The Pros And Cons Of The US-Pakistan Bilateral Relations

At the start of the new millennium, China became rapidly known as the fastest growing economy sparking the greatest shift of relative power in history. Coincidence, or not, Afghanistan’s narrow border with China made it a perfect strategic target to presume military presence within the Asian region. Arguably, the invasion of Afghanistan lays largely on a tactical plan designed by the US to resist

History of terrorism in Pakistan goes back to the time of Russian capture of Afghanistan. Pakistani powers have long had binds to residential aggressor amasses that help propel the nation 's center outside strategy engages. India and Afghanistan have blamed Pakistan 's security and discernment administrations for playing a "twofold amusement".

1. In President Obama’s speech at West Point, he announced that 30,000 additional troops would be sent to Afghanistan. He made this decision because he said it was vital to the United States’ national interest. The vital national interest at risk in President Obama’s address is the security and safety of the American people as well as the “security of our allies and the common security of the world.” By involving the military and increasing the troop strength, President Obama can achieve the objectives of his strategy. His objectives are to keep the Taliban from becoming powerful, prevent them from government rule, improve Afghanistan security forces and government so they can manage their own country and prevent Al Qaeda from

The Americans became a friend of Pakistan because those days Russia was their main enemy. The crisis of war united some countries. In my opinion, the destinies of those mini-states were concerned with the war between two superpower. Poor and backward countries were all became victims of the conflict. Pakistan used war tactics to teach math at that time because they wanted their offspring to understand the cruelty of war and warned their future generations to become stronger. Because the change of position in the international energy supply chain, the civil strife in Iraq rise in oil prices allowed the United States gained a lot of advantages from it. The higher price made America more investment in oil development and corresponding employment,

“In December 2011, remaining U.S. troops were pulled out of Iraq, leaving that nation in a far more volatile state than when military operations first began in 2001” (Green). This illustrates that 9/11 has caused instability in multiple regions such as Afghanistan. Moreover, U.S. foreign policy dramatically changed from deterrence and containment to preemptive and preventive action. Consequently, this foreign policy established questionable allies such as Pakistan where Osama bin Laden was hiding. When the terrorist attacks happened, it was designed to instill fear and weaken the US but it made the US even stronger (HÉochaidh).

With the tales of these three individuals told, it is hard not to feel a sense of pity and uncertainty about Afghanistan and especially the United States’ role in Afghanistan. With the consensus of entering Afghanistan originally being to stop terrorism, throughout Gopal’s book it seems that the goal, or better yet, the idea of wiping terrorism away had certainly been lost. No longer does it seem that the United States is helping, rather that the U.S. is one of the main problems in the country. The details and facts listed in the book open a

Hamid shows Changes perception of individuality. People like Changes suffered a lot in America and got interest to know native identity. Native culture and identity is awesome for every individual. Changes worries that even after all the sacrifices and services of Pakistanis has never treated Pakistan as ally or friend. There is probability that Americans might have encouraged Indians to envy with Pakistanis. Hamid painfully conveys that Americans never treat non- European Counties as their friends and they treat like tissue papers.

Rajiv Chandrasekaran, is a Washington Post reporter and editor. He has spent three years in Afghanistan and reported extensively about the operations conducted by the ISAF and NATO forces in the post troop’s surge period. He is also the author of Imperial Life in the Emerald City: inside Iraq’s Green Zone, one of the New York Times’s 10 best books of year 2007. Interestingly the author was a guest speaker at the USAWC and presented his thoughts to the students of class of AY 14. His talk at the USAWC and relevance of situation in Afghanistan to Pakistan prompted me to select his book “Little America” for writing the critical book report.

Since 1960, Pakistan was perceived in the U. s. States as an integral bulwark against the globalized Communism in the Cool War. The U. s. States very carefully strengthened Pakistan during 1971 although The legislature kept in place an hands embargo. In 1970, Indian local

The war between Afghanistan and the United States has been one that has lasted longer than any war; the civil war combined with both World War I and World War II do not match the duration the United States currently faces with Afghanistan. With both countries engaging little to no military conflict, the U.S. continues to be on Afghanistan’s territory, securing the country from the rise of militias potentially threatening our counterpart’s sovereignty. Many people have been arguing whether the US should withdraw from Afghanistan and when. Currently, as the U.S. plans to withdraw from the Afghan nation, the issue is not one that pertains to the U.S. and Afghanistan, for they are not the only two involved. American forces had planned to leave the opponent’s nation but fear the security along with the sovereignty of Afghanistan continues to be one that is porous. The initiation of the war was the 9/11 attack and has been lasting for 13 years. However, many people complain about the extreme high cost of the war The United States should withdraw completely from Afghanistan because of the high cost of the war, popular opinion’s support, and very few al-Qaeda members are left.

The United States has not been able to eradicate the Taliban in Afghanistan because of two main reasons: the corruption within the Afghan security forces and the Pakistani government 's support of the Afghan Taliban. Internal to the country, the corrupt practices of the Afghan Army leaders and police officials include selling American-issued weapons and ammunition to the Taliban insurgents. The corruption results in members of the Taliban to remain strong and well equipped with American weapons and ammunitions. External factor, the government of Pakistan (ISI –Inter-Service Intelligence) or army intelligence supports the Afghan Taliban by financing their military operations, training them and providing sanctuary for members of the Taliban. For these two reasons which will be addressed with details, America has not been able to defeat the Taliban insurgent group in Afghanistan since 2001.

There is very little doubt that this decade of 20th century was characterised by a very vicious strategic rivalry between the two contemporary super powers. Although the Soviet-US Enmity was the most dominant factor of this war, yet it was never fought between these two countries. One can argue that this was the only US war where not even a single US soldier received even a single bullet. With very little doubt, one can say that this US-Soviet war was actually fought between Pakistan and the USSR, where the Pakistani army was fighting to fulfil its commitments with its ally. A tussle between Kabul and Moscow finally involved an active role by Islamabad and Washington. Both Islamabad and Washington were able to rebuild their relationship a

Many of these commanders had well-documented records of human rights abuses in Afghanistan’s post-Soviet civil war.” (Watch)The United States continued to provide billions to Pakistan even after finding out that the Pakistan government harbored Osama Bin Laden. If the U.S. is going to use the reason that they believe introducing democracies will reduce terrorism it is hypocritical when its supporting warlords in the other part of the world. This also brings out the second problem with the United States forcefully changing regimes, it inevitably supports rogue elemets to achieve it. This further destablieses the region and leaves the country worse of then it

Through my own research and personal experiences I have concluded this faceless approach is slowly backfiring. For instance, in 2006 during my time in the Marine Corp, having worked alongside Pakistan’s military in Pakistan on several missions and training operations, their feelings of us were not that of an enemy, but alley.

The United States has minimized its military participation in Afghanistan. For more than a decade Afghanistan has struggled with the Taliban. Power, authority, and influence has played a role in Afghanistan’s political and military strategies. The emergence of international jihadi-insurgent groups, such as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), have brought uncertainty regarding political, economic transitions, and the security of the nation. The formation of the National Unity Government (NUG) in Afghanistan outlines the limitations of military support from the U.S. The NUG discusses the end of NATO International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) and its new mission, Operation Resolute Support. This new mission outlines the planning