By: Maya Berna

FOREIGN POLICY IN PAKISTAN

Alliance was born after the second world warAmerica felt compelled to become a benefactor of the

immensely poor and densely populated countryOver the decades, it poured billions of dollars into

Paksitan’s economy, training and equipping its military and its intelligence services.

Goal: to create a reliable ally with strong institutions and a modern, vigorous democracy.

Pakistan became America’s protégé, firmly supporting its fight to contain Communism.

PROGRESSION OF DIPLOMACY

After the 1965 Pakistan-India war began, the U.S. essentially withdrew aid to both countries. Gradually, U.S. economic aid was restored, but the Pakistani military was kept on probation.

1979, U.S. intelligence discovered that Pakistan was secretly building a uranium-enrichment facility in response to India’s nuclear-weapons program.

When the military dictator of Pakistan (Zia-ul-Haq) hung the civilian president and cancelled elections, U.S aid came to a halt.

At the same time, Zia began giving support to an Islamist organization, forerunner of many more radical groups to come.

Later that year, a mob of Jamaal followers inflamed by a rumor burned the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad to the ground. The American romance with Pakistan was over, but the marriage was just about to begin.

TIES TURN SOUR

Later in 1979, the soviet union invaded Afghanistan the Reagan administration offered Pakistan and

Afghani jihadist 3 billion dollars in military aid hoping to amend this disintegrating alliance

Money went through the Inter-Service Intelligence directorate, the spy branch of the Pakistani army

The I.S.I. became so glutted with power and money that it formed a “state within a state,”

Gul, the head of the I.S.I, helped oversee the creation of the Taliban, reportedly using mainly Saudi money. The I.S.I. openly supported the Taliban until September 11, 2001.

Since then, the Pakistani government has disavowed the group, but it is widely believed that it still provides Taliban leaders with safe harbor in Quetta, where they stage jihad against Western forces in Afghanistan. As you can imagine, this put a damper on good relations between the two nations. To say the least.

In 1990, GW Bush cut off military aid to Pakistan as a response to Pakistan’s pursuit of nuclear weapons

But, after the September 11th attacks, Pakistan abruptly became America’s key ally in the “war on terror.” Under President George W. Bush, the U.S. gave billions of dollars to Pakistan, most of it in unrestricted funds, to combat terrorism by hunting terrorists that reside in the country.

The Pakistan president in 1999 and 2008, now admits that during his tenure he diverted many of those billions to arm Pakistan against its hobgoblin enemy, India .

Pakistani military does very well in its investments. Such entrepreneurship, however corrupt, fills a gap, as Pakistan’s economy is now almost entirely dependent on American taxpayers.

AID IS CUT OFF THEN ABRUPTLY REINSTATED

In 2009, Senators Richard Lugar and John Kerry, helped pass legislation in Congress sanctioning seven and a half billion dollars in civilian assistance.

civilian projects require oversight and checks on corruption in the Pakistani military, meanwhile, submits expense claims every month to the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad

ALLEVIATING CORRUPTION

Terrorist suicide bombers have killed thousands of Pakistani civilians

Military and the I.S.I. created and nurtured these very groups—such as the Taliban—that have turned against the Pakistani state. The money used to fund these radical organizations came largely from American taxpayers.

the US is much less generous now than it was- suspending and cancelling millions of dollars of aid

Pentagon budget bill l imits the Defense Department from spending more than 25 percent of its projected $1.1 billion budget for training and equipping Pakistani troops

likely to produce greater distance between the two countries.

America needs Pakistan’s help to defeat Al Qaeda and make an honorable retreat from Afghanistan .

THE HUNT FOR TERRORISTS

Articulated by the C.I.A the first drone was used to kill a Taliban rebellion leader as an outcome of a secret deal- the C.I.A. had agreed to kill him in exchange for access to airspace-in return they would be allowed to use drones to hunt down its own enemies.

Used for target killings The C.I.A. has since conducted hundreds of drone strikes

in Pakistan that have killed thousands of people, Pakistanis and Arabs, militants and civilians alike.

drones have turned the C.I.A. (and the US for that matter) into the villain countries like Pakistan detest, it should be nurturing relationships in order to gather intelligence.

As a result passionate anti-American feelings in Pakistan have arisen

MEDIA CONCENTRATION: THE DRONE WAR

Most Pakistanis reject the Taliban and other extremists. But they also reject the American drones that violate their sovereignty and operate with impunity.

Pakistani resistance has had an impact: number of drones is declining, less than 30 this year compared to 112 in 2011.

Prime minister Sharif’s ability to force Washington’s hand is constrained by finances: his government relies on $1.6 billion in US aid and is dependent on US support for the $6.7 billion International Monetary Fund loan package it just signed. The government’s inability to stop the drone attacks makes it look weak and subservient to US interests, undermining Pakistan’s fragile democracy.

The two drone strikes in November show that these attacks don’t just kill and maim individuals- they also blow up peace talks. They weaken democratically elected governments. They sabotage bilateral relations. They sow hatred and resentment.

TROUBLE PUTTING A STOP TO THEM

Some Pakistanis are in favor of the drone strikes as they eliminate Taliban and other terrorist leaders who make their lives hell.

Others fear for their immediate safety when drones fly over their local towns and village

The use of drones has created anti-american feelings in Pakistan as they have been the cause for death and destruction

CONTROVERSY IN PAKISTAN

Both sides are in agreement that drone attacks are dangerous and disapprove of them

Concern for civilian casualties and souring of a strong alliance

There is no stark difference between the two, mainly blanket disapproval

Of the few that approve of drone strikes in hopes that it will eliminate extremists, the majority are republican

This group of individuals is a mere 8%

POLITICAL PARTIES’ VIEW…

It is important to be informed about global issues so that we may have better relations with other countries, but more specifically American business in foreign countries.

We must maintain our interest in struggling countries to strengthen alliances.

Foreign policy promotes peace, prosperity, and democratic governments.

Global problems can be dealt with successfully when working in conjunction.

advance economic prosperity, human rights, and other interests of the United States in the world.

Gain international understanding of American values and policies.

AWARENESS OF FOREIGN POLICY:IMPORTANCE