its own interests from the outside.

US Secretary of Defence Leon Panetta recently acknowledged that the United States is "fighting a war in the Fata [Pakistani Federally Administered Tribal Areas]".

Unfortunately, he said this in Delhi, not Islamabad. This may be a war of necessity, but waging it without the explicit support and involvement of Pakistan elevates both costs and risks as the Salala tragedy underscores.

If Pakistan and the United States are to reach a point of "co-ordinated action" against a "common enemy", significant adjustments are needed. This needs to be not just an American war but Pakistan's as well.

Finally, the Obama administration needs to go back after elections in America this year and Pakistan next year and restart the strategic dialogue with Pakistan focused on the long-term.

Increased trade and investment will be more effective - and appreciated - than aid. US actions should reinforce rather than undercut civilian governance in Pakistan.

Responding in a meaningful way to the recent parliamentary report is a good place to start.

More than anything else, the United States must make a convincing argument in Pakistan and across the region that 2014 is not the end of its engagement, but a pivot point.

Unlike 20 years ago, the United States will be staying, not leaving.

[KudosBot]

No permission for drone attacks after US apology: Sherry


Washington—Pakistan’s ambassador to the United States Sherry Rehman Monday said that Pakistan has not okayed any American drone strikes on its territory in exchange for Washington’s apology over the Salala attacks and continues to deem unilateral unmanned aerial attacks as violation of the international law.

The ambassador in an interview with CNN said last week’s expression of remorse by the United States, over killing of Pakistani soldiers in November 26, 2011 in American cross-border attacks on the Salala posts, has opened the way for constructive discussions on bilateral relations.

“No, we have not agreed on anything. In fact, those conversations are yet to happen. As I said, the apology has opened the space for an opportunity where we can have constructive conversations that might be to the satisfaction of both sides.’ Right now, we have given no go-ahead at all,” Ms Rehman told the American news channel’s Christiana Amanpour.

The Pakistani envoy, who, according to CNN played an instrumental role in resolving the dispute over Salala attacks, reiterated serious concerns the Pakistani people and Islamabad have over drone strike on its territory.

“There’s no question of it. We also consider it, the drone program, we consider it counterproductive to all our goals in the sense that it radicalises tribes and entire villages in our region. And what we see, really, is that increasingly Pakistan is feared as a predatory footprint.”

“The concerns over drones ‘can’t just be’ brushed aside,” she added. When Aamanpour pointedly asked the ambassador if the United States is in violation of international law when it conducts drone strikes on Pakistani territory, Ms Rehman responded, “This is something that Pakistan has consistently said.”

The Pakistani ambassador drew attention to the need for acknowledgement of her country’s huge sacrifices and successes in the fight against terror. “We need to understand that certainly Pakistan is looking for some amount of strategic sympathy in the losses we have incurred over the last 10 years. We didn’t have more than one suicide bombing before 2001”.

“So it’s not that we are saying that all our troubles or volatility, even within parts of Pakistan, have come as a result of joining force with the United States and Nato. But much of it has. I think there needs to ‘be less tough talk in public.”

Ambassador Rehman also pointed out the need to bridge the lingering trust deficit between the two countries. “There’s a trust gap, also, a trust deficit that you know about ‘between’ the two countries, and we must work to build that, because both people are quite able to work together when left on their own.”“It’s when we get into the complexities of, for instance, drones, that the whole drone programme is seen as, it tests the relationship at every juncture. And we honestly feel that there are ‘better’ ways now of eliminating al Qaeda, which has been done with our help. And we have been doing that consistently. We’re the heavy lifters in this relationship.”

Although, the drones may appear as a precise tool to target militants, the damage they do in radicalising people and challenging the bilateral relationship far outweigh the benefits.

Regarding Shakil Afridi, the Pakistani doctor employed by the CIA in hunt for Osama bin Laden before the al Qaeda chief’s death in an American cross-border operation last year, the ambassador said the doctor had no knowledge that the goal that he was working for, he knew he was contracting with a foreign intelligence agency, but he had no knowledge that he was seeking to bring Osama bin Laden in, number one.

“So let’s not lionize him.”

The envoy said Dr Afridi was contracting with many terrorist outfits. He was even kidnapped by one, and he was in many transactions on the ground, all over the place. He is one of many such people who have been convicted for such actions.

“His conviction is really for contracting with one of the terrorist groups that is waging or attempting to attack our soldiers. “We’ve had several beheaded recently.”

Pakistan, the ambassador said, would have considered a feather in its cap if it had been able to get Osama bin Laden. “We do not want to play host to terrorists, international terrorists.”

They haunt our own people and our own children, our girl schools, our hospitals, our Sufi shrines. They have bombed almost every day, including our police and security services.

So it’s not on your television screens, but our daily reality has, over the last 10 years, changed. “We are a resilient people but it doesn’t help to tell us to ‘continue’ to do more. It is our fight as much as anyone else’s, because we are committed to eliminating terrorism at its root and source.”—INP

http://pakobserver.n...s.asp?id=164286

[KudosBot]

An honour deficit nation
Rizwan Akhtar


The parliament opened the NATO supply route and everyone expected it to happen. But the question is why there is this circus of words among the politicians over this issue for so many months? Suddenly, too many people are competing to prove their patriotic afflictions. Did not we know that beggars are not choosers? US are our biggest economic donor and the master-slave dialectic between Pakistan and the US prevails over decades.

There are some opinion makers, including journalists, who believe that Pakistan should not have opened the NATO route as it is a blemish on the nation’s honour. Let me say that in modern times the honour of a nation is directly proportional to its economic condition. A country where people do not have access to clear drinking water, and where in the big cities there is power shutdown for more than fifteen hours stands on a too weak ground to claim for any honour for its people.

A system that is corrupt and dysfunctional humiliates its masses on daily base, and one wonders if it isn’t the question of one’s individual and collective honour. We have not taught people the meaning of the word ‘honour’. All we have is rhetoric reverberating everywhere. The Establishment-backed politicians, a bunch of incensed and defunct Generals, and the clerics think that they can wage a holy war against the US while they themselves have been the beneficiaries of American aid in the past.

And now there is this game of semantics whether the US should have used the word’ apology’ or ‘sorry’. The painful reality is that whether they use or do not use the words apology or sorry our status will remain ancillary. Unless as a nation we adopt the path of knowledge and promote a culture of research and intellectual inquiry, which our religion and the beloved Prophet taught us, we cannot rise in the world.

—Univeristy of Essex, UK

http://pakobserver.n...s.asp?id=164323

[KudosBot]

Pakistan should take control of their soil: US Ambassador

The US has said Pakistan's civil and military leadership should have "its writ on its soil", making it clear that Islamabad needs to take more steps to tackle terrorism.

"Pakistan should not become the problem...it should help resolve the problem," US Ambassador to Pakistan Cameron Munter said.

The US wants to work with Pakistan to tackle militant elements that are sheltering in the tribal belt bordering Afghanistan, he said.

Munter, who is set to step down in the near future, made it clear that Pakistan will have to do more to counter terrorism if it wants US financial assistance to resume.

He told BBC Urdu that Pakistan and the US will have to work together to find ways to effectively tackle a common enemy.

Though the envoy did not name any particular militant group, his remarks were an apparent reference to the Haqqani network which uses its bases in the lawless North Waziristan tribal region to launch attacks on US and foreign forces in Afghanistan.

Asked about the threat Pakistan was facing from local Taliban fighters, Munter said those challenging the writ of the state are terrorists.

"The civil and military leadership of Pakistan should take control of Pakistani soil and defeat such terrorists. And we want to help them," he said.

"We want Pakistan to be a sovereign state – by sovereign I mean the state should have its writ on its soil," he added.

"I think the issue of sovereignty is those people in your country who are attacking you from the inside and attacking your neighbour".

Munter noted that even Pakistan's Parliament had said in a resolution that the country's soil will not be allowed to be used for terrorism.

He avoided a direct response to a question about US drone strikes in the tribal belt, which Pakistan has described as a violation of its sovereignty and counter-productive.

The envoy's remarks came in the wake of Islamabad's decision to end a seven-month blockade of supply routes to Afghanistan that was imposed after NATO air strike killed 24 Pakistani soldiers last November.

Pakistan reopened the supply lines after the US apologised for the attack.

Munter said a decision on reopening the routes by delayed by Pakistan's internal politics and the pain caused by the death of the soldiers.

"It was a problem for Pakistan. It (the decision to block the NATO supply routes) had alienated 50 allies in the war against terrorism – a war that Pakistan's military is also fighting," he said.

"Now the reopening of the supply routes will help us fight this war collectively," he said.

He said the two countries had acknowledged that they will have to work together.

In response to a question about the possibility of an anti-US government coming to power in the next general election, Munter said both Pakistan Tehrik-e-Insaf chief Imran Khan and PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif had assured him that their parties "support" the US.

"I've met both Imran Khan and Nawaz Sharif and they have assured me that their parties fully support the United States," he said.

The two opposition parties have been critical of the US and their leaders have criticised US policies for Pakistan and Afghanistan.

[KudosBot]

Anti-Nato protests getting stronger in Islamabad

ISLAMABAD: Thousands of protesters have taken to the streets for the past few days in a “long march” from Lahore to Pakistan’s capital, Islamabad, in response to government’s recent decision to reopen Nato access to critical supply routes for the war efforts in Afghanistan.

More protests are planned in cities across Pakistan in the coming days, including a rally heading up the northern Khyber Pass.

The Nato supply line was closed by Pakistani authorities in November, after 24 Pakistani soldiers were killed in a cross-border attack by US soldiers further damaging already strained relations between the two allies.

Since then, Pakistan’s role in the US-led war in Afghanistan has hinged on the thorny issue of the supply lines and an apology.

After a diplomatic stand off and a series of negotiations, the government resumed transit routes last week after US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton finally issued an official apology for the deaths.

The recent protests organized by Difa-e-Pakistan Council or Defence of Pakistan Council (DPC), an umbrella coalition of right-wing parties, suggest however, that the issue is far from resolved for Pakistan’s religious right. Although the protests may not significantly affect logistics of the resumed supply routes, they set the stage for the coming elections.

Analysts say that anti-establishment activism will further de -legitimise the already weakened government, and the major opposition parties not currently participating in the rallies will try their best to exploit that.

http://www.thepenins...-islamabad.html




















Pakistan finalising procedures for clearance of Nato supply trucks Saturday,

14 July 2012 01:3

KARACHI: The customs authorities of Pakistan are close to finalising procedures for clearance of thousands of Nato/Isaf and US army containers stranded inside the country even after the governments decision to reopen routes into Afghanistan on July 3.

According to official sources, the major issues for clearance of goods lying inside the bonded areas of ports and even those that have left the ports but have not crossed the Afghan border have already been worked out.

However, certain clarifications have been sought from the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR).The sources said that these issues were expected to be sorted out by yeswterday evening, after which the cargoes would start moving out of the ports and other storage areas. Answering a question, the Collector for Port Qasim, Robina Wasti said, “So far not a single container belonging to the Nato/Isaf or US army has moved out of the port area or crossed the border since the announcement about the reopening of the Nato routes.”

However, she said that containers belonging to the diplomatic and commercial cargoes of the Afghan Transit Trade were being cleared as usual. Under the procedure being laid down for the clearance of the containers, all of them would have to be scanned.

The vehicles carrying them would be weighed both before and after the loading of the containers.

The customs authorities will have to put a seal on every container and proper documentation would be required for clearance of the cargo.

In the past the US army containers were cleared without the filing of the Goods Declaration (DG) which mentions the contents of the boxes. The vehicles moving out of the ports will be escorted by the Pakistan Rangers personnel. The National Logistics Cell will issue the no-objection certificate to the ‘bonded carriers’, according to the sources.

Pakistan closed overland routes for Nato convoys going to its war torn neighbour after botched US air strikes killed 24 Pakistani soldiers in November, plunging ties between the “war on terror” allies to a new low.

Internews
http://www.thepenins...ply-trucks.html

[Simpleton]

More Pakistan protests over NATO supply lines


By Riaz Khan - The Associated Press
Posted : Sunday Jul 15, 2012 15:23:14 EDT
PESHAWAR, Pakistan — A mortar round hit a house belonging to a paramilitary soldier Sunday in northwestern Pakistan, killing his wife and three of his children, police said, not far from the newly reopened NATO supply crossing to Afghanistan.

The soldier in the Frontier Corps, Dolat Mir, was wounded in the explosion in Mera Sheikhan village near the Khyber tribal area, said police official Inayatullah Khan.

The Khyber tribal region is one of the two land routes for ferrying the supplies to U.S. and its allied NATO forces across border in Afghanistan. Chaman border in southwest Pakistan is the other land crossing.

Mir’s son and two daughters who died were between the ages of 1 and 7, Khan said.

It was unclear who fired the mortar, Khan said, or whether the house was intentionally targeted. The 27-year-old soldier has been serving in the North Waziristan tribal region, said police official Behram Khan.

The military has been conducting operations against Islamist militants in Khyber.

Pakistan reopened both routes for NATO supplies on July 4 after a seven-month suspension. This came after U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton apologized for the deaths of 24 Pakistani soldiers in an allied forces raid on a border military post. Pakistan blocked the routes after the border incident, demanding an apology.

Opponents of reopening the route demonstrated at the Chaman crossing on Sunday.

Around 4,000 Islamists travelled hundreds of kilometers to the border from Quetta, the capital of Baluchistan province where Chaman is located, and held a sit-in protest, said police official Agha Mohammad. A banner in the rally read, “Say no to NATO supplies,” and the protesters chanted, “Long live Mullah Omar,” a founder of the Taliban.

The demonstrators dispersed peacefully.

Another 1,000 Islamists marched to the seaport in the southern city of Karachi, where NATO supplies are received before being transported to Afghanistan.

Thousands of Islamists under the banner of the Difa-e-Pakistan Council, or council for defending Pakistan, a group of several Islamic political parties and militant groups, thronged the Pakistani capital, Islamabad, on July 9 to protest the supply resumption. At the time, the group pledged to organize more protests.

Associated Press Writer Matiullah Achakzai in Chaman contributed to this report.

[Dizasta]

I pray that the People of Pakistan gather momentum in the protests against the re-opening of the NATO-Supply Routes. I pray to Allah Subhanaho Wata'aalah that this be the catalyst which would unite the people of Pakistan together to destroy and vanquish the zardari-ppp govt and the Bhuttos, Talpurs, Magsis, Menghals, Soomros, Marris and Bugtis from Pakistan, permanently.

[rungroot]

Dizasta, on 18 July 2012 - 02:56 PM, said:

I pray that the People of Pakistan gather momentum in the protests against the re-opening of the NATO-Supply Routes. I pray to Allah Subhanaho Wata'aalah that this be the catalyst which would unite the people of Pakistan together to destroy and vanquish the zardari-ppp govt and the Bhuttos, Talpurs, Magsis, Menghals, Soomros, Marris and Bugtis from Pakistan, permanently.

Ameen sum Ameen.

Also please add the Sharif brothers and that gutter rat britt altaf hussain and his bhai log thugs to your buddua.

[Magnus]

Quiet Duo Forged Road Deal for U.S. and Pakistan

By DECLAN WALSH
Published: July 26, 2012

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Much like the 900-mile highway that links the heaving port of Karachi with the storied Khyber Pass on the Afghan border, the United States’ relationship with Pakistan this year has been winding and strewed with unexpected hazards.

After months of painful negotiations that reached a formal conclusion this week, that road has reopened to NATO supply traffic and the broader diplomatic relationship has wobbled back on track — at least for now.

On Wednesday, the Pakistani cabinet approved a 10-page document that sets the terms for NATO transit traffic, codifying a political deal that was struck in early July and that broke a seven-month deadlock that had stranded more than 11,000 military shipping containers bound for Afghanistan.

The Pakistanis received an American apology for the deaths of 24 Pakistani soldiers in American airstrikes in November — and other, more tangible benefits. The United States will transfer $1.1 billion in delayed military aid in the coming days, giving an urgent lift to an ailing economy. The Americans have also promised to refurbish 130 miles of Pakistani road.

The breakthrough, American and Pakistani officials say now, was not won through the high diplomacy efforts that dominated headlines through that stretch, but rather through an unconventional back channel run by a low-key duo: Thomas R. Nides, a deputy to Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, and Abdul Hafeez Shaikh, Pakistan’s finance minister.

Both cut their teeth in finance: Mr. Nides came to the Obama administration from Morgan Stanley, while Mr. Shaikh is a soft-spoken Boston University graduate who previously worked in the World Bank and equity finance.

“The bean counters did it,” said a senior American official, in comments intended to convey admiration rather than disparagement. The official spoke on condition of anonymity, as did several others interviewed about the talks.

The channel between Mr. Nides and Mr. Shaikh was established in late May amid secrecy after months of mishaps and missed opportunities on the part of more seasoned players. Much of it revolved around the vexed notion of an American apology.

At first Pakistan’s foreign minister, Hina Rabbani Khar, asked the Americans to stall their apology until Parliament met. But by the time she met Mrs. Clinton in London in February, anti-American riots had seized Afghanistan after an episode in which American troops burned copies of the Koran. Mr. Obama’s expression of regret for that caused his aides to caution against a similar gesture to Pakistan, amid fears that the president’s rivals could label him as “apologizer-in-chief.”

A major NATO conference in Chicago in May stirred hopes of a breakthrough. But on the first day of the meeting, an article in The Chicago Tribune by the Pakistani ambassador to Washington, Sherry Rehman, listed five Pakistani demands, annoying Mr. Obama, said senior officials on both sides. “It really set us back,” one American said.

A day later, Mrs. Clinton and President Asif Ali Zardari agreed to the channel between Mr. Nides and Mr. Shaikh. “Make it happen” she told Mr. Nides. Secrecy was paramount: only a tiny group of insiders on both sides was privy to the talks.

Through e-mails, conference calls and discreet meetings, at least four drafts of the American apology went back and forth. The two men played on their personal chemistry and shared business background, often eschewing the traditional posturing of diplomacy. They also had to contend with significant resistance in their own camps.

Pakistan’s army chief, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, rejected early American offers of an apology for deaths “on both sides.” Mr. Nides pushed to bring around skeptics in the White House, where anti-Pakistan sentiment was hardening.

The president and his advisers were swayed, however, by money and geopolitics. The alternate supply route, through Central Asia, was costing the American military an extra $100 million per month, or about $17,000 per truck. That route was also, to some degree, hostage to the dissipating good will of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.

Positions shifted. At a barbecue at Pakistan’s Washington embassy residence in late June, the national security adviser, Thomas E. Donilon, signaled to Ms. Rehman that the White House was ready to move. Mr. Shaikh invited Mr. Nides and an American team to Islamabad. On July 1, the two sides gathered in Ms. Khar’s Islamabad home for a fateful five-hour meeting.

It got off to a rocky start. General Kayani opened the meeting with a new draft apology that the Americans had not seen; Mr. Nides exploded with anger in protest, according to several people present, and officials from both sides took a break, venturing into the garden for fresh air.

On resuming, both sides calmed down and reworked the text, line by line. Two days later, in a carefully orchestrated maneuver, Mrs. Clinton phoned Ms. Khar and said “sorry” for the deaths of the 24 soldiers.

Days later, the first trucks rumbled out of a Karachi port, headed for Afghanistan.

Under the agreement finalized this week, the United States will continue to pay standard trucking fees of about $250 per truck — less than the $5,000 demanded by Pakistan at one point. Crucially, it also eases the immense task of transporting military matériel out of Afghanistan that will be needed as the 2014 withdrawal deadline nears.

Still, officials say it should take at least two months to clear the backlog of 11,000 containers in Karachi, some of which have been stuck there since November. “We’re not looking forward to opening the cheese container,” one diplomat joked.

Despite all the talking, several Pakistani demands remain unresolved: for a halt to drone strikes, which seems unlikely, and a resumption of military aid, which has better chances of success.

Some officials, even while expressing relief that relations had at last reached a corner, if not quite turned it, warned that the crisis highlighted the dangerous frailty of relations between the two countries. One senior Pakistani official said, “This relationship can’t be subjected to so many wounds in such a short space of time.”

Eric Schmitt contributed reporting from Washington.
This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: July 27, 2012


A previous version of this article incorrectly referred to Abdul Hafeez Shaikh, Pakistan’s finance minister, as a graduate of Harvard University. He graduated from Boston University.

http://www.nytimes.c...d-Pakistan.html

[Magnus]

Taliban cheer Pakistan’s decision to reopen NATO route; protection money feeds operations

By Associated Press, Updated: Tuesday, July 31, 4:58 AM

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan — 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 U.S. 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 U.S. airstrikes 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 U.S. apologized 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 U.S. military estimated last year that $360 million in U.S. 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 funneled 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 U.S. Over more than two years, the power broker funneled $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 U.S. 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 U.S. 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 U.S. and other NATO countries shipped about 30 percent of their nonlethal 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 U.S. 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.”

____

Abbot reported from Islamabad and can be reached at https://twitter.com/sebabbot . Associated Press writer Richard Lardner contributed to this report from Washington.

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

http://www.washingto...c1LX_story.html