The White House on Monday defended continuing U.S. aid to Pakistan in the wake of revelations that Osama bin Laden was hiding out in a million-dollar walled compound near Islamabad before he was slain by U.S. forces on Sunday. Doubts about whether Pakistan has been a trusted partner in the effort against al-Qaida surfaced again after learning that the residence was located in an area surrounded by Pakistan military.
Even as John Brennan, the White House advisor on homeland security, contradicted Pakistan’s claims that the government was given advance warning by U.S. intelligence officials about the raid that led to the death of the 9/11 mastermind, he praised Pakistan’s efforts in the long-running war on terror. Brennan pledged continued military and foreign aid, which has totaled $18 billion since 2002, two-thirds of it security-related.
“That partnership is critically important to breaking the back of al-Qaida,” Brennan said during a White House press briefing. Bracing for what is certain to be heightened scrutiny of foreign military assistance to Pakistan, especially in the current tight fiscal environment; he called questions about aid to Pakistan “legitimate.” Bin Laden’s “location there raises questions,” Brennan said. “They [Pakistani government officials] seemed as surprised as we were that he was holding out” so close to the capital of Pakistan.
of 2009 pledged $7.5 billion in civilian aid
to the world’s second largest Muslim country.
Leaders on Capitol Hill stopped short of calling for cutbacks in aid, but pledged heightened scrutiny of both civilian and military programs, which have come under fire in recent months. The Government Accountability Office recently released a critical analysis of the Enhanced Partnership with Pakistan Act of 2009, which pledged $7.5 billion in civilian aid to the world’s second largest Muslim country over the next five years.
Just $180 million of the first year’s appropriation was spent, GAO said, because Pakistani organizations “lack the capacity to efficiently and effectively implement and monitor U.S.-funded projects.” By contrast, U.S. military support in the last few years has flowed freely, including $500 million for maritime patrol aircraft, $476 million for updating Pakistan’s fleet of F-16 fighter jets, and over $200 million for anti-tank missiles.
Yet the heightened military hardware apparently hasn’t won their loyalty, at least not entirely. Two weeks ago, the top U.S. military officer, Admiral Michael Mullen, accused Pakistan's intelligence agency, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), of maintaining ties to militants targeting U.S. troops in neighboring Afghanistan. “Their bureaucratic structures are fragmented and their loyalties are fragmented,” said Jack Jacobs, a former military officer who monitors events in the Middle East and South Asia. “A majority, in the military, in the ISI, have been hostile to American efforts to get rid of terrorism.”
That issue may finally be ripe for scrutiny on Capitol Hill in the wake of Sunday’s successful raid. “I think the Pakistani army and intelligence have a lot of questions to answer – the location, the length of time and the apparent fact that this facility was actually built for bin Laden and it’s close to the central location of the Pakistani army,” Senate Armed Services Committee chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., told reporters on Capitol Hill. “I think the army and the intelligence of Pakistan – there are plenty of questions that they should be answering.”
But Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., chairman of the House Intelligence committee, cautioned that “we have to remember this: there are still some counter-terrorism needs that we have that are mutually beneficial between Pakistan and the United States. . . I would be very careful about saying that we’re going to throw them overboard given how many other targets that are really critical for us to go after,” he said in an interview on MSNBC.
advanced fighters to India because
of our relationship with Pakistan.”
The U.S. embrace of Pakistan’s military and intelligence establishment to help fight the war on terror has exacted a commercial price, too. Last week, India’s government rejected a Boeing bid to sell an older version of its F-16s to that fast-growing economy. It would have been the largest U.S. foreign jet sale in nearly two decades.
India, which is now negotiating the deal with European manufacturers, who are willing to sell their latest jets, needs to replace its 1970s-era air force comprised of MIG-21s, which were produced by the former Soviet Union. “We weren’t able to offer our most advanced fighters to India because of our relationship with Pakistan,” said Heather Hurlburt, executive director of the National Security Network, a Washington-based think tank. “We told them we wouldn’t sell them anything more advanced than what we sell the Pakistanis.”
billion in direct grants for Pakistan, about
half of it in unrestricted funds to combat
terrorism, which isn’t counted as foreign aid.
Pakistan officials have done little to help their own cause. Two weeks ago, Pakistan finance minister Hafiz Shaikh lashed out at U.S. critics, claiming it was “largely a myth” that U.S. aid to his country had totaled tens of billions since 9/11. However, the Congressional Research Service reported that since 2001 Congress has approved about $20 billion in direct grants for Pakistan, about half of it in unrestricted funds to combat terrorism, which isn’t counted as foreign aid.
The Pakistani official apparently was referring to the 2009 law, sponsored by Sens. John Kerry, D-Mass., and Richard Lugar, R-Ind., which was designed to shift the focus of Pakistani aid from military support to civilian projects. That money must be appropriated every year, and as the GAO report pointed out, is slow in arriving because of poor financial controls in Pakistan’s underdeveloped civilian sector.
Some analysts suggested the death of bin Laden could trigger a long overdue reevaluation of U.S. policy in the region, which has emphasized nation-building in Afghanistan to prevent that country from becoming a safe haven for terrorists. U.S. troops are slated to begin leaving Afghanistan this summer. The analysts suggest the time has come to shift the focus of attention to impoverished Pakistan, which has received guns but not much else from the U.S.
“We spend way too much time thinking about Afghanistan,” said Hurlburt, “Pakistan, which will become the largest Muslim population in the world in five years, almost defaulted during the economic meltdown.”
Related Links:
Petraeus to Give Upbeat View of Afghan Fight (The Fiscal Times)
U.S. Aid Plan for Pakistan is Foundering (The New York Times)
Pakistan, Greater U.S. Enemy than Qaeda, Spy Says (CBS Evening News)
