And rightly so. Pakistan, far more than any other nation, is the center of global terrorism. The change from Bush's ridiculous coddling of Musharraf couldn't be more stark.
McClatchy reports:
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — The Pakistan military declared Sunday that it doesn't need U.S. military aid, as the White House confirmed that Washington is stopping some $800 million in assistance to Pakistan's armed forces, further poisoning ties between the two anti-terror "allies."
Already tense relations between Islamabad and Washington had plummeted after the unilateral U.S. raid to kill Osama bin Laden in northern Pakistan in May, even before the current row over aid. Nuclear-armed Pakistan is struggling to combat Islamic extremists, while its economy is lurching towards disaster.
I can't heap enough praise on President Obama for taking a tough position with Pakistan. If there is any group in the world that we should consider a hostile power, it is the nuclear-weapons armed military and intelligence establishment in Pakistan. It isn't Iraq, or Afghanistan, or Libya, or Iran, or Yeman, or Somolia, or North Korea. It is Pakistan. Pakistan is the headquarters of global terrorism. Pakistan's military is not under civilian control. Pakistan's military is filled with radical extremists. Pakistan's military has nuclear weapons.They are not our friends.
Further toughening is needed, but this is a great first step. None of this is new. Candidate Obama has long held a very skeptical view of our so called "alliance" with the nation that not only financed the Taliban, but harbored Osama bin Laden. In 2007, Senator Obama gave a get-tough speech on Pakistan that was widely panned by Clintonistas, Republicans and "War on Terror" conservatives. That was the famed "actionable intelligence" speech that proved 100% on the money when President Obama did exactly what he promised in taking decisive action against bin Laden.
Obama said he would make hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. military aid to Pakistan conditional on Pakistan making substantial progress in closing down training camps, evicting foreign fighters and preventing the Taliban from using Pakistan as a staging area for attacks on Afghanistan.
Now we have the follow through.
To be clear, I am not calling for war against Pakistan. Diplomacy must always be the first, middle, and last option in all foreign relations. Only when we are faced with direct attack from Pakistan should we even consider acts of war against the Pakistani military-industrial complex. But there is no question in my mind that these folks are not our friends. A tough negotiating posture is needed, not the senseless coddling we experienced from the Bush Administration. And we certainly should not provide them taxpayer money and weaponry.
Some other nuggets from McClatchy:
"The Pakistani relationship is difficult but it must be made to work over time," William Daley, the White House chief of staff, told ABC News on Sunday. "But until we get through these difficulties we will hold back some of the money that the American taxpayers have committed to give them." Daley said the figure amounted to about $800 million.
The cutback seemed a direct response to recent moves by Pakistan, which expelled U.S. military trainers from the country, limited the ability of U.S. diplomats and other officials to get visas, and restricted CIA operations allowed on its territory.
Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas, the chief spokesman of the Pakistan military, said that the military had received no formal notification of any aid being cut. He also pointed out that the army chief, Gen. Ashfaq Kayani, had already declared that U.S. cash reimbursements to the military, known as Coalition Support Funds, should go instead to the civilian government, where there was more need.
"We have conducted our (anti-extremist) military operations without external support or assistance," said Abbas. "Reports coming out of the U.S. are aimed at undermining the authority of our military organizations."
The Obama administration leaks critical stories on a seemingly daily basis to the American press, which riles Pakistani public and official opinion against the United States. Many in Pakistan believe that there is a concerted American effort to weakened Pakistan and its armed forces, among the largest in the world.
That's the kind of damaging leaking I'm all in favor of. It is one of the many arrows in the quiver of international diplomacy. While we very much should continue to try and drive a wedge between Pakistani military and the international community, we should also continue to skillfully maneuver Pakistan into an increasingly untenable position with respect to its people. Pakistan cannot continue to cultivate and harbor radical militants in a state that has, not trying to acquire, has nuclear weapons. Furthermore, Pakistan continues to sell technology to irresponsible dictators and is the headquarters of the black market global small arms trade.
The worst thing is the elected civilian leadership has no control over the military establishment. They're so out of control, they feel absolutely no problem with executing journalists:
Admiral Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, confirmed today that the U.S. believes the Pakistani government "sanctioned" the murder of Pakistani journalist Syed Saleem Shahzad, the National Journal reports.
"It was sanctioned by the government," Mullen told Washington reporters. "I have not seen anything to disabuse that the government knew about it."
President Obama is charting the proper course on Pakistan and that course is likely to be followed by his successors, no matter what party they come from.
The bottom line is simple: Pakistan's military must brought under the control of its elected leadership. Why? Because Pakistan has nuclear weapons and has very tense relations with a nuclear-armed India. If there is any place a nuclear war could possibly begin, it is there.
4:33 PM PT: By the way, I don't know where you get your news, but I read McClatchy. Every single day.