Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Purveyor

(29,876 posts)
Mon May 9, 2016, 01:07 AM May 2016

US Hits Back At 'Ungrateful' Allies

LONDON • Frustrated for decades, they finally lost their patience: In a move which surprised President Barack Obama's officials, US lawmakers decided to forbid the use of US taxpayers' money to subsidise the sale of eight F-16 fighter jets to Pakistan.

This was one of those rare occasions when the US executive branch lost a weapons deal on Capitol Hill, and especially a defence contract aimed at bolstering one of the United States' closest allies. But that was precisely the problem, for Pakistan is no longer considered an ally by both Democrats and Republicans in Congress, angered by what they see as Pakistan's policy of supporting terrorist networks in neighbouring Afghanistan, as well as Pakistan's alleged connivance in exporting violence to India.

The episode was hailed by congressmen as the beginning of a new US policy of punishing allies which not only fail to provide an adequate return for the heavy US investment in their nations and militaries, but actually act as an obstacle to US security interests. And the mood of impatience with allies which fail to "deliver" - as Washington's fashionable parlance now puts it - is intensifying from all quarters: President Obama criticises European "free riders" who demand US security guarantees without offering a payback, while Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump dismisses most of the US military alliances as simply a waste of money.

Still, Washington's current frustration with its closest allied nations is hardly remarkable. For all big powers invariably end up paying more for their alliances than they ever get back. And allies frequently succeed in controlling their patrons rather than being controlled by them; this is a classic example of the tail wagging the dog.

PAKISTAN A STRIKING EXAMPLE

As US lawmakers see it, Pakistan is perhaps the most striking example of an ungrateful ally. The US has poured tens of billions of dollars into the Pakistani military for over half a century. But that has only allowed Pakistan to divert resources towards the production of nuclear weapons, as well as subsequently engaging in the sale of nuclear technology to other nations, most of which are US enemies. Pakistan has also harboured militant groups that were responsible for at least a chunk of the 2,300 US soldiers killed in Afghanistan since the Sept 11 terrorist attacks of 2001.

more...

http://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/us-hits-back-at-ungrateful-allies

3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
US Hits Back At 'Ungrateful' Allies (Original Post) Purveyor May 2016 OP
Why don't they thank us? Seriously? merrily May 2016 #1
It's about time. The mood here is moving slightly more toward isolationism, mostly JDPriestly May 2016 #2
A good start. Israel would be a good follow up. marble falls May 2016 #3

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
2. It's about time. The mood here is moving slightly more toward isolationism, mostly
Mon May 9, 2016, 03:36 AM
May 2016

out of disappointment with supposed allies.

Pakistan harbored Bin Laden although we believed and believe he was involved in organizing 9/11. How can they justify that?

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»US Hits Back At 'Ungratef...