As a demonstration of how short a memory the Obama administration has when it comes to their “smart diplomacy”, just take yesterday’s apology by Secretary of State Clinton to Pakistan for a air strike along the Afghan/Pakistani border last November that killed members of the Pakistani military.
According to one NATO commander, the attack was self-defense after Pakistani troops opened fire on ISAF forces conducting operations across the border for which current Joint Chiefs Chairman Dempsey refused to apologize for. The Pakistanis had been warned “much earlier” the incident that ISAF would be conducting operations in the area and one Pakistani official admitted that the Pakistani troops had fired mortars and bursts of automatic weapons fire in the direction of the ISAF troops.
In a statement published by the State Department following her apology, Clinton said:
In today’s phone call, Foreign Minister Khar and I talked about the importance of taking coordinated action against terrorists who threaten Pakistan, the United States, and the region; of supporting Afghanistan’s security, stability, and efforts towards reconciliation; and of continuing to work together to advance the many other shared interests we have, from increasing trade and investment to strengthening our people-to-people ties. Our countries should have a relationship that is enduring, strategic, and carefully defined, and that enhances the security and prosperity of both our nations and the region.
The irony in Clinton’s talk about “coordinated action” with Pakistan is that this is not the only “coordinated action” that the Pakistanis are engaged in.
Last September then-Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen went to Capitol Hill and said that Pakistan was engaged in “coordinated action” with terrorist groups that were attacking US troops and other US interests in Afghanistan.
According to one report:
Appearing on Capitol Hill today, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Michael Mullen maintained their hard-line stance that Pakistan has to do more to rein in the Haqqani Network that uses safe havens on the Pakistani side of the border to launch attacks against U.S. forces in Afghanistan.
Mullen even went so far as to say that Pakistan is “exporting violence” and that Pakistan’s intelligence agency provided the Haqqanis with support for their recent terror attacks in Kabul.
Mullen went further than defense officials who’ve said that the Haqqani Network was responsible for the recent terror attacks in Kabul prior to former Afghan President Burhanuddin Rabbani’s assassination, although the bomber’s affiliation has yet to be determined.
The Haqqanis are “veritable arm of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence Agency [ISI],” he said in opening remarks before the Senate Armed Services Committee, adding that it had provided the Haqqanis with support to conduct the Kabul attacks[...]
Mullen said Pakistan’s government has chosen to “use violent extremism as an instrument of policy,” which jeopardizes its relationship with the United States and its role as a player in the region.
Speaking of its support for the Haqqani Network, Mullen said, “they may believe that by using these proxies they are hedging their bets, or redressing what they feel is an imbalance of regional power. But, in reality, they have already lost that bet.”
He added that by “exporting violence, they have eroded their internal security and their position in the region. They have undermined their international credibility and threatened their economic well-being.”
Just some context for the Obama administration’s “smart diplomacy”. Churchill called it “appeasement”. Reagan called it “surrender”.
The new T.R. speaks:
“This government wants Perdicaris dead or Raisuli alive”
On another note, I think it might be time for us to consider some retrenchment, while keeping the same size military. We simply are not united enough or good enough to play the Great Games at this moment, Europe is a mess in all things and not a bulwark, except in the East, and our relative strength is diminishing to the point that we might need to let portions of the world be Indian country for a while, thought continuing a robust game of checking folks into the boards when required. Which will be often.
But the key is our relative declining strength, our lack of unity here, and everyody taking the Pax Americana for granted. It might do the Indians of the subcontinent good to try to shoulder our role for a while, so they might see that it is easier to sit on the sidelines and dream of great national pride and glory to come than actually be a force for good in the world. It might also do folks some service to see that Islamism is quite to be feared, and the best way to make that happen is to let their hands get burned on the stove while the relative threat is still small. We need to get back to being the America of economic growth and Jacksonian enthusiasm focused on the future, not the British Imperial Foreign Office. Because we just aren’t good at it. We need to be Batman swinging to the rescue, not the beat cop.
Don’t get me wrong–we’ll need to go back. But if everybody outside the GOP wishes us to stop, let’s stop, and see how the world unfolds when the elites’ and cosmocrats’ councils are taken, instead of this current regime of hard work being its only reward.
And I say this in part because we are going to have to tell the rest of the world–or the ruling elites in most countries–the same thing that we have been telling them since 1787–that the relationship between people and government should be the one we have and not the one you have. This is the critical issue of the next 100 years, and it will be a task made manifestly easier, here and abroad, if we retrench somewhat. Far better to let a little evil fester for a while, as long as it can be readily checked when the time for action comes, than discredit the entire American Experiment by global displays of fecklessness.
I do not care if Pakistan loves us. I do care if they fear us. Let us show them how Americans do it and then let us be done with the place. For the moment.
LMAO
Wonderful movie, and an aptly-twisted gag-line. I can readily hear Barack Obama, playing Brian Keith playing TR, pontificating it without understanding the absurdity.
What might General Patton, General MacArthur or General Eisenhower have to say? I doubt that they would agree with that great foreign policy and military expert Secretary Clinton, despite her having some “under fire,” or even with our Commander in Chief, President Obama, who thinks . . . . I don’t know what.
Well, if you listen to the apology, what Clinton said was carefully worded: “We are sorry for the losses suffered by the Pakistani military.” Sounds a lot like what we said right from the start. When someone says “I am sorry for your loss,” that does not necessarily suggest culpability. What I’m surprised of is that it actually seemed to have worked. The Pakistanis accepted it as an apology, it was sold that way to the Pakistani people, and at least one Pakistani newspaper I happened to read is selling it that way.
I don’t think anyone wants to delve into what exactly it means. I think both sides just want it to go away. So I can’t really fault Clinton on this one, but I most certainly think we are playing a game with the devil here. Of course, I think everybody else does too.
I agree that we should greatly reduce our profile in world affairs and as quickly as possible. Nobody seems to realize that once we pull out of Afghanistan, we can start really applying pressure on Pakistan to go after the Haqanni Network (the ones the Pakistanis consider “the good Taliban” and the ones supported by the ISI. Going forward on having Pakistan declared a terrorist sponsoring nation–which I don’t think anybody would disagree with–would put tremendous pressure on them to go after all of the Taliban or watch their nation collapse under sanctions.
Let them spend their blood and treasure getting rid of our problem. Now that’s smart diplomacy.
Cut the aid money to Pakistan and Egypt to zero and let them rot.
In late November of 2008, as GW Bush was on his way out of office, Pakistan commited an act of war against India by attacking Mumbai. The culpability was fuzzy at first, but became crystal clear on President Obama’s watch.
It is well-known that the Haqqani Network is supported by the ISI, and that the Haqqanis are waging war against the US-supported nation of Afghanistan — killing Americans.
Barack . Obama . Has . Done . Nothing . Of . Any . Consequence .
And this week, CNS News reports that 70% of all American deaths in Afghanistan since the 2011 invasion have occurred during the past three-and-a-half-years.
Who . Is . Responsible ?
The Pentagon is funding attacks against U.S. Troops. The tribal leaders don’t spend all the money they give them on buying little girls and little boys.
The pentagon also pays the salaries of those in the Afghan army and police, those whom they call “our partners in peace”, who shoot our troops in the back, which is now up to about 70 that we know of.
1) We have hundreds of thousands of tons of military equipment in Afghanistan that we need to withdraw along with the troops, and we need that done by the end of next year if President Romney doesn’t decide to continue the war in Afghanistan. The only way to do that at some reasonable cost is via land links to Pakistani ports.
2) In this case, saying “I’m sorry for your losses” is not a “mea culpa” apology. But, as we all know, ‘Diplomacy is the art of telling a man to go to hell in such a manner that he looks forward to the trip.’ Hillary can smile and say, “Mission accomplished.” [It may well have helped that the discussion was woman to woman - far less testosterone and ego involved.]
3) Obama’s “good war” has now turned to dust for him. 70% of all casualties in the war have occurred on his watch. But, have you seen pages of photos of the fallen in your local newspaper, as was the custom during the Bush era and Iraq? Thought not. Time for Romney to hammer on this issue, too.