United States Foreign Policy: Pakistan

1. United States Foreign Policy: Pakistan Andy Bazany, Daniel Eicher, Cassidy Stevens

2. Historical Overview • Pakistan achieved independence from England in 1947. In contrast with India, Pakistan was more pro-west. • Pakistan was considered our best ally in Asia; they joined both SEATO (Southeast Asia Treaty Organization) and CENTO (Central Treaty Organization). In addition, they signed a mutual defense agreement with the US in 1954. • In 1971, Bangladesh was formed during a civil war. The United States supported Pakistan. The US also allied with Pakistan during the Soviet-Afghan war. • US/Pakistani relations soured in the 90s. As a result of Pakistan’s nuclear program, the US placed sanctions on them. In response, Pakistan supported the Taliban.

3. Post 9/11 History • The US brokered a deal with Musharraf (President of Pakistan 2001-2008) over the war on terror. In exchange for military support, the US would lift sanctions on Pakistan. • The US was allowed usage of 3 air bases in Pakistan. In return, the US supported Musharraf, granted $10 billion in financial aid (from 2001-present), and made Pakistan a major non-NATO ally. • Then-President Musharraf resigned due to potential impeachment charges, and was succeeded by the more democratic Asif Ali Zardari, after his wife, Benazir Bhutto, was assassinated mid-campaign. • President Barack Obama supports the new Pakistani government and has expanded military aid to Pakistan.

4. Drone Strikes in Pakistan Frequent drone strikes display our unique relationship with Pakistan. Drone strikes are intended to take out insurgent leaders and military personnel; however, of the 185 recorded drone strikes since 2004, over 1863 casualties have been reported, many of which are civilian. The majority of these strikes occur in the Waziristan region, which encompasses part of the Northwestern Afghan/Pakistan border.

5. Anti-Pakistani Involvement, GPUSA (Green Party) • Party platform calls for nonviolence in all respects. • American democracy should advocate peace, not enforce it through means of violence. • Civilian casualties from drone strikes are too frequent to be considered effective. • American involvement strengthens Al Qaeda and Taliban forces by contributing to destabilization and forcing insurgent establishment throughout Pakistan. • Presence of troops currently in violation of War Powers Act of 1973.

6. Further opposition Involvement costs considerable amount of money. Pakistani government may be aiding the Taliban. We have a history of supporting less than reputable leaders. Billions in aid to potentially unstable country.

7. pro pakistani involvement, united states government • $20.7 billion in aid paid to Pakistan, and a firm US stance ensures continued support after major combat operations. • “… America will remain a strong supporter of Pakistan’s security and prosperity long after the guns have fallen silent” -Ambassador Anne Patterson • Supports NATO attacks on extremists and continued military presence in Waziristan. • Desires to help Pakistan towards democracy and good relations with neighbors. • Desires to use Pakistan as base of operations for South/Central Asian military action. • Increase in standard of living, GDP, lessened hostilities, fair elections in Pakistan. • "The U.S. and Pakistan have a robust working relationship that serves the mutual interests of our people” -Spokesman for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs

8. Pro Pakistani Involvement, Supporters • Opposition faced by Musharraf emphasizes his effort and worthiness. • Liberalization of Pakistani society and marginalization of fringe elements benefits Pakistan’s well being. • Al-Qaeda cannot be permitted a stronghold in northwest Pakistan. • Drone civilian body count is inaccurate and often reported by pro-Taliban tribals. • The Pakistani government needs our aid to help shore it up. • Support of Pakistan is an investment for our own security at home.

9. Pakistani Government • More supportive of US military involvement, mainly for resource donation. • Not fond of infringements on territory by both US and NATO forces. • Can use the US to divert difficulties of Pakistani instability • Needs a strong, Western ally to deal with larger threats from Taliban, Al Qaeda, home-grown terrorists, and India.

10. Pakistani Population • Overwhelming majority oppose US military action and doubt legitimacy of American involvement in Pakistan. • American involvement furthers instability and provides for the Pakistani government, which has led to the deaths of many notable leaders such as Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, Baluch tribal leader Nawab Akbar Bugti, and prominent MQM (MuttahidaQuami movement) party member Dr. Imran Farooq • Calls for full removal of US/NATO troops from Pakistan and Afghanistan, as well as an end to drone attacks. Also calls for demilitarization of FATA (Federally Administered Tribal Areas), NWFP (North West Frontier Province), and Baluchistan

11. Public Opinion: Pakistan, 2009 • In a 2009 poll of all of Pakistan, • 51% supported military action by NATO, only 13% opposed, 36% uncertain. • 37% believed it to be Pakistan’s war, 39% U.S.’s. This shows an increase from one year prior, when only 23% thought it to be Pakistan’s war. • About 36% each hope it will improve the situation and feel it will worsen. • 25% blame the Taliban for military action in Waziristan, 35% America, 31% Pakistan’s government.

12. Public Opinion: Pakistan, 2010 • In a 2010 poll of tribal areas, • Nearly 90% oppose U.S. military action in Waziristan and other FATA regions, 70% wanting Pakistani military fighting instead. • 10% think anti-Pakistani suicide bombing is sometimes justified, 60% think it’s sometimes justified against U.S. • 85% believe drone attacks target civilians wholly or in part. • Only 1% would vote for al-Qaeda or Pakistani Taliban in a general election.

13. Public Opinion: US • Firmly opposed to Pakistani Taliban and al-Qaeda in FATA. • As of 2007, Americans were firmly opposed to Pakistan and its leadership, and felt it important for candidates to discuss in the upcoming election. • Recent developments show a decreasing opinion of military operations in Afghanistan and the FATA. • Most are more concerned with American lives lost than with Pakistani government.

14. Current Events • 9/27/2010 – Pakistan outraged because NATO crossed the border into Waziristan while chasing after Taliban fighters. • 10/14/2010 – 100% or so rise in kidnappings in Khyber FATA since last year. • 10/23/2010 – Washington reported to be looking to increase CIA presence in Pakistan. • 10/26/2010 – Pakistani military has blockaded an anti-Taliban tribe in the Kurram FATA.

15. Pics (or it didn’t happen)

16. Presidents Bush and Musharraf

17. Map of Pakistan

18. Ethnic Borders

19. Drone Attacks in Pakistan

20. Food for Thought Soup du jour is pea soup. Cut it. Should military involvement continue, or should Pakistan assume full responsibility over the war on terror?

21. Crafting a Solution Give it a spin! How should the issues of Pakistani instability and the war on terror be addressed to ensure a swift and lasting solution?

22. Lasting Effects Will the status quo endure till the very end? If immediate stability and a full defeat of insurgent forces was achieved, how would you keep the peace?

23. Sources • Opposing Views: http://www.2facts.com/icof_story.aspx?PIN=i1400410Pro Current U.S. Foreign Policy: http://www.app.com.pk/en_/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=96455&Itemid=2Anti Current U.S. Foreign Policy: http://www.gp.org/press/pr-national.php?ID=335http://progpak.wordpress.com/app-statement-on-the-war-in-afghanistan-and-pakistan/ Pakistani Populace Opinionshttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8254360.stm Musharraf admits that U.S. aid was used to prepare for war against Indiahttp://www.achievement.org/autodoc/page/kar0bio-1 Hamid Karzai Interviews, Biography, etc.http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/27/pakistan-nato-raid-afghanistan-taliban Pakistan is disappoint. ISAF forces moved into Pakistani territory to fight the Taliban.http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/26/pakistan-imran-farooq-murder-mqm Pakistani political officials are possibly being killed by each other. Civil unrest --> inability to deal with foreign issues at same time in a proper manner.http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/26/minister-resigns-pakistan-accuses-army More Pakistanis killing each other --> military corruptionhttp://www.theworldreporter.com/2010/10/us-and-pakistan-not-allies-but-enemies.html Pakistan-US relationshttp://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6103AW20100201 Pakistan-US relationshttp://www.gp.org/platform/2004/2004platform.pdf Green Party Platformhttp://www.thestate.com/2010/10/17/1517524/trying-to-win-pakistani-trust.html Pakistanhttp://www.newamerica.net/publications/policy/public_opinion_in_pakistan_s_tribal_regions Survey on Pakistani opinion towards U.S. involvement.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-11625216 Pakistani military blocks off anti-Taliban tribe, possibly pending a lessening of anti-Taliban hostilities.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-11539343 Rise in kidnappings in FATA since last year reported.http://www.2facts.com/icof_story.aspx?PIN=i1100520 Facts on File regarding U.S. foreign policy in Pakistan - oldie but still very relevant.http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/02/17/politics/main6217143.shtml Report regarding capture of Afghan Taliban leader; comments by spokesman for Chairman of the JCoS.http://www.voanews.com/english/news/asia/WSJ-US-Seeks-Wider-CIA-Role-in-Pakistan-105591273.html Washington is increasing CIA presence in Pakistan. Yay?http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/aug/27/wikileaks-war-logs-free-speech-supreme-court Information on leaked documents on U.S. foreign policy in general