BBC BLOGS - Have Your Say
« Previous | Main | Next »

Will aid help improve security?

11:31 UK time, Monday, 19 July 2010

The US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton has announced aid projects worth $500m (£328m) as part of a five-year $7.5bn (£5bn) for Pakistan. Will this help the region?

Mrs Clinton said she wants the partnership between the US and Pakistan to go "far beyond security against our common enemies." But she also added that the US expects Pakistan to take further, specific actions against militant networks.

On Sunday, the UK also announced that the spending on aid projects in Afghanistan will increase by 40% in efforts to hasten the withdrawal of troops from the country.

Will international aid bring stability to the region? How should that aid be distributed? How should Afghanistan and Pakistan tackle militant networks?

This debate is now closed. Thank you for your comments.

Comments

Page 1 of 2

  • Comment number 1.

    Pakistan is the front line country in the war against terror but it is an unsung hero as far as US appreciation is concerned.
    Aid will help to acheive the objective if it is being spent on human invest (i,e. Education & Economy).
    Extremism & terrorism can be eliminated through educating masses which will minimize the chances of Madrassahism which is the main cause to extremism.
    US should know more about it & follow the UK administration which is cooperating Pakistan & Afghanistan on non - military grounds. That's why UK image is much better than any western country / America.

  • Comment number 2.

    Once again they got it all wrong. Commons in Pakistan are not interested in AID, they want INVESTMENT and thriving ECONOMY. The negative feelings against America are rooted from general conception that Americans support the corrupt class. Let it be the civil administration or military. A common man will never see the impact or this $7bn aid, as most of this aid will be wasted in prolonged & politicized projects.

    If America is serious about improving their public image in Pakistan, which will ensure security, they should INVEST in private sector projects & education system. This will have a deeper impact on a common man's life and will change their views about American intentions.

  • Comment number 3.

    Persistent diplomacy and not greater aid will mend matters in Pakistan and Afghanistan. The conflict started with the attack on Afghanistan to nab Bin Laden - nobody talks of Bin Laden now except he still adorns the most wanted list. Power corrupted Bush to launch another unnecessary war in Iraq and this segregated the Islamic world giving fillip to jihadis elements in the Muslim world. This holocaust in turn spread to Pakistan that is helping the Taliban and hardcore fundamentalists. The malignancy thus set in is affecting the neighbouring country India in increased militancy in the unresolved Kashmir imbroglio. Love and appreciation of Islamic culture though a slow process will help in better understanding and mutual respect for the West than doling out billions of dollars in aid most of which is siphoned off by the intermediaries and henchmen.

  • Comment number 4.

    I can't help but feel the Americans are getting scared Pakistan will use the nuclear arsenal against them, so they're paying them off to ensure protection. Sadly throwing money at corrupt regimens does not work. If they're really interested in giving aid to the most needy it should be in the form of building materials, medical supplies, basic food & workers. Too much aid money ends up in politicians pockets while the general population starve.

  • Comment number 5.

    The Secretary of State supports the building of two hydro-electric dams - but NOT the controversial Kalabagh Dam which would benefit only Punjab:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalabagh_Dam
    This is a dam on the Indus river, so except that it's controversial in the rest of Pakistan, downstream India would want to have a say in this too.
    Smart choice by Hilary Clinton not to do this, as water shortages may become causes of future armed conflict.

    "US announces to provide assistance for 18 energy projects"
    ISLAMABAD, July 19 (APP):
    Funds for these projects would be provided under Kerry Lugar Berman bill that will ensure financial assistance of dollars 7.5 billion dollars in next five years.
    According to details, provided in the press conference, the projects include: Satpara Dam Hydroelectric Project in Gilgit Baltistan, Tarbela Dam Hydroelectric Power Station Improvements, Electricity Distribution Company Peshawar Performance Improvement, Beaconhouse Schools Solar Photovoltaic Power Supply Feasibility Study in Lahore, Biomass-Fueled Boiler Feasibility Study for Bulleh Shah Paper Mill in Kasur, Multan Northern Generating Company Repowering Feasibility Study in Multan, Muzaffargarh Thermal Power Station Improvements, Electricity Distribution Company Performance Improvement in Multan, Replacing or Repairing 1,000 Agricultural Irrigation Tube Well Pumps in Multan, Guddu Thermal Power Station Rehabilitation in Sindh, Commercial Law Development Programme for Natural Gas Capacity Building for Sui gas, Electricity Distribution Company Performance Improvement in Quetta, Jamshoro Thermal Power Station Improvements in Hyderabad, Electricity Distribution Company Performance Improvement in Hyderabad, Smart Grid and Distribution Modernization Feasibility Study in Karachi, Gharo Corridor wind farm feasibility study near Karachi, U.S. Geological Survey Natural Gas Assessment in Baluchistan, Gomal Zam Dam Hydroelectric Project in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
    http://www.app.com.pk/en_/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=109755&Itemid=2

    "A dam no one wants" - M Ismail Khan writes:
    If constructed, Skardu Dam, will be the world’s largest high-altitude water reservoir where an accidental outburst can play havoc all the way down to Karachi.
    http://www.dawn.com/weekly/dmag/archive/050710/dmag5.htm

    So the Pakistani government will have to keep fighting terrorism, to prevent a flood... This answers the BBC question "Will aid help improve security?" in a practical sense.

    On the Gomal Zam Dam Project work stopped in October 2006, after two Chinese engineers were kidnapped, one of whom was subsequently killed and the other injured in the recovery operation.
    The contractors asked for negotiations for a new contract on the basis of prevailing market prices of material, but the government of Pakistan rejected this demand. Instead the government decided on September 27, 2007 to award the contract for construction of Rs 13 billion Gomal Zam Dam to Frontier Works Organisation http://fwo.com.pk/ and a Turkish firm Tekser, who had been runners-up in the original tender.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gomal_Zam_Dam
    http://www.engpedia.com/index.php/Gomal_Zam_Dam

  • Comment number 6.

    Will aid help improve security? No.

  • Comment number 7.

    Pouring Aid into Pakistan is albeit pouring money to militancy. Pakistan is not committed to fight militancy & why would it? Militancy is afterall the cashcow called America which Pakistan can milk all the time.
    Pakistan still needs to act against militants in North Waziristan or in Punjab. It still wants control Afghanistan and create trouble in India.
    No action has been taken against 26/11 mumbai attacks yet.
    The moment US withdraws from Afghanistan, there`s going to be many more 9/11, 26/11, LondonTube Bombings etc.. Scary Future for the region.

  • Comment number 8.

    Great, more of my hard earned tax payer dollars being transferred to a government that says thank you very much. Where's the transparency, where is the accountability? Just another way Obama wants to make friends and have everyone love him.

  • Comment number 9.

    Wait a minute moderator, I made a mistake in that comment.

  • Comment number 10.

    Many comments will appear to show that Aid is Pakistan`s right & Pakistan is doing the world a favor fight terrorists (which is of their own creation).
    My bets are that the Generals would gobble up the money or put money into military equipment than doing anything constructive.
    Afterall, America will pay as long as militancy thrives in pakistan.

  • Comment number 11.

    American foreign aid to Pakistan will not make a difference. Pakistanis typically view the West as hostile and exploitive. The poor people of the nation are better served by international interests with established ties to Islamabad like other Arab States. The United States literally swims in red ink. Congress should hold-on to money.

  • Comment number 12.

    Improve security for who?
    This won't stop the yanks from bombing civilians will it?

  • Comment number 13.

    Replaces earlier comment nr.5:

    The Secretary of State supports the building of two hydro-electric dams - but NOT the controversial Kalabagh Dam which would benefit only Punjab:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalabagh_Dam
    This is a dam on the Indus river, so except that it's controversial in the rest of Pakistan, downstream India would want to have a say in this too.
    Smart choice by Hilary Clinton not to do this, as water shortages may become causes of future armed conflict.

    "US announces to provide assistance for 18 energy projects"
    ISLAMABAD, July 19 (APP):
    Funds for these projects would be provided under Kerry Lugar Berman bill that will ensure financial assistance of dollars 7.5 billion dollars in next five years.
    According to details, provided in the press conference, the projects include: Satpara Dam Hydroelectric Project in Gilgit Baltistan, Tarbela Dam Hydroelectric Power Station Improvements, Electricity Distribution Company Peshawar Performance Improvement, Beaconhouse Schools Solar Photovoltaic Power Supply Feasibility Study in Lahore, Biomass-Fueled Boiler Feasibility Study for Bulleh Shah Paper Mill in Kasur, Multan Northern Generating Company Repowering Feasibility Study in Multan, Muzaffargarh Thermal Power Station Improvements, Electricity Distribution Company Performance Improvement in Multan, Replacing or Repairing 1,000 Agricultural Irrigation Tube Well Pumps in Multan, Guddu Thermal Power Station Rehabilitation in Sindh, Commercial Law Development Programme for Natural Gas Capacity Building for Sui gas, Electricity Distribution Company Performance Improvement in Quetta, Jamshoro Thermal Power Station Improvements in Hyderabad, Electricity Distribution Company Performance Improvement in Hyderabad, Smart Grid and Distribution Modernization Feasibility Study in Karachi, Gharo Corridor wind farm feasibility study near Karachi, U.S. Geological Survey Natural Gas Assessment in Baluchistan, Gomal Zam Dam Hydroelectric Project in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
    http://www.app.com.pk/en_/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=109755&Itemid=2

    Another "dam no one wants" as M Ismail Khan writes, is:
    If constructed, Skardu Dam, will be the world’s largest high-altitude water reservoir where an accidental outburst can play havoc all the way down to Karachi.
    Now, let us not confuse the huge Skardu (Katzara) dam with Satpara dam on which work is in progress. Satpara dam is a small dam. In fact, it is rehabilitation of a locally-made old infrastructure on the Satpara Lake, which will provide energy and improve access to water for barren villages in the valley.
    http://www.dawn.com/weekly/dmag/archive/050710/dmag5.htm

    This answers the BBC question "Will aid help improve security?" in a practical sense. The US only gives its support to hydroelectric projects which were already in place. Avoiding controversy on issues of water rights.

    On the Gomal Zam Dam Project work stopped in October 2006, after two Chinese engineers were kidnapped, one of whom was subsequently killed and the other injured in the recovery operation.
    The contractors asked for negotiations for a new contract on the basis of prevailing market prices of material, but the government of Pakistan rejected this demand. Instead the government decided on September 27, 2007 to award the contract for construction of Rs 13 billion Gomal Zam Dam to Frontier Works Organisation http://fwo.com.pk/ and a Turkish firm Tekser, who had been runners-up in the original tender.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gomal_Zam_Dam
    http://www.engpedia.com/index.php/Gomal_Zam_Dam

    Perhaps the financial support for "U.S. Geological Survey Natural Gas Assessment in Baluchistan" which is (typically) made part of the aid package comes to no surprise to the insider, I can't tell...

  • Comment number 14.

    The best thing the 'west' could do would be to invest in free quality education for both boys and girls, especially in the 'frontier' areas. This would eventually lead to the marginalisation of madrassars where impressionable children are brainwashed by fanatics still propagating a stone-age lifestyle, resulting in incidents such as young girls having acid thrown in their faces for 'daring' to go to school and, of course, suicide bombers.

  • Comment number 15.

    Aid packages can help the region *if there is accountability*. The US must ensure that the money is not spent on funding terrorism instead of fighting it, or on purchasing weapons. If there is a way to have independent, third party oversight to ensure the aid funds the projects it is meant for, it can help. The problem is this is very very difficult to achieve in an unstable state like Pakistan, where the civilian government is basically at the mercy of the military and intelligence services.

  • Comment number 16.

    US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton's announcement of 7.5 million Dollars aid to Pakistan is intended to be an inducement. But this alone will not benifit the region. It should be a package deal for Pakistan, Afghanistan and even Iraq. The US strategy of launching wars to end wars will not work. The Afghans and the Iraqis are too invincible to be humbled down by the coalition forces' guns. Investment in economic development will work instead.The aid should be so distributed as to benefit the people at the gras roots. Killing Pakistani, Afghan and Iraqi people at random by the manless drones gives the message that American hatred of the Muslims has now been honed into a killing mission pure and simple. The Governments of Pakistan and Afghaistan can tackle military networks by sincere gestures of concern and goodwill for the common people.They should dispel from the minds of the geneneral people including the Taliban that their soldiers are patriots and not mercenaries to help the Americans and other coalition partners that are out to foist their hegemony in the region.They must trust their own people including the Taliban.They must also pluck the courage to tell the coalition forces that the Taliban are too strong a force to be humbled down by the military.Political ngotiation and settlement is the only way to secure peace and democracy in the region.

  • Comment number 17.

    Pakistan's ruling elite interested in positive cash flow only.
    For that reason they need to preserve the state of that (virtual) war.
    The US wastes money for sympathy and for faster results?
    Naivety. Those are too smart guys for HC.
    It is a Catch-22 situation...

  • Comment number 18.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 19.

    Us/Pakistan: There is a deficit between these two countries and that deficit is TRUST.
    PM Yousaf Raza Gilani emphasized the need for a non-discriminatory approach on the part of the US, especially when the Pakistani people and the Pakistani military have made such great sacrifices and endured such great suffering over the last eight years. Yet, he emphasized the Pakistani effort has essentially remained unappreciated and non-recompensed or under-recompensed, except by drones.
    The CIA based in Afghanistan has been conducting drone attacks in violation of Pakistan’s sovereignty, in total disregard of the government’s protests. The US’s refusal to stop the attacks or to provide drone technology to Pakistan so that attacks can be carried out in moderation, do not meet the spirit of President Obama’s assurance that “America will remain a strong supporter of Pakistan’s security and prosperity...”
    In May 2009, US Advisor to Gen. David Kilmulllen, asked the Obama Administration to stop drone attacks. He stated that the US had been able to kill only 14 senior Al Qaeda leaders since 2006 and in the same period, it had killed over 700 Pakistani civilians.
    Obama's response: “We cannot tolerate a safe haven for terrorists whose location is known and whose intentions are clear.”
    These attacks are counterproductive. Predator strikes have inflamed anti-American fury among Afghans and Pakistanis. Public resentment against these attacks is being exploited by militant elements to make clear that the US does not wish to see any strong Muslim state, that the US and its strategic partner India are bent on destabilising Pakistan.
    Perhaps more importantly, the PM said Pakistan wanted to have good relations with India seeking resolution of all contentious issues, particularly Kashmir and water.
    The PM seemed tired of the blame game: He said that the Pakistan Government expected the US to share intelligence before the fact, not play the blame game after the fact.
    He told the US officials that the existing Pakistani support for the country’s military operations could easily evaporate unless there was socio-economic development in the areas affected by terrorism. He pointed out that less than 1/5 Pakistani People support US intervention. Yet Clinton said: “We have moved beyond a standoff of our misunderstandings that were allowed to fester and not addressed, to a position where we are engaged in the most open dialogue….”
    Officials in Pakistan are suspicious of American promises. Several discussions in the 2 capitals over the last 4 years have not created an enduring partnership.
    The reasons include a lack of mutual understanding and divergent interests. India is yet another factor that has frayed the mutual relationship.
    Lack of action on the proposals made for economic measures, such as establishment of Reconstruction Opportunity Zones (ROZ) and the Free Trade Area Agreement (FTA), have frustrated Pakistan. The secretary of state announced a string of new projects, including dams, power generation, agricultural development, and hospital construction, funded under the US legislation, tripling the civilian aid to $7.5B over the next five years.
    Pakistan is seeking a nuclear deal with China. The US shows up in Pakistan with more pormises, more money.
    The Pakistani and Afghan commerce ministers signed a trade deal during Clinton’s visit, which the United States hopes will help to boost cooperation between Pakistan and the US. The Obama administration sees nuclear-armed Pakistan as a pivotal player in the struggle against militant Islamist groups in both countries. But the two sides are divided by MISTRUST.
    The US is likely trying to prop up a slipping international relationship which appparently is turning away from the US towards India and China because it is just plain tired of American drones and unkept promises.

  • Comment number 20.

    Will aid help improve security ???? Never.As a citizen of pakistan,A $7billion dollar aid for a population of more than 180 million amounts to nothing.Furthermore in a country as pakistan most of the aid would go into the pockets of corrupt politicians who can do anything for their own gains.With all due respect most of the pakistanis are under the poverty line.Being educated in pakistan means that you can write your own name and read a letter and that's the statistics the government uses to fool others,moreover half of our politicians are being caught in fake degree cases.How can you expect such individuals to run a country,let alone ensure a smooth channel for aid.Factors such as Rising Inflation, Umemployment and corruption are contributing to the adverse impact in the life of a common pakistani,I'm sorry to say but an aid of $7 billion would not help us to eradicate all these factors.I would like to add one more point but i dont mean to be disrespectful to anybody in any way.The USA after the end of soviet-afghan war has been seen as an ally full of unfullfilled promises.The citizens of pakistan don't like the current government,neither do they trust the USA.An aid program to win the hearts of pakistani's alike would lead to a disastrous result as our hearts and souls cannot be bought for $7 billion or $700 billion and so on.Infact we think of it as an insult when it's being reported in the media that the aid offered is to win the heart of pakistani's.The war on terrorism and pakistan being in the frontline has lead to disastrous result.WHY??? 1)We are fighting an american war 2)Innocent people are being killed everyday through drone strikes and suicide bomb blasts 3)Our soldiers are getting killed 4)There is a risk of rising budget deficit 5)The revenue collected by the government could have been invested in education,healthcare,food subsidies , unemployment benefits and so on,but the excess revenue accumulated by the government is going in defence due to the war on terrorism,furthermore half of the revenue goes into these corrupted individuals pockets.I have just defined a summary of our major problems and if the world thinks that a $7 billion dollar aid can solve all our problems,you're wrong !!!

  • Comment number 21.

    Well! what people do NOT understand is the true mindset of the Paks. It is the 6th most populace nation, home to two mega-cities of the world and an aggressively developing economy. Yes indeed there are extreme elements within (like many other nations) but the world must serve Pakistan with due position it deserves on the global stage by putting things in the right perspective. There are more Moaist (Nexilites) rebels (extremists) in Hindustan (India) than Pakistan and more poor people than the entire population of Pakistan forced to eat rats or starve but yet the media reflects India as a Soft (bollywood {copied name}) state.

    So giving so called AID will not benefit anyone. Lets give them the deserving respect and genuine opportunities. And re-tune our perceptions as well.

  • Comment number 22.

    "Giving extra aid to Pakistan and Afghanistan wont' help anyone in the west stay safe, What is needed is full western education, over many years for all the young people boys and girls but the people in power, The mullahs and mufti would not let this happen its against they dogma, Bombs and fighting is a way of life for many who are mislead. Because Warlords and drug barons fund many of the people who are in government in them countries, killing innocent people is an every day thing.

  • Comment number 23.

    Aid is almost always counterproductive unless the aid is to help the impoverished help themselves.

  • Comment number 24.

    So the Tories and Liberals announce a 40% increase in UK funding to Afghanistan and then, surprise, the US announces an increase in funding a day later. Shame on you Cameron and Clegg. What was that about being a poodle for the Americans ? This weak "government" is doing absolutely everything it critised Labour for doing. Are they just hoping nobody notices ?

  • Comment number 25.

    Pakistan is a nuclear power and, politically, unstable with governments are family affaires. The populus hates both the British and the Americans despite what Pakistani diplomats and Western aid givers say. The longstanding (and so far unsuccessful) occupation of Afghanistan has been partly facilitated by the government of Pakistan who have 'benefited' from Western bribery. This new proposed installment is intended to spread the largess more widely. Will it buy happy faces? History says no.

  • Comment number 26.

    The aid will get intercepted by the Pakistani politicians and army as usual. The drone attacks on civilians won't stop. Blackwater will continue moving in, laying the foundations for more conflict. The US will continue treating Pakistani people like criminals when they visit America, or in their own country. The US will continue picking Pakistan's leaders, bankrolling them, and assassinating whoever gets in their way. The US will continue blanket propaganda in their own country against Pakistan, Pakistani people, and Islam. The US will continue selling guns and bombs to Pakistan, and little else.

    As others have said, the issue is that none of this money will lead to educating the people of Pakistan, which is all that matters. How can a population which is 80, 90, 95 % illiterate participate in democracy or understand how the country is being run? People know things aren't right, but are easily oppressed.

  • Comment number 27.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 28.

    Considering the Pakistan record of aid abuse, it is imperative that US checks where the current aid would be going.

  • Comment number 29.

    It looks like a larger clash of powers takes place over the heads of the Pakistani: the oil and gas interests of China versus the USA.

    Because Hilary Clinton's new aid package provides for a "U.S. Geological Survey Natural Gas Assessment in Baluchistan" I assume she wants a larger say in this underdeveloped tribal province of Pakistan. Why?
    http://www.app.com.pk/en_/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=109755&Itemid=2

    "The economy of the province Balochistan is largely based upon the production of natural gas, coal and minerals."
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balochistan_%28Pakistan%29

    People have suggested that the reason for America's presence in Central Asia is to curtail the influence of China. For instance a pipeline from the Middle East to China would have to go through Afghanistan, which is as we know controlled by US forces.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Afghanistan_Pipeline

    You can dismiss this as paranoid nonsense, but on the 14th of July a similar US interference with respect to Sudanese oil in China:
    "The US government, aiming to increase pressure on the government of Sudan, has warned PetroChina not to process Sudanese crude oil at its newly launched 200,000 b/d Qinzhou refinery in China’s southwestern Guangxi region."
    http://www.ogj.com/index/blogs/oil-diplomacy/blogs/OGJ/oil-diplomacy-blog/post987_27306368030017935.html

    And China does have a spearhead in Baluchistan:
    "The Gwadar Port was built on a turnkey basis by China and signifies an enlarging Chinese footprint in a critically important area. Gwadar Port is now being expanded into a naval base with Chinese technical and financial assistance. In addition to Gwadar serving as a potential Chinese naval anchor, Beijing is also interested in turning it into an energy-transport hub by building an oil pipeline from Gwadar into Chinese-ruled Xinjiang."
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gwadar

    Just to remind you, that China has a nasty geopolitical attitude of its own...
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinjiang

    But shows promise... also! on the 14th of July:
    "China held off on Wednesday from condemning the International Criminal Court over its arrest warrant for Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir for orchestrating genocide in the Darfur region."
    http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/TOE66D07I.htm

  • Comment number 30.

    I am so sick of our government spending money all over the world. I am sick of my taxes going up year after year. I would like to see us pull back from all over the world and spend our money and resources at home. I am sure most of the rest of the world feels the same way, of course exceptd for those who are getting the checks.

  • Comment number 31.

    Throwing money at Muslim countries does nothing but enrich the corrupt ruling class, add to the debt of future American generations, and breed anger with American taxpayers who are sick of footing the bill for every president's foray into foreign relations that never, ever seems to do any good. Americans want Obama to pay attention to OUR deep economic problems and quit giving our money away to people who hate us, and will continue to hate us no matter how much we bribe them. Obama and Clinton, take care of Americans and let the Pakistani government take care of the people of Pakistan.

  • Comment number 32.

    Time for the US to stop trying to BUY their friends. That never works, for very long.

    There is no amount of money, that will buy friends in Islamic countries. The religion is too extreme.

    If they want their convoys to get through, they have to have the military might to stop attacks, themselves, whether the Pakistanis like it, or not.

  • Comment number 33.

    When will US learn. Probably never. They have already poured so much money since 9/11 and it just is down the drain. No gains whatsoever. Afghanistan burns the same (probably more), Taliban is nowhere near extinction (in fact probability is they will survive US withdrawal of troups and recapture Afghanistan), Pakistan's nuclear ambition and proliferation is nowhere in check, ISI as a catalyst for terror is becoming more enterprising and bold. And the Americans are getting ready to pour another round of Billions of Dollar. As President Obama says - God bless the United States Of America. Really god should. For the Americans need it desperately with this kind of wisdom.

  • Comment number 34.

    More money down a rat hole. Why is it that we think pouring money into a nation that has been torn by violence, beset by tribalism, an incubator of Islamic radicalism and a director enabler of terrorism both regionally and worlwide is going to be reformed into a demi Switzerland because of a few billions?

    It is not our obligation to "invest" in a country whose main occupation seems to be burning Israeli and American flags in the streets and rioting over cartoons. Nor our obligation to reward them for the biggest farce since 9-11 that they are "on our side" in the fight against jihadists. The problem isn't Afghanistan. Never has been. It's Pakistan. Always has been. Since 1947. One need only compare the different paths taken by India and Pakistan since Independence and the state of both countries now to appreciate that Islam and a modern, productive, prosperous functioning state are contridictions in terms.

  • Comment number 35.

    I hope the aid does not end up in the hands of the terrorists the US is trying to foil.

  • Comment number 36.

    This aid will achieve the same that past sums of aid have achieved in 63 years of Pakistan's existence. Most of it will be stolen by the army and corrupt officials. The people of Pakistan will not see a penny of it, and Washington knows that and does not care about it. The objective is to keep Pakistan's corrupt generals and government officials happy so they could continue to do what is expected of them. The problem is this approach causes tension among the two peoples. American taxpayers are frustrated to keep sending their dollars but see no improvement in Pakistan, and the people of Pakistan see mansions of generals and corrupt officials rise while most of the people don’t know where the next meal will come from.

  • Comment number 37.

    unless and untill pakistan eradicate home grown terrorism,the fight against taliban and al-qaeda will be a fiasco.moreover the nexus between pakistan army and taliban is of paramount concern to the humanity.

  • Comment number 38.

    One cannot win the conflict in Afghanistan while the terrorists are able to move freely to & fro across the border with Pakistan. The Allies should withdraw all of their troops immediately but rather than aid they should provide both Afghanistan & Pakistan with enough funds to offer rewards of $100,000 for each dead or alive terrorist turned in. This would be substantially cheaper and would bring the conflict to an end quite quickly and without any further loss of life amongst the Allies!

  • Comment number 39.

    THe US has followed a policy of providing aid either money or supplies to 'friendly' governments in furtherance of its foreign policy aims for decades. Most of the receiptants have been and are, either corrupt, dictatorial or both. The normal course of events in the opposition forces in the country eventually overthrow the government and install a new regime which is hostile to the US as they are seen as complicit in keepping in power the repressive regime thatr has just been overthrow.
    The problem for the US with Pakistan is that elements of the government and military are supporters of the Taliban and are sympathetic to the philosophy which motives Al Q'Aida.

  • Comment number 40.

    A crucial balancing-act for the American Secretary of State. Impartiality should be the governing principle when dealing with India and Pakistan. Hillary Clinton has to be so very careful that prudence is her watch-word. While Pakistan is a very important ally against terrorism, there needs to be cast-iron promises that the aid provided will not be used against India. While the concerted efforts against the Taliban and al Qaeda are so very important, the United States should not be blinded by promises by Pakistan. India is a very important player in South Asia.

  • Comment number 41.

    Obviously the US want something back in the longterm, be it mineral, or fuel exploration, troup/missile location bases, who knows?.

    Its greedy tentacles are always searching for a route in.

  • Comment number 42.

    pakistan has created and nurtured terrorists.that's why it is unable to take any tangible action against terrorism.the aid given to pakistan to combat terrorism is only a farce.pakistan is well known for the diversion of aid against anti america activities(providing aid to taliban and al qaeda)

  • Comment number 43.


    This aid money will be wasted like other U.S handouts.Pakistan's main source of sustenance is nuclear blackmailing.

    All the structures of Pakistani society is corrupt and has little accountability. The U.S must understand that using U.S taxpayers money will not stabilize Pakistan nor it will make the U.S homeland more secure. Pakistan is deeply involved in supporting Afghan insurgents. This has been reported several times by many institutions and U.S senators. Pakistan wants the U.S out of Afghanistan, and soon after the U.S departure Afghanistan will be back to late 1990's within 6 months. The bottom line is that it is futile to depend or even trust Pakistan. It has bitten and will bite the same hands that has been feeding it. It's a long gone conclusion but who will explain this to a snorting gaint.

  • Comment number 44.

    When did this strategy ever actually work. Money wasted as far as I am concerned like most of overseas aid. By all means nations should give aid following a disaster but buying friends is a lost cause. Behind your back they laugh at your generosity - taking all that you are willing to give for what?

  • Comment number 45.

    Giving aid to countries doesn't seem to quench terrorism. I think the best option will be diplomatic move aimed at melting down grievances.

  • Comment number 46.

    The trouble with providing aid is once given, it can never be taken back, regardless of its final destination!

  • Comment number 47.

    Why is the United states aiding Pakistan when ever relationships between them goes bad?.It is always seems to be true that Pakistan never agrees for there wrong doings in aiding indirectly for Talibans.They never hand over Top most Terrorists to India.They always creating problems in Kashmir.They know how to extract money from United States.I feel US is doing a blunder mistake by aiding Pakistan,as this is a never ending problem.

  • Comment number 48.

    With millions of people out of work in the U.S.A.,roads and bridges falling into disrepair,schools and libraries closing down and both police and firemen being laid off in droves and these servces being curtailed,I find it quite idiotic to be squandering American taxpayer money on the Pakistani infrastructure.I guess that these right-wing politicians in Washington just don't get it and it will only continue as it has for the last 60 years.

  • Comment number 49.

    WHY BLAME ISLAM?
    Individuals, not religions, carry out inhuman acts

    Islam is a religion of peace, accepted and practiced by more than 1.25 billion people worldwide. It is the fastest-growing religion in the world, and if it was what some critics claim, why should the people from all walks of life from around the world keep embracing Islam?

    Where is the sword now?

    In Islam, a person has the right to defend himself, his family, his country or his neighbor(s), which justifies the resistance being offered by the people of Afghanistan, Bosnia, Chechnya, Iraq, Kashmir and Palestine, to attacks on their soils by the so-called liberators, who are actually the occupiers.

    The Holy Qur’an clearly states that if a person saves one life, it’s as if he saved humanity, and if a person kills one human being, it’s as if he killed humanity.

    What is happening in the enslaved Muslim countries is a natural reaction to occupation, bombings, killing and terrorizing of innocent civilians (children, old men and women), rapes, in addition to looting of resources, national antiques and artifacts, above all destruction of property by the occupiers.

    Terror breeds terror!

    We assure those who bash Islam that if there was no occupation in this world by foreign invaders, there would be no resistance – the so-called terror.

    We would like those who criticize Islam to explain the following acts committed by the Christians on Jews, other Christians and Muslims alike, throughout history:

    - Hundreds of thousands of Muslim men, women and children killed by the crusaders, who were Christians.
    - Inquisition of Jews and Muslims from Spain by Queen Isabella, a Christian.
    - Millions of people killed by the European and American Christians during the two world wars.
    - Atrocities committed on millions of Jews and Christians by Adolph Hitler, a professed Christian.
    - Hundreds of thousands of Christians killed every year by the Irish Christians, including the British and the IRA, both Catholics and Protestants, during the past few centuries. Why they are not blamed to be “Christian Terrorists?”
    Both of them believe in Jesus Christ, who told them to turn the other cheek, and both of them believe in the same Lord, Who commanded that “Thou shall not kill.” Period.
    - Timothy McVeigh, who bombed the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, was a Catholic. Are all Catholics terrorists?

    Last but not least, the bombings, killings, rapings and lynchings of both American Indians and black slaves (Afro-Americans) during the past 200 years in the United States.

    What about them?

    Will those filled with hate for Islam blame Christianity for the above
    inhuman acts by Christians in various parts of the world since its inception?
    If not, then why are they blaming the religion of Islam for what is a natural reaction to occupation of Muslim countries by foreign invaders?

    Most importantly, these folks should know that the three great Abrahamic religions – Judaism, Christianity and Islam – have one common basis, and that is one God Almighty.

    “All men (and women) are created equal, and we all are one nation under Almighty God,” is a statement according to the Holy Qur’an and is very well elucidated in the U.S. Constitution.

    Lastly, yet importantly, as brothers in humanity, we recommend those filled with hate get an education in the history of Islam and Muslims, before they dare to write nasty letters full of personal, ingrain hate and vendetta.

  • Comment number 50.

    Money cannot always buy every thing specially when it comes to National Identity and Faith.The role of the West in the Muslim world by bombing innocent people in the name of the erradication of terrorisem and handing out money for development is contradictory which has contributed to the hardening of Radcal Element and the growth of Home inborn terrorist in the West.America has been granting money to Pakistan and Afghanistan since 9/11 but the benefit form this Tax payer money is still negative that requires an indepth look at its Foreign Aid Policy.

  • Comment number 51.

    One word no.

  • Comment number 52.

    Another meddling in another Muslim country by the USA. This aid is just another step of preparing to put boots (military) on the ground in Pakistan. #48 You make alot of sense. Having been in the USA quite often, I have seen the disrepair of the American infrastructure myself. As a result I find it quite mind boggling at this US action. Washington's elites just don't get it!

  • Comment number 53.

    It is just like that first slap the child for nothing and then offer him a chocolate cover with instruction that if you would abide you might get this chocolate too.
    This is not aid but bribe incentives for miltiary and corrupt team signing accords for US.
    Pakistani as majority is not in favor of such invisible aid or AID but want to get rid of such kind of friendship which is ensuing military operations and drone attacks on our people.
    US is country which can see water particles of Mars while sitting in US but after 9 year they couldnt trace top wanted terrorists whom search has been reason of war in three countries with huge collateral damages in civilian setup..

  • Comment number 54.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 55.

    International policies.
    UK increase aid to Afghanistan.
    USA increase aid to Pakistan.
    To make them both happy.

    These aid will not work unless , countries providing aid spent itself

    Slut to US troops

  • Comment number 56.

    Much of the aid in Pakistan is conditional that the Pakistani government continues action against Taleban/Al queda in its northern regions, especially bordering Afganistan.

    The fact of the matter is, is that this military action by Pakistan, is very expensive. While Pakistan diverts funds/resources from other expenditure, the USA is paying money to suplement these areas, so that USA is NOT directly seen as just paying the Pakistan army to undertake its wishes/demands, but in reality it FACTUALLY is, INDIRECTLY.

    Hilary Clinton also added that the US expects Pakistan to take further, specific actions against militant networks.

    REALITY:- Pakistan as a country is basically skint/brassic/potless, its national credit rating is FAR FAR below the USA, it has LITTLE chance of borrowing as its debts are ALREADY MASSIVE, hence the UNSPOKEN REALITY of this NEW money, is basically to enable Pakistan to AFFORD to take further/more/increased action against militant networks. Pakistan will basically just divert more of its funds to military expenditure and this amount will be replaced for expenditure in NON-military areas by USA.



    Lets also not forget that USA has just announced a CUT of $4BILLION in aid to Afganistan

  • Comment number 57.

    #41 Jack Frost
    Looking at the list posted #12 Gerard Lelieveld it's looks like most of this largesse is going into 'Feasibilty Studies' and guess who will be doing the feasibilty studies? Fluor, Halliburton, et al, most of that money will end up in the hands of US contractors. What goes round comes round.
    Now we also learn that Afghanistan is sitting on top of piles of minerals, I wonder when the US will announce more such 'Aid' for Afghanistan?

  • Comment number 58.

    Eliminate the rampant illiteracy in this country and provide us with a good, working justice system where nobody is above the law. Then look how this country progresses. There will be no anti-americanism left in this country if the US can help us in concrete steps on both of these paths. Diplomacy will only lead to more mistrust. Pakistanis want to see something material in the right direction which takes off from the desperation currently present in the country.

  • Comment number 59.

    To assist with peace and security in that part of the world the required action is simple, force israel to comply with all united nation security counsel resolutions.

    This will remove any justification that militants give to their actions leaving them as nothing more than criminals and there is a justice system in place to deal with those.

    It is ignored due to the massive pr machine that Israel employs you will never see accurate reporting of the conflict in the middle east on american TV. Most americans are unaware that Israel is illegally occupying land and has done since 1967, you would have thought that after 911 someone would have asked the simple question " what have middle eastern people got against america?" the answer is a resounding unquestioned support for the terrorist state of Israel.

  • Comment number 60.

    By the way, Pakistan has been taking on a LOT of the American's headache about the Taliban - something that THEY THEMSELVES created. Now that because of our war against them (at the behest of the americans) they have started bombing our cities, killing innocent people here. We want all of the American's ill-thought, twisted, goal-less war to stop. Enough is enough. Unless they are giving us something in return, we should not allow this war to continue in the country which kills OUR innocent people. What is in it for us anyway?? So let the neo-cons in America shut up their mouths.

  • Comment number 61.

    They will take the money, and terrorists from these countries will continue to kill amd maim.
    The yanks think that if they throw enough money at a problem it will go away. This approach has been proved time and again not to work, but the yanks don't learn

  • Comment number 62.

    It's highly questionable whether more aid for Pakistan and Afghanistan will accomplish anything. More likely, much of it will be squandered through corruption. I also don't think it will change many locals'/Muslims' perception of America, not as long as it continues to occupy Iraq and Afghanistan or largely turn a blind eye towards Israel's excesses.

  • Comment number 63.

    I have personally contributed to Roots of Peace, an U.S. organization that has done much for landmine removal, agricultural development, building of schools, and recently initiating the return of rug making industry to Afghanistan. This organization has been receiving support from the U.S. State Department and the World Bank for a number of recent years. I was proud to learn that this year the U.S. Aid contributed $30 million to Roots of Peace agricultural development efforts in Afghanistan. I know part of their effort is to teach farmers techniques in farming and marketing so that healthful crops such as table grapes and promegranets can be significantly more profitable than growing opium poppies. My question for those in the pharmaceutical industry, is why not create fair trade with opium farmers in Afghanistan, so that the crops go solely to medical uses, and not to the black market that benefits the Taliban and/or Al Queda, while causing expensive health problems because of heroin addiction in European and Western countries?

  • Comment number 64.

    When will politicians of all creeds and colours realise that we really dont care?

    They can promise billions in aid and it will acheive nothing. A similar amount of money spent on protecting their own population will acheive something - their protection!

    We no longer care what happens in these backward countries, charity begins at home - end all aid now!

  • Comment number 65.

    As much of the aid and charity that goes abroad is so poorly distributed that the majority of it either buys AK47s or goes into the pocket of the blackmarketeers and makes them millionaires. Why will Afganistan be any different?

  • Comment number 66.

    Charity begins at home.

  • Comment number 67.

    Will international aid bring stability to the region? How should that aid be distributed? How should Afghanistan and Pakistan tackle militant networks?

    Sadly people will do almost anything and some anything for money with provisions. Aid should be given to alleviate the hardships and make it something that will be allowed by the General population with exceptions that will not cut your own throats in the process.

    Incentives to cooperate to remove a enemy of peace. Should be straight forward superior weaponry and infiltration techniques has to involve unaware individuals and the safety of the unaware informant protected.

    (I am now seeing where information is being complied from to use these techniques of glass beads and trinkets. It is gathered from individuals in prisons. Individuals who very possibly were radio implanted and orchestrated to preform some action that convicted them of a crime if they were guilty or not.)

    The worlds citizens are easily subverted in the like same fashion else they would be greater aware of the world and put a stop to each governments crimes against their people. You are at judgment of your peers, be you pressured or not to comply with the changes and creation of the society that the public abide by.

  • Comment number 68.

    Hilary Clinton is a good lawyer but a poor Sociologist. Expecting any one to be lured by aid is a foolish hope. She must first carry out sociological research to understand why ordinary people in Pakistan blame the USA for destabilizing their country.

  • Comment number 69.

    66. At 7:34pm on 19 Jul 2010, ian cheese wrote:
    "Charity begins at home."

    They may even tier apart your country for narrow minded interests.
    The power of/for wealth...

  • Comment number 70.

    Such moves look more like conscience money than anything else.

    Why, given the dreadful state the Labour party left the nation's finances in, are we so freely giving away money that WE need?

    Corruption in Afghanistan will ensure that barely anything the government so generously gives on our behalves will reach the intended destinatons. We are not stupid.

  • Comment number 71.

    Wherever the Western nations send aid it seems to be gobbled up by the greed of the governments. The money never appears to each the people for whom it is meant and would be more likely to cause more strife than ease danger.

  • Comment number 72.

    When Governments say "we never deal with terrorists"
    you know damn well they do.

  • Comment number 73.

    No amount of aid can cut the militancy, becuase it's in their Genes. As long as they can't recognise the difference between civility and a good order, the struggle will continue.

    It will be wise for the west to realise that the material bond that holds the Good and Evil is in the human nature. And we can't expect that wealth can subdue any cause, and evil will domain in its course.

    I am sorry for the brave young British/American/Canadian/Austalian and others falling into their targets.

  • Comment number 74.

    NO!! 'Aid' will be happily accepted but will make no difference to attitudes, terrorist threats or our military situation. Aid is a waste of money. Military operations are a waste of money and lives. Get out, stay out. For our security, look after our borders, key installations, territorial waters and trade routes.

  • Comment number 75.

    I would think investing in the economy and education would be the way to go.

    just throwing cash at them only helps the corruption.

    Help the education system so they are not just sending children to religious schools. (we all know that brainwashing children is bad)

  • Comment number 76.

    Got the same reaction as when I read Obama got the Noble prize for 'Peace' -
    fell off my chair laughing when I read the headline.

  • Comment number 77.

    America should give Aid to Pakistan & make sure it is spent correctly. Coruption is the biggest problem there. It also should make sure that Pakisatan works towards religious freedom. Which is a rare commodity there.
    Two biggest problems of Pakistan
    Lack of Education
    Stupid Maulvies

  • Comment number 78.

    The people of pakistan most likely to join the Taliban/other militant groups will never see one rupee of this money, so no. it will not.

    On paper some 'should' see benefits such as clean water. But then again..will they? will this project even make it past the planning stages?

    Will the pakistani govt go to the remote areas controlled by the talibs and force the talibs to build the irrigation/clean water projects?

    Hilary clinton knows full well they will not. The pakistani govt/armed forces have neither the power, nor the will, to do so.

    Had this been used to create jobs or grant free education to anyone..regardless of gender, it would have gone much further.

    Who are the people of pakistan more likely to turn to? the taliban who offer them x hundred dollars a month salary, which in turn means they can afford the things on offer with this package ten times over, or their own govt who squanders the foreign aid time and time again?

    Only when they are offered a comparable, or even lesser, stable wage and basic standard of living will pakistanis become less willing to accept the wages and life of the 'pakistani taliban'

  • Comment number 79.


    After bombing twenty four countries since the second world war and still counting and trying to stuff our faces with horror regurgitated food all with little success at being loved, that mighty beast that is America is now trying to buy it
    As the Beatles put it ''Can't buy me, Love''
    Wake up Cowboys

  • Comment number 80.

    The trouble with aid is that it may come with a sting in the tail .
    Which is perhaps why Zimbabwe and Sudan tried to reject it .
    Any gift accepted , burdens the recipient with an obligation . This is why charities send us free pens and stuff - to make us feel obligated to give something back .
    Your souls , maybe .

  • Comment number 81.


    It is time for the doner nations to wakeup to the fact that what ever aid is given to Pakistan and afganistan is scoped by the the so called elected leaders and their cronies. If that aid was given in a way that benifits the people then by now we would have had different outcome.The corruption might have been reduced and people would look forward to better future for themselves rather than attack innocent people in their own and other countries.
    As for America specifically I think they have to work out a fair plan for Afganistan,Pakistan and India other wise a lot of thinking will have to be done in future remedies for the problems created due to the approach now.

  • Comment number 82.

    Foreign aid is a waste of money because it never ends up helping the desperate people it should. It's better to send a cadre of architects and teachers to build schools and supply a meaningful curriculum or engineers to build a water system. America has its own desperate needs. We can help others by teaching and provide materials but sending aid is a waste of taxpayer money that doesn't endear others to us. Changing our foreign policy to help rather than hinder the world will help the world and maybe people won't hate us so much.

  • Comment number 83.

    If the Americans are trying to buy their way to secular democracy in Pakistan,then they better realise that it will take much more than all the money they have ever printed,to effect meaningful,long-lasting change in that particular area of the globe. Although an injection of billions will gain them some "friends",and some time,that's about all it will buy.Building projects,infrastructure,secular education,healthcare provision,these will all buy time and a sense of gratitude from the "ordinary" Pakistanis.The real issue,in terms of meaningful change,is that of the nations "official" religion,and its fundamentalist proponents gaining disproportionate ground over the more moderate voices within the country,which go unheard by the majority of the population. Indeed,the persecution and murder of moderate Muslims continues apace in Pakistan,Iran,Iraq,Yemen,Somalia,Nigeria,Sudan etc.It seems that the internal warfare of Islam,as witnessed by the murder by Muslims of other Muslims,recently evidenced by the bombing of Ahmadi Muslims in Pakistan ,is actually Islam's battle between the fundamentalists and the moderates.This dichotomy within the ranks serves only to weaken the case for those who say,get out,do nothing,do not exploit the situation.This foolishness has been taken up blindly by the left as a default position against the right-wing press and their chums in politics and industry.The morally correct AND smart thing to do is to boost moderate opinion and discredit the fundamentalists,denouncing them as murderers and enemies of Islam.I am not pro-war,not pro-exploitation in a commercial sense,but if we are talking about security,then prosperity and peace for the poorest,coupled with extensive education and healthcare plans,is definitely a major step forward towards increased security.When all is said and done though,vested commercial interests and political/military agendas will prevail.

  • Comment number 84.

    "Will aid help improve security?"

    Sure. When has Western aid to the Middle East ever turned around to bite us on the rear?...

  • Comment number 85.

    Charity begins at home and ends abroad,aid should be given to the millions that are out of works, and for such a long time that would improve our own security, country and situation, it's about time we wake up and realise that there is certin things that money just cannot buy.

  • Comment number 86.

    It amazes me they will help other countries problems with financial aid, what about OUR own problems? It would help people get off the breadline and get back to work.

  • Comment number 87.

    The United States has failed to understand the fundamental basics of the political situation in that region of the world. Not only will U.S. aid be attacked, so will people who accept U.S. aid. This is consistent with any guerilla war, but there are other dimensions to that particular guerilla war, that will make it longer, bloodier, and more bitter than other guerilla wars of the past. One wonders if the United States will ever learn the most fundamental principles as to the political situation and the role of Islamist fundamentalism in Pakistan's evolving political situation.

  • Comment number 88.

    American agression worldwide must stop to bring peace and security. No soverign nation with the possible exception of Israel wants the american armed forces in their country. With the current American administration there is a light at the end of the tunnel which could mean a less agressive stance toward the rest of the world. Until the life of a non American person is valued the same as that of an American world peace and security will not be achieved.

  • Comment number 89.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 90.

    I hope that the aid will improved security in both Pakistan/Afghanistan regions; But, I am very skeptical of it because of fraud, corruption and other problems in their governments structures...

    (D)

  • Comment number 91.

    Will aid help improve security?
    Yes it will improve terror network's financial security. How ? all this money spent in Pakistan will eventually routed to terror groups and will be used against India and US. This has been always the case throughout the history of US Pakistan relationship.
    I really pity the foreign policy brains in the US. They have got it all wrong in the south asia region.

  • Comment number 92.

    The history of US aid to Pakistan is that it goes to its corrupt politicians and military. It encourages them to use terrorists to make US feel that Pakistan is needed more to control terrorism. In other words, give us more money and we will help you to control terrorism. If they really,help to destroy terrorists,then,their future aid is in jeopardy,so they keep terrorism alive to keep getting free money. Also, they offer this
    carrot to US that we are willing to act as your hired guns, you can use us against anyone,China or India or Russia. Pak military behaves like a prostitute,use me but pay me.

  • Comment number 93.

    Maybe we should chuck in the aid, and go back to good old imperialism and start to re-mould the world again.

    Our present liberalist attempts are getting us no-where fast.

    I doubt whether $100billion of aid each to Pakistan or Afganistan or a dozen other countrys would actually result in enough change/improvement/distraction to make the world a better, more secure and safer place, long term.

    It's basically nonsensical to think/suggest that good quality of life for all stops wars.

    The WHOLE of human history disputes it, FACT!!!

  • Comment number 94.

    You can only help those who want to be helped. Pakistan is facing much more fundamental problems than 10 or 20 or 50 billion dollars in foreign aid. In this case the "helpers" have their own agenda which can hardly be described as aid.

  • Comment number 95.

    So we supply Pakistan with financial aid in exchange for them to fight terrorism from within their own country.

    Where is the incentive for Pakistan to 'solve' the issue entirely? That would stop the financial aid.

  • Comment number 96.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 97.

    Schools, schools, schools.

  • Comment number 98.

    59. At 6:48pm on 19 Jul 2010, th3_0r4cl3 wrote:
    To assist with peace and security in that part of the world the required action is simple, force israel to comply with all united nation security counsel resolutions.

    This will remove any justification that militants give to their actions leaving them as nothing more than criminals and there is a justice system in place to deal with those.

    It is ignored due to the massive pr machine that Israel employs you will never see accurate reporting of the conflict in the middle east on american TV. Most americans are unaware that Israel is illegally occupying land and has done since 1967, you would have thought that after 911 someone would have asked the simple question " what have middle eastern people got against america?" the answer is a resounding unquestioned support for the terrorist state of Israel.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    And the other shoe comes cascading from the sky!

    This is the same rubbish bin Laden spouted in order to justify his cowardly and vicious acts on 9/11, and also his attacks on the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 and on the USS Cole in 2000.

    By the way, who attacked who in 1967? It wasnt Israel but unprovoked aggression on the part of the Arab League.

    Moreover Pakistan's human rights and international foreign policy record is far from pristine, and it did not sign the NPT along with Israel and India.

    Why should anyone appease the backwardness and crass violence of militant political Islam?

    You need to sort your head out.

  • Comment number 99.

    >96. At 00:59am on 20 Jul 2010, you wrote:
    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.


    Is it true, then, that one of those on the skilled and unbiased BBC / BLPBC* "Moderation" Team is the Hon'ble MP for Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath, who has time on his hands as he doesn't attend Parliament any more (being a discredited ex P.M. and ex Chancellor of the Exchequer who lost the election)?


    NOTE: ** BLPBC, formerly known as the BBC, is the British Labour Party Broadcasting Corporation, funded by the taxpayer.

  • Comment number 100.

    Instead of providing it with yet more money, invading Pakistan, a rogue failed state that is the World Hub for terrorism, would appear a better long-term plan.

    There are other alternatives, though.

 

Page 1 of 2

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.