US to spend $50 million on media in Pakistan: Examiner

Ibrahim Sajid Malick

The Obama administration plans to spend nearly $50 million on Pakistani media this year to reverse anti-American sentiments and raise awareness of projects aimed at improving quality of life, confirms a Washington insider.

After the Kerry-Lugar Bill debacle, the Obama administration had struggled with the idea of ‘branding’ aid and many within the State department and the USAID had argued that identifying projects may backfire.

“By announcing that a school was built and is being maintained – partly because of the aid received from America – you can alienate people,” said someone who had proposed not ‘branding’ the aid.

The US Special Representative to Pakistan and Afghanistan, Ambassador Richard Holbrooke believes that a substantial amount of monies spent on media- especially private TV channels will reduce tension and may even bring Pakistan-US relations back on the right path.

Senator John Kerry, the main architect of Kerry-Lugar bill also supports the idea of claiming credit for all “the good work being done to improve infrastructure, energy and education,” said a source in Senator’s office.

Reuters today reported that the Obama administration has sent lawmakers a plan for funding water, energy and other projects. Report said the US intends to spend $1.45 billion of earmarked for the Kerry-Lugar bill in fiscal 2010.

The trust deficit had surged after a well intended aid package focused to uplift Pakistan’s civilian society was trashed by a section of Pakistani media. Interviews with diplomatic sources in Washington, D.C. and media coverage of the KLB debacle had demonstrated growing frustration of the Obama administration.

Although American officials publicly praise military operation in South Waziristan, in private they sing a different tune; their assessment of ”alignment” is rather pessimistic. Stories leaked to media consistently allege that al-Qaeda leadership is still enjoying safe haven in Pakistan.

For more on this article, please click on the following link: US to spend $50 million on media in Pakistan: Examiner

Indian Army Chief’s outrageous admission of Armoured debacle stuns the world: Daily Mail

By Makhdoom Babar
(Additional reporting by Ajay Mehta in New Delhi & Hina Kayani in Rawalpindi)

While the Indians celebrate 62nd Army Day, country’s Army Chief General Deepak Kapoor, just after a couple of weeks of announcing a new war doctrine of Indian army to eliminate Pakistan and China in matter of hours even if it has to fight on simultaneous fronts, outrageously admitted Indian Army’s Armoured debacle and expressed concern about the force's 'night blindness' in the area of Armoured Corps and mechanised infantry. 'My major concern is that night blindness of the army is removed so we are able to fight in the night as in the day,' Kapoor said at New Delhi Yesterday, an admission that stunned the world in the back drop of his two weeks old remarks. The situation also forced Indian Defence Minister Antony to chew his own buts as he had been endorsing and projecting General Kapoor’s announcement regarding the new war doctrine for Pakistan and China Earlier, when his attention was brought to the fact that the Indian Army's tanks have a night vision capability of 20 percent, Pakistan's have 80 percent while China has 100 percent, General Deepak Kapoor admitted this outrageous military debacle by saying: 'You are right.'
'Projects are already in the pipeline to ensure that we have the night vision capability that our adversaries have. It may take three-four years,' Kapoor added. The lack of night vision capability of the Indian Army has affected its fighting capability during the night. The deficiency has been persistent since the Kargil conflict.
On a query about the obsolete artillery of the Indian Army, the army chief said that successive bans have delayed acquisition of new guns for long. 'Artillery is a cause for concern. We need to have better guns. Trials for towed guns are underway. Because of bans the process got delayed. We are now acquiring (ultra light) guns through FMS (Foreign Military Sales) route (from the US),' Kapoor added.

The Daily mail’s investigations into the matter reveal that despite a numerical strength of tanks over Pakistan, Indian army otherwise armoured and infantry capabilities are even below average if compared with Pakistan Army. According to these findings, Indian armoured corps comprises around 4, 059 tanks with a backup of 1, 133 as reserve while Pakistan Army’s Tank strength is 2,401 with a backup of 270 as reserves. However this numerical supremacy of Indian army is outraged with the fact that Indian armoured corps relies mainly on its Main Battle Tank (MBT) Arjun which emerged as a big failure while Pakistan Army’s armoured corps’ main strength has become Al-Khalid MBT which is a great success story, endorsed across the world. But the latest admission of Indian Army Chief about failure of its armoured corps to fight a battle in the night time is an additional and a rather huge disadvantage to the Indian Army and crystal clearly negates the claims of Indian Army Chief regarding smooth victory in case Indian army has to fight a war with Pakistan or China or even both at the same time.
The Daily Mail’s findings further disclose that India’s MBT Arjun is more flab than brawn. More a heavyweight than a performer. A potpourri really, with a French engine, and German seals fitted into an Indian hull and turret. And transporting this heavyweight is going to be another problem, which could limit its operational performance.
These findings further indicate that Arjun has indeed suffered throughout its development, from confusion and inexplicable delays and by imbalances between the Army, the DRDO and the bureaucracy. Pakistan by contrast, has drawn a lesson from the Indian experience and avoided the trap of over lasting her R&D’s indigenous know-how in the development of its MBT Al-Khalid.

For more on this article, please click on the following link: Indian Army Chief’s outrageous admission of Armoured debacle stuns the world: Daily Mail

Try Pakistan’s M2 motorway: The Gazette

ISLAMABAD - If you want a slice of peace and stability in a country with a reputation for violence and chaos, try Pakistan’s M2 motorway.

At times foreign reporters need to a give a nation a rest from their instinctive cynicism. I feel like that with Pakistan each time I whizz along the M2 between Islamabad and Lahore, the only motorway I know that inspires me to write.

Now, if the M2 conjures images of bland, spotless tarmac interspersed with gas stations and fast food outlets, you would be right. But this is South Asia, land of potholes, reckless driving and the occasional invasion of livestock.

And this is Pakistan, for many a "failed state". Here, blandness can inspire almost heady optimism.

Built in the 1990s at a cost of around $1 billion, the 228-mile (367-km) motorway -- which continues to Peshawar as the M1 -- is like a six-lane highway to paradise in a country that usually makes headlines for suicide bombers, army offensives and political mayhem.

For more on this article, please click on the following link: Try Pakistan’s M2 motorway: The Gazette

Pakistan has Given Reverse Aid to the US Worth $5.1 Billion Since 2006: Economistan

Much hue and cry has been made out of the Aid US has given to Pakistan over the years. However, all this Aid amounts to pittance when we realize that US has given Pakistan over a period of 60 years only $8.9 billion dollars in economic assistance. This amount is less than even the remittances that Pakistanis would send this year which would amount to a little more than $9 billion dollars. The military aid that the US has given to Pakistan over the past 62 years amounts to $14.7 billion, which includes $5 billion dollars which were given to Pakistan during the Zia years to drive the Soviets back from Afghanistan thus signaling the end of the Cold War. In short, Pakistan won the war for the US for just $5 billion which speaks volumes about the efficiency and determination of Pakistan Armed Forces.

This $5 billion not only covered the cost of arming and training Afghan fighters and the supply of stinger missiles which were instrumental in bringing down Russian air power but also helicopters and other weapons and fuel needed to defeat the Soviets. It was a war in which many Pakistani fighter pilots also laid down their lives in an effort to drive the Russians away from Afghanistan.
The US basically used Pakistan to win its war against Russia and dubbed the Foreign Direct Investment in this Cold War as US Aid. Paying another country to fight its own war should not be called as Aid but wages for fighting the war. Again during so the called “War on Terror”, the US has enrolled its old and forgotten partner to do all the work for it and given Pakistan a little more than $ 9 billion as Coalition Support Funds (or “Military Aid”) to win the war.

A major portion of these Coalition Support Funds however, also includes the cost of fuel that Pakistan supplies to the US forces based in Afghanistan. In effect the US calls the money it gives to Pakistan for the fuel that the US itself uses in Afghanistan as “Military Aid”. There are also reports that Pakistan is supplying the fuel to the US below cost. The Coalition Support Funds and Security Assistance almost entirely are composed of fuel plus the military hardware costs that the US has supplied to Pakistan. Given below is a complete breakdown of the so called “Military Aid” since 911 to Pakistan,

“Military Aid” to Pakistan since 911
Coalition Support Funds	$5.6 b
Security Assistance	$1.8 b
Budget Support	$1.6 b
Development	$0.9 b

The breakdown of the total aid given to Pakistan by the US is as follows,

Total US Aid to Pakistan in past 62 years($ millions)
	Military	Economic
1950-1964	700	2500
1965-1979	26	2550
1979-1990	5000	0
1991-2000	5	429
2001-2009	9000	3500
Total	$14.731 billion	$8.979 billion

Ken Stier writes in an article on aid to Pakistan writes,

“Currently, 70 to 80 cents of every dollar allocated in aid comes back to the U.S. instead of staying in the country it is meant to benefit because of USAID's dependence on contractors.”

The US is using US companies and contractors to channel this so called “Aid” which is used to support US companies presently operating in Pakistan against Chinese firms along with the construction of infrastructure projects like the building and expansion of the $One billion dollar US Embassy in Pakistan. Under the same token if Pakistan spends some money from its exchequer to build part of its embassy in the US, would that also be termed as Pakistan’s aid to the US? or for that matter if Pakistan purchased any military hardware from the US would it be termed as Pakistan’s aid to the US? Under the current US definition of “aid” it would. If so then it would not be wrong to say that Pakistan has given the US aid worth $5.1 billion since 2006 because of the money it spent for the purchase of F-16s from the US. Well the logic behind the Kerry-Lugar bill is the same. This so called aid is not really aid at all instead it is US Foreign Direct Investment in Pakistan to accomplish its nefarious designs such as expansion of US military infrastructure in Pakistan through use of private military contractors and blacklisted companies like Black Water and stationing of US marines and hardware in Pakistan through overt and covert means.

The funny thing is that this so called US Aid is spread over many years comes with harsh conditions. The US just playing with terminologies and fooling the people of Pakistan into thinking that the money US is using in supporting US companies in Pakistan and building its own embassy is aid. It is about time for Pakistan to wake up and aggressively address the issues of the sovereignty in Pakistan and excessive US interference in Pakistan’s internal affairs in the garb of this so called aid. Pakistan would also be well served to reject this so called aid and closely scrutinize all of this “Foreign Direct Investment” from the US which it calls aid to Pakistan. Pakistan should require the US to give a detailed list of each and every item that is purchased through this money in Pakistan and which US companies, contractors and concerns are the beneficiaries of the so called “aid”.

Pakistan's Aid to the US since 2006
Item 1: 36 New F-16 Block 50/52s – $3 billion	$ 3 billion
Item 2: Weapons for the New F-16s – $650 Million	$ 650 million
Item 3: F-16A/B Mid-Life Update Modification Kits – $1.3 billion	$ 1.3 billion
Item 4: F-16A/B Engine Modifications & UP/STAR – $151 Million	$ 151 million

Thanks to the billions of dollars that overseas Pakistanis have sent to Pakistan just this year($ 9 billion), the current account deficit of the current financial year for Pakistan has reduced to a mere $462 million dollars which bodes well for Pakistan. Pakistan’s stock market is also in recovery mode and rose by 2.4% to 9,374 points since Sept 24. It is about time Pakistan reconsidered its partnership with the US and called the US military aid or foreign direct investment in Pakistan “US military expense” and the US economic assistance to Pakistan over the last 62 years of $ 8.9 billion dollars what it is, a “Pittance”.

For more on this article, please click on the following link: Pakistan has Given Reverse Aid to the US Worth $5.1 Billion Since 2006: Economistan

About Those Billions: Newsweek

By Katie Paul

It was with the best of intentions that the U.S. funneled nearly $5.3 billion to Pakistan during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s. After all, that money helped strike down a Cold War adversary. But there were unintended consequences too—namely, the Taliban. Since 9/11, the U.S. has turned on the spigot again, sending more than $15 billion in assistance to Pakistan. President Barack Obama just approved another $7.5 billion this month, which triples aid while committing to another five years of funding. It also bolsters development efforts, which, according to bill coauthor Sen. John Kerry, will "build a relationship with the people [of Pakistan] to show that what we want is a relationship that meets their interests and needs."

But how effective will this round of money be? Officials at the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad have alleged that Pakistan misspent some 70 percent of the U.S. funds that paid the Pakistani military to run missions in the unwieldy provinces along the Afghan border. U.S. officials accuse Pakistan of running a double game with the money, keeping the Taliban at bay just enough to persuade American benefactors to keep their wallets open, thereby ensuring a lifeline for the country's mangled economy. All of which raises the question: will any amount of money produce results?

A big part of that answer lies in determining how much bang the United States has gotten for its buck so far—whether or not some of the money was siphoned off along the way to fund Army generals' new houses or Taliban elements. Here's an accounting of aid sent over from the United States to Pakistan in recent decades, divided into eras based on the ebbs and flows of assistance. (Figures are in historical dollars.)

1950-1964: As the Cold War heated up, a 1954 security agreement prompted the United States to provide nearly $2.5 billion in economic aid and $700 million in military aid to Pakistan.

1965-1979: With the Indo-Pakistani hostilities in the late 1960s, the United States retreated. Between 1965 and 1971, the U.S. sent only $26 million in military aid, which was cut back even further to $2.9 million through the end of the decade. Meanwhile, economic aid kept flowing, totaling $2.55 billion over the 15 years. Everything came to a halt in 1979, however, when the Carter administration cut off all but food aid after discovering a uranium-enrichment facility in Pakistan. Pakistani leader Gen. Mohammad Zia ul-Haq refused $400 million, split for economic and military aid from President Jimmy Carter, calling it "peanuts." The following year, he was rewarded with a much more attractive offer.

1979-1990: The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan changed everything. Pakistan's ISI security apparatus became the primary means of funneling covert U.S. assistance to anti-Soviet forces in Afghanistan. From 1980 to 1990, the United States ramped up its contributions for both development and military purposes, sending more than $5 billion over the course of the decade.

1991-2000: But even while Pakistan was serving a strategic Cold War purpose, concerns persisted about the country's nuclear ambitions. That gave President George H.W. Bush an easy out from the massive funding commitments in 1990, after the fall of the Soviet Union. Aid over the next decade withered to $429 million in economic assistance and $5.2 million in military assistance, a drop-off Pakistanis still cite bitterly, accusing the United States of leaving them high and dry during the decade.

2001-2009: Since 9/11, the United States has once again bolstered its funding commitments, sending nearly $9 billion in military assistance both to aid and reimburse Pakistan for its operations in the unwieldy border regions with Afghanistan. Another $3.6 billion has funded economic and diplomatic initiatives. But U.S. officials and journalists' accounts have raised concerns that such funds are not being used as intended, and not just because of the typical concerns about corruption. Documented military and civilian government deals with Taliban elements, like a 2004 agreement with Waziri militant leader Nek Mohammed, have confirmed that money intended to fight the Taliban is, in many cases, being used instead to pay them off. (Islamabad is currently battling Taliban fighters in Waziristan.) When the deals fall through, as rapidly shifting alliances in Pakistan's tribal regions often do, that money ultimately ends up funding the insurgency. U.S. officials have expressed particular concerns about the Pakistani government's links to the Haqqani network in North Waziristan, which reportedly has ties to Al Qaeda. At the same time, former president Pervez Musharraf has recently admitted to using U.S. military funding to strengthen defenses against India.

For more on this article, please click on the following link: About Those Billions: Newsweek

Pakistan's July-Sept c/a narrows to $462 mln: Reuters

KARACHI, Oct 21 (Reuters) - Pakistan's current account deficit in the first three months of the 2009/10 fiscal year was a provisional $462 million compared with a deficit of $4.26 billion in the same period last year, the central bank said.

Pakistan recorded a provisional current account surplus of $174 million in September, compared with a revised current account deficit of $19 million the previous month, the bank said.

"The reason for the narrowing of the deficit is a combination of a lower trade deficit and higher remittances," said Khalid Iqbal Siddiqui, director of research at Invest & Finance Securities Ltd.

The trade deficit narrowed to $897 million in September compared with $2.03 billion in September last year. The deficit was $1.04 billion in August. [ID:nISL21660]

Pakistan entered a $7.6 billion emergency International Monetary Fund (IMF) programme last November to avert a balance of payments crisis. The loan was increased to $11.3 billion in July, of which the IMF has disbursed more than $5 billion.

For more on this article, please click on the following link: Pakistan's July-Sept c/a narrows to $462 mln: Reuters

Kerry-Lugar Bill: the army’s objections —Shaukat Qadir: Daily Times

Does no one understand that they can only be strong if they enjoy the support of the people of Pakistan and, if they do, no army can ‘subvert the judicial and political processes’ in Pakistan?

Many analysts in Pakistan find nothing wrong with the Kerry-Lugar (K-L) Bill. Some feel that Pakistan is so desperately in need of assistance that the bill should be accepted at any cost — preconditions or consequences notwithstanding. The President is firmly behind it; the Prime Minister expressed concerned initially, but soon fell in line behind the president. The opposition seems to consider this a golden opportunity to take on the government on its continued submission to the United States at the cost of our sovereignty, and while prepared to tear the government apart on the issue, is carefully refraining from criticising the US.

However, surprisingly, the army, which has been at pains to establish the principle of civilian supremacy, has not only discussed the subject in its annual corps commanders’ conference, but has thereafter issued a public statement to the effect that it “has concerns...the details of which will be conveyed to the government...Pakistan is a sovereign state and has all the rights to analyse and respond to the threat in accordance with its own national interests...in the considered opinion of the forum, it is parliament that would deliberate on the issue to enable the government to develop a national response.”

What does this statement by the army imply?

Obviously, it has reservations about the government’s unconditional acceptance of the bill. It is almost certain that, having conveyed its concerns to General Stanley McChrystal, the US commander in Afghanistan, during his visit, the army must also have conveyed these to the government, but was dissatisfied with its response and, consequently, decided to express these publicly, without specifying the ‘concerns’.

Moreover, it has publicly implied its dissatisfaction with government policy on this issue and, while announcing its acceptance of the supremacy of parliament, it seeks a ‘national consensus’.

From a totally apolitical, democratic army chief, who has ensured so far that the army visibly stays out of politics and has attempted to erase the view that the army will always have political clout in Pakistan, this is a most unusual and unexpected move. In effect, he has reasserted the army’s political role; knowing him, as I do, there must have been very compelling reasons for him to do so.

For more on this article, please click on the following link: Kerry-Lugar Bill: the army’s objections —Shaukat Qadir: Daily Times

Pakistan's Sept trade deficit narrows to $897 mln: Reuters

ISLAMABAD, Oct 12 (Reuters) - Pakistan's trade deficit narrowed to $897 million in September compared with $2.03 billion in September last year, the Federal Bureau of Statistics said.

The deficit was $1.04 billion in August.

Exports stood at $1.52 billion in September, against $1.77 billion in the same month last year. Imports were worth $2.41 billion in September compared with $3.80 billion in the same month last year, the bureau said on its web site.

For more on this article, please click on the following link: Pakistan's Sept trade deficit narrows to $897 mln: Reuters

Australia doubles aid package for Pakistan: Brisbane Times

MATT WADE

ISLAMABAD: Like the US, Australia is about to ramp up its aid to Pakistan, but questions are being raised about how it will ensure the money is well spent.

Australia will double its development assistance to Pakistan to almost $60 million, in addition to the $23 million in emergency assistance recently provided to families displaced by fighting in the north-west.

Most of the money will be directed to basic education and maternal and child health, and a large slice of the cash will fund scholarships for Pakistanis to study in Australia.

When asked if Australia had put any conditions on its aid, the Government agency AusAID said only that the aid program ''is conditional upon annual budget deliberations by the Australian Government''.

Australian aid to Pakistan and neighbouring Afghanistan is set to keep rising. The Government has pledged $650 million for development assistance over the next four years in the two countries, on top of military spending and assistance.

Last month the Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, said Australia was doubling its military training to the Pakistani Army.

Much of Australia's aid is channelled through organisations such as the World Food Program, partnerships with other donor governments and non-government organisations.

For more on this article, please click on the following link: Australia doubles aid package for Pakistan: Brisbane Times

Strings may force Pakistan to reject US aid: Peninsula

ISLAMABAD: The debate on stringent conditions attached by the Obama Administration to the Kerry-Lugar Bill of aid is giving an option to Pakistan’s economic managers from barring the US to provide its aid in such a way where major chunk on the development projects — in the range of 50 to 60 percent of the $1.5bn per annum — is being spent and sent back to US in the name of consultancy and intermediatory costs.

All kinds of tough conditions have been incorporated in the Kerry-Lugar Bill to ensure strict audit in the name of transparency but it never touches the spending of money by the United States on consultancy, salaries and other intermediately costs to run the USAID funded projects inside Pakistan.

A relevant authority having knowledge on Pakistan’s economy is of the view that the US wanted to spend major chunk of the aid in its own bureaucratic way which in some cases rose to 65 to 70 per cent and certain projects currently being executed by USAID could be cited on this count.

For more on this article, please click on the following link: Strings may force Pakistan to reject US aid: Peninsula

Are Development Dollars in Pakistan Being Well Spent?: Time

By Ken Stier

To development experts who have long called for a shift in strategy in the Muslim world, it would seem like cause for celebration. After years of devoting the bulk of U.S. aid to Pakistan to military assistance, Washington is about to shift that equation. Under legislation approved by the Senate last week and by the House on Wednesday, Pakistan can expect to receive $1.5 billion of non-military (or civilian) aid for each of the next five years, which triples previous levels and will roughly balance out the amount of military aid the U.S. gives to Pakistan.

But getting the money is only half the battle; how well it works — and whether it helps to change strong anti-American sentiment — depends on getting it to the right people and projects on the ground. That job principally falls to the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and many critics say its performance isn't very encouraging. "When you are spending large amounts of money at arm's length, operating in hostile environments, it is very easy for money to get spent corruptly and/or badly, and that is what I have seen in our health programs," says Roger Bates of the American Enterprise Institute, a trenchant USAID critic.

One early effort in education already appears to be a cautionary tale. Improving schooling in the country has been a key focus of U.S. development efforts, both to undermine the need for and appeal of religious schools (or madrasahs) and to advance literacy, which is 43% among adults; two-thirds of Pakistani women cannot read or write. In long, jargon-filled reports, the principal USAID contractor on an $83 million, five-year education-sector reform project, North Carolina–headquartered RTI (also known as Research Triangle Institute), claims to have "positively impacted" more than 400,000 students (out of 70 million school-age kids) through strengthening policy and planning, teacher and school-administrator training, and youth and adult literacy. But when USAID's inspector general sent a team over in August 2007 to check on the progress, it could not validate the claims because the USAID mission in Islamabad "did not require RTI to adhere to reporting requirements critical to monitoring the program performance." The problem was serious enough for RTI, which derived close to 40% of its $710 million in revenues last year from USAID, to be disqualified from follow-on contracts on this particular project.

For more on this article, please click on the following link: Are Development Dollars in Pakistan Being Well Spent?: Time

Pakistan army anger over $1.5bn US aid deal: Times

By Saeed Shah in Islamabad

The row pits the Pakistan's powerful armed forces against the fragile civilian government of the Pakistan Peoples Party, which championed the US assistance deal.

The military is about to begin a Western-backed offensive against the Taliban and al-Qaida in Waziristan, the epicentre of Pakistani extremism and an important refuge for Afghan insurgents.

Conditions that come with the Kerry-Lugar Bill, passed by Congress late last month, have caused a political storm in Pakistan, with the military now joining the parliamentary opposition in hostility to the aid package.

The Bill, which was supposed to symbolise US commitment to Pakistan, requires monitoring and certification of Pakistan's action against terrorism. It also requires the country to work to prevent nuclear proliferation and show that the military is not interfering in the political process.

According to critics of the legislation, the conditions imply that Pakistan sponsors terrorism and nuclear proliferation, and they resent the intrusion into affairs of the military.

The army's top brass met on Wednesday to consider the Kerry-Lugar legislation at corp commanders' conference at the military headquarters at Rawalpindi.

A statement issued after the corp commanders meeting said: "Chief of army staff, General Ashfaq Kayani, reiterated that Pakistan is a sovereign state and has all the rights to analyse and respond to the threat in accordance with her own national interests.

For more on this article, please click on the following link: Pakistan army anger over $1.5bn US aid deal: Times