Historical Background
Yasir Sharif
Chapter 1 Historical Background
1.1 History of Pak-US relation:
“After the completion of Second War and the United States is thinking accident about both large,
poor, densely crowded countries in Asia. America finds one of the countries, going its
benefactor. Around the decade, it pours billions of dollars into which country’s economy,
exercising and equipping theses uniform and its psyche services. However goal is always bring a
successful friend with heavy institutions and one modern, healthy democracy. Other country, at
the same time, is actually spurned because this forges relationships with States’s enemies.”
1.2 Explanation:
These beautiful sentences are clear identification that the Pak-US relations are very old and it’s
history falls before the independence of Pakistan. The U.S chosen this country for it’s benefit
and the first example in the history falls when the United States first developed diplomaticfamily
members with Pakistan upon 20 October 1947.1 The U.S has developed this relationship upon
1
http://dawn.com/2012/02/23/pak-us-relations-a-very-analytical-history/
Historical Background
economic and also uniform assistance it showed with Pakistan by showing its support in different
ways by military aid, war weapons etc. The most important thing to discuss is that Pakistan is
one major non-Nato ally of United States for some reasons, this keeps pretending that it's one of
the biggest anti-US, super-duper control in the world2. Pakistan has showed and proved in
different ways that it is loyal with them but in my point of view; it is totally unrealistic that you
holds one nation and forgets others.
If we talk about U.S then we will came to know that U.S. major export is the production of
weapons and if the war will stop then think; how the U.S. nation will survive. That is the only
reason that during wars; the Americans had played a vital role. The biggest examples in the
history are First World War, Second World War, Palestine Israel issue, Pakistan India issue etc.
If we look at the statistics then we should come to know that United States is actually the secondlargest supplier on military resources to be able to Pakistan and major financial aid contributor
however Pakistanis refuse to know this and also insist the equipment and also the aid really come
from Saudi Arabia on Dubai on flight camels.
When the U.S has to choose the country for its benefit against the super power of that time
Russia then the selected country was Pakistan. The American’s gave priority to Pakistan against
India and the reason behind was that India was “angled” towards the Soviet Union during the
Cold war.3The benefits that Pakistan accrued from this relationship were quickly apparent : in
the nineteen-sixties, its economy was an exemplar. India, by contrast, was a byword for basket
case.
1.3
Comparison between Pakistan and India:
After that experiment by two nations, we can see the results today which had shown that India
has reached to the peak of progress as compared to Pakistan. India is sharing the American
interest and Pakistan is the target of American interest. Now a question arises, that what does
“share” Vs “attack” mean? India is a rising economic star, militarily powerful and democratic
so it shares the American interest but Pakistan is one of the most anti-American countries in the
world, and a biggest place of terrorism, not only this it is politically and economically a failed
state so it is a target of American interest.
And also, despite Pakistani avowals to the contrary, States’s worst enemy, Osama bin Laden,
made been concealing there for years beneath strikingly happy conditionbefore U.S. commandos
eventually road him deep and killed him, on 2nd May.4
2
http://dawn.com/2012/02/23/pak-us-relations-a-very-analytical-history/
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/05/16/110516fa_fact_wright
3
4The Double Game by Lawrence Wright
Historical Background
1.4
American Money given:
American aid is actually hardly the just factor which points these both countries to these
disparate outcomes. However, on this pivotal time, it's clearly known and if we do not to discuss
the point to be able to which U.S. money have undermined our strategic association with
Pakistan and developed monstrous contradictions within Pakistan itself.
American money was first given to Pakistan in 1954, on a mutual defense basis was record.
Around the next 10 years, nearly two and also a half billion money in economic services, and
also seven thousand million in uniform aid, visited Pakistan. Once the 1965 Pakistan-India war
takes up, both the U.S. essentially exited aid to either countries. Eventually, U.S. financial aid
remained restored, but both the Pakistani military was kept probation. Moreover, In 1955
Pakistan became a member of the US-run Central Treaty Organization (also known as Central
Free Treats Organization).
Those civilian-aid applications remained largely effective. Christine Fair, a authority on South
Asia around the Middle for Serenity and also Security Evidence, on Georgetown University,
considerations that the original sort for financial services was “need driven” local circles or
governments suggested projects and also employed for gives. Aid usually arrived the mode on
matching resources, so grantees had one stake in the work. Moreover, American specialists
presided over the disbursement of these funds and served as managers. “That was effective,” Fair
says. “But we haven’t done it for decades.”
In 1971 Pakistanis were angry at the US again for not bailing them out from yet another war they
started against India. Just why Pakistanis kept testing their friendship with the US by starting
hopeless wars with India?
After that, in 1979, U.S. intelligence learned that Pakistan was privately facility a uraniumenrichment service beneath response to be able to India’s nuclear-weapons program. So, in April
1979, the United States suspended most economic assistance to Pakistan over concerns about
Pakistan’s nuclear program under the Foreign Assistance Act. That April, both the military
dictator on Pakistan, Common Mohammed Zia-ul-Haq, held the civilian Owner he made
expelled from workplace, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto; he after that cancelled elections. U.S. help came
to one halt. Simultaneously, Zia take up giving help to an Islamist business, Jamaat-e-Islami, the
forerunner on hundreds of radical circles to be able to come. Beneath November, a mob of
Jamaat students, inflamed by one rumor the U.S. and Israel remained behind an assault on the
Grand Mosque, beneath Mecca, burned both the U.S. Embassy beneath Islamabad to the farm,
killing two Folks and both Pakistani members. The Western love with Pakistan remained over,
but both the marriage was about to take up.
The so next week, both the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. President Jimmy Carter, in one
panic, provided Zia 4 hundred thousand money in economic and also military aid. Zia refused
the submit, career it “nuts”-the term probably arises in Pakistani reviews of Western help, but it
Historical Background
need rankled the peanut farmer in the Refined House. Zia remained wise hold open. Below
Carter’s successor, Ronald Reagan, U.S. help nearly quintupled: about three billion money in
economic services and also two billion beneath uniform aid. Both the Reagan Administration
also included three billion dollars to be able to Afghan jihadis.
Pakistan with US, Saudi and divine assistance armed and supplied anti-Soviet fighters in
Afghanistan, eventually defeating the Soviets, who withdrew in 1988 but left behind a number of
bored Arab, Afghan and Pakistani fighters.5
1.5
After the Cold War:
Prior to both the September 11 consumption in 2001, Pakistan and also Saudi Arabia were key
friends of the Taliban beneath Afghanistan. Both the Taliban were one heavy group on herdsmen
who were thinking that goats remained other valuable rather than women and sheep made more
feeling rather than human beings.
By 1996 they were ruling Afghanistan.
The Pakistan-Saudi support to these herdsmen was an integral part of the Pakistan military’s
“strategic depth” objective via India, Iran, Russia and the Vatican City.
After the World Trade Centre attacks, US president, George W. Bush, had threatened
Musharraf, growling that the US would bomb Pakistan back into Stone Age if he didn’t dump
the herdsmen.
Having failed to convince the Taliban to hand over Osama, Pakistan provided the US a number
of military bases for its attack on Afghanistan. Since 2001, Pakistan has arrested over 500 alQaeda herdsmen and handed them over to the US so in return has received about $10 billion in
US aid.
Pakistan has lost thousands of lives since joining the US Error on Terror. Most were killed by the
irritated Taliban herdsmen (approximately 35,000) and some by American drone attacks
(approximately 9000). But many Pakistanis believe most were killed by the drones
(approximately 2 million) while the rest by innocent men with an abnormal combustion
condition in which normal, peace loving and pious men suddenly combust in and outside
mosques, shrines and markets.6
With Obama entering into office, the US assured to multiple non-military help to Pakistan to be
able to $1.5 billion every year over decade, and to tie uniform aid to be able to improve in the
battle militants. It has rubbed both the military in an incorrect way that, on its friends in the
shape of pounds pious men, offers win that these non-military improve in Pakistan is actually
towards the Pakistan Ideology.
5
The Double Game by Lawrence Wright
http://dawn.com/2012/02/23/pak-us-relations-a-very-analytical-history/
6
Historical Background
1.6
Major events which brought distances:
1.6.1 Raymond Davis:
He was an alleged private security contractor and Sushi expert, was on an American diplomatic
mission in Pakistan when he shot dead two Pakistani locals and claimed that it was in selfdefense after the two attempted to rob him.
Historical Background
1.7.2 Murder of Osama Bin Laden:
On May 2, 2011, shortly after 1 am the head of al-Qeada, Osama Bin There Done That was
killed by a United States special forces unit led by an army of T-1000 Terminators, in the
Pakistani city of Abbotabad.
Nevertheless, Pakistan remains to be a major non-Nato ally as part of the US Error on Terror. A
leading recipient of US military assistance, Pakistan expects to receive approximately $20
billion, slurp.
Historical Background
1.8 A Brief History of Drones:
It was ten years ago this month, on February 4, 2002, that the CIA first used an unmanned killer
drone in a targeted killing. The strike was in Paktia province in Afghanistan, near the city of
Khost. The projected target was Osama bin Laden, or at least someone in the CIA had thought
so. Donald Rumsfeld later explained, using the passive voice of government: “A decision was
made to fire the Hellfire missile. It was fired.” The incident occurred during a brief period when
the military, which assisted the CIA’s drone program by providing active service personnel as
operators, still approved the program’s survival. Within days of the strike, journalists on the
ground were collecting accounts from local Afghans that the dead men were civilians gathering
scrap metal. The Pentagon media pool began asking questions, and so the long decade of the
drone began7.
Lame interviews after Drone attacks:
Once the February 2002 strike, uniform legal quickly known as the “tall man” remained not bin
Laden. However they urged both the targets remained “lawful,” although they will struggled to
explain the reason why, using unclear and coy speech to hide what appeared to be question.
Pentagon spokeswoman Victoria Clark said, “We’re thinking that it remained an suitable goal.”
7
http://www.thenation.com/article/166124/brief-history-drones
Historical Background
However she added, “We tend to do not know yet who it remained.” Gen. Tommy Franks
advertised ABC News which he expected the roles of the three to be able to prove “attractive.”
Pentagon spokesman John Stufflebeem voice of the federal government’s being in both the
“comfort zone” on identifying the targets were “but not innocent,” otherwise presently there
remained “no unique indications that these types of were innocent local people,” one curious
name mirroring a presumption on guilt. “Indicators existed that presently there remained
something uptoward which we needed to be able to make leave…. Unique indications might
appear to say that here are not peasant people off there cultivated area.” Rumsfeld then chimed
in, promoting his signature pseudo-philosophical analysis to location the allegations the dead
remained civilians. “We tend to’ll just must find out. There’s little more you would add, besides
which there’s you know that version, and presently there’s the other edition.
Reality of Drone:
The drone attacks are being done as a byproduct of the war on terror with the tacit/covert
approval the Pakistani military/civilian authorities. The war on terror is actually against Islam not
against the terror. In reality, USA and her allies are the biggest terrorists on the face of this planet
on whose hands you (reader) could find the blood of the millions of human beings. They have
pushed the world into the abyss of the war many times on the wrong pretexts. Korean,
Vietnamese, Iraqi & Afghani wars are a few examples of their insincerity. Ironically, they are
very lucky to find collaborators in the rank and file of the local military and civilian leadership.
So is the case with Pakistan. They have succeeded in recruiting so many agents from Pakistani
military and civilian leaders that they can easily advance their nefarious designs against Pakistan
in particular and Islam in general. And they also have been able to take on their pay roll a
considerable portion of the civil society in Pakistan long ago when they started funding NGOs in
Pakistan who are apparently working for the rights of Pakistani poor but the reality is very
different which is now coming out of the bag of these so called liberal Civil Societies and NGOs.
The are working against the culture, religion, sovereignty and even very existence of Pakistan.
They are trying to frighten the Pakistani nation with the so called Ground realities. According to
them the ground realities are: Pakistan cannot cope with her financial crisis and military needs
without the help of USA and her allies. They even threaten the Pakistani Nation with the so
called “Stone Age” insight against backtracking the American friendly foreign policy of the last
63 years. What, at end of, is actually troubling to the CIA’s use of drones? Drones are only
someone weapon computer of many, and also the CIA’s part, while worrying, is not the primary
cause of alarm. Definitely both the legal role of drone operators, CIA and military, matters young
to the sufferers of Hellfire strike. So which is actually it to the drone, really, that forces the
attention on victims, insurgent propagandists, lawyer and also journalists, more than additional
forms of kinetic violent energy? Why accomplish drones development us, seduce us or disturb
us?
Perhaps someone clue comes from both the linguistics. The guns terms suggest forceful and
brutal characteristics. Early drone aircraft deployed around the CIA and Mist Energy after 2001
remained the Predator, a particularly vulgar brand also for one guns system, effective that the
enemy was but not human however no prey, that uniform transactions were but not combat
subject to both the laws of battle but one search. (Some of the software used by the uniform and
Historical Background
the CIA to be able to assess expected civilian casualties on airstrikes is actually known beneath
government circles when Bug Splat.) Both the Predator’s manufacturer, Common Atomics, then
created the big Reaper, a cross involving that the United Country was fate alone, sacrifice
enemies who remained destined to pass away. That the drones’ payloads remained known as
Hellfire missiles, invoking both the penalty of the afterlife, included a sense of honesty
However the true issue is both the context on just how drones kill. Both the snooping
characteristic on drones-and the names support this-is to be used first to be able to target pc
humans, not where or uniform moments as such. And they will at the same time hide the human
part in perpetrating both the episodes. Unlike one missile strike, in that a physical and
geographic target was actually found earlier, drones linger, searching accurately for one targetone naked target. But, at the same time, the perpetrator of violence is not physical present.
Observers are attracted toward thinking it's the Predator which kills Anwar al-Awlaki, or these
Hellfire missiles, not the CIA police officers who buy both the weapons’ wedding. On the one
hands, we have most romantic form of episodes-both the targeted death of a specific people,
which beneath such contexts is actually called assassination-while at the same time, the least
romantic on weapons.
Which feature, the range between targets and also CIA executive police officers on Langley, is
both the determining feature of drones? They're both the zenith of the medical quest that costs
back to be able to both the invention on slings and arrows thousands years ago, work of the
initial perpetrators on violence for away from their sufferers. Which submit, that brought
catapults and also later arms, hit its first height with the stimulation on intercontinental atomic
missiles; but those are usually weapons on small tactical handle and also have by no means been
used. Drones permit all the alienation of long-range adventures but to many more flexibility and
also energy for normal use. The net answer is normal episodes with all the range and disaffection
of ICBMs. It was disturbing probably as alienation is worrying.
Advantage of Drone:
Obviously the primary advantage of the drone is that it insulates its operators from risk. Yet one
can’t help wondering whether aversion to the unpleasantness of violence is another factor
making drones popular with the military and CIA. The main advantage of drone attack is that No
pilot to die or be captured and tortured if the drone is shot down just as one was in the last few
days. More risky missions accomplished without risking a life. Drones make the nasty business
of killing a little easier. Or do they?
Drone attacks in Pakistan
The U.S Country government offers made a number of attacks upon objects in northwest
Pakistan as 2004 using drones (unmanned aerial vehicles) managed by the Central Psyche
Agency's Special belongings Paragraph. This consumption represents the Connected States' War
upon Terrorism campaign, trying to loss Taliban and Al-Qaeda militants below Pakistan. These
attacks are usually on targets in a Federally Administered Tribal Things around the Afghan
border beneath Northwest Pakistan. These strikes make increased substantially underneath the
Presidency on Barack Obama. Some media refer to both the number of attacks for the sake of
"drone war."
Historical Background
Pakistan's government widely condemns these attacks, however has privately release intelligence
for the United States and supposedly allowed both the drones to be able to operate on Shamsi
Airfield in Pakistan until 21 April 2011, on 150 Americans left both the base. According to be
able to private diplomatic cables cried by Wiki leaks, Pakistan's Army Chief
AshfaqParvezKayani not just tacitly agreed to both the drone rides, but under 2008 requested
individuals to increase them. But, Pakistan's Interior Minister Rehman Malik expressed, "drone
missiles create guarantee harm. Several militants are wiped out, but the most victims are
innocent residents." The affects are linked to Anti-American emotion in Pakistan and the
developing questionability of the range and also extent on CIA things in Pakistan.
Drone strikes were halted in November 2011 after NATO. Two NATO Apache
helicopters an gunship and two F-15E Eagle fighter jets entered by unreliable estimates as little
as 200 meters (660 ft) to up to 2.5 kilometers (1.6 miles), into the Pakistani border area
of Salala in the Baizai subdivision of Mohmand Agency, FATA at 2 a.m. local time, from across
the border in Afghanistan and opened fire at two border patrol check-posts, killing up to 24
Pakistani soldiers and wounding 13 others. The two Pakistan Army check-posts were codenamed
"Boulder" and "Volcano" respectively. This attack resulted in a weakening of relations between
Pakistan and the United States. The Pakistani public reacted with protests all over the country
and the government took measures harmfully affecting the US exit strategic from Afghanistan
including the migration of Shamsi Airfield and closure of the NATO supply line.
Historical Background
Syed Ali Raza Hassan
Chapter 2
Western and Foreign Media Coverage on NATOSupply Routes
closure from November 2012 to May 2012
Time Line:
Print Media
Blogs
Magazines
Wall Street Journal:
Economists:
Reuters.com
(Framing
of
U.S. losing patience
Coverage)
The NATO
with Pakistan, says
summit
U.S. Cuts Pakistan Panetta
Aid
31 May 2012
NATO’s
Associated Press on 25
risky
May 2012
Afghan
endgame
A timetable
for winding
down
the
war leaves
more
questions
than
answers
May
26th
2012 | from
the
print
edition
Electronic Media

CNN.COM
1. The anchor is WOLF
BLITZER on CNN
NEWS with guest
KEITH
DANE,
HUMANE SOCIETY
OF THE U.S; BRIAN
TODD,
CNN
CORRESPONDENT;
JAMES CARVILLE,
CNN
POLITICAL
CONTRIBUTOR;
BARBARA STARR,
CNN
PENTAGON
CORRESPONDENT:I
nterview with Sherry
Rehman,
Pakistani
Ambassador to U.S.;
Cubs'
Owners
in
Political Brawl with
Team
Obama;
Obama's
North
Carolina
Problem;
Jordan
Taking
in
Refugees; Cruelty to
High-Stepping Horses;
Historical Background
Final Frontier Open for
Business?
OnAired
May 18, 2012 - 17:00
ET
Washington
(Framing
Coverage)
post: Salon.com
Economists:
of
TUESDAY, MAY 15, “Pakistan
2012 05:15 PM PST
and
White House doesn’t
America
expect to finish talks
to
 NATO invites come
with Pakistan on
terms”
supply lines during
Keep
on
NATO summit
Pakistan
to
truckin'
By Associated
May 16th
summit
Press, Sunday,
BY
ASSOCIATED 2012,
May 20, 7:12 AM
9:51 by
PRESS
TOPICS: FROM THE S.S. |
WIRES
ISLAMABA
D
1. EARLY
START
WITH ASHLEIGH
BANFIELD
AND
ZORAIDA
SAMBOLIN
NATO Summit: Day
Two; Afghan Exit
Strategy;
Pakistan
role
and
NATO
supply; DSK Could
Face "Gang Rape"
Charges; Robin Gibb
Dead At 62; Deadly
Prison
Riot;
Lockerbie
Bomber
Dies;
Italy
Earthquake Worst In
Centuries; Webcam
Case
Sentencing
Today;
Workers
Blame Bain In New
Ad; Alberto Cancels
Cruises;
Chen
Arrives AT NYU;
Obama Heads To
Joplin;
Edwards
Verdict
Watch;
Police Brace for New
Demonstrations
in
Chicago
Aired May 21, 2012 06:00 ET
Historical Background
Washington
(Framing
Coverage)
post: Salon.com
Counter
of
Punch:
MONDAY, MAY 14,
2012 01:15 PM PST
MAY
03,
2012
Pakistani president
Drone-byto attend NATO
 US, Pakistan
Drone
summit amid signs
country will reopen
Sowing the
negotiate
supply
route
Seeds
of
reopening
Hate
in
By Associated
Press, Published:
NATO supply Pakistan
May 17
by
ATIF
K. BUTT
line
BY SEBASTIAN
ABBOT,
ASSOCIATED
PRESS
TOPICS: FROM THE
WIRES
Salon.com
Wall Street Journal:
(Framing
of MONDAY, MAY 21,
Coverage)
2012 11:50 PM PST
U.S. Agonizes Over
Apology to Pakistan
 NATO
By ADAM
ENTOUS, SIOBHA
N
believes
GORMAN and JULI
AN E. BARNES on
Pakistani
17 May 2012.
Counter
Punch:
MAY
14,
2012
A
Global
Crime Spree
What’s
NATO Ever
Done?
by JOHN
supply lines to LaFORGE
open soon
BY
ASSOCIATED
PRESS
FOX NEWS:

Outrage Grows in
Pakistan After NATO
Attack
Nov 30, 2011
- 4:15 Pakistan's deeply troubled
relationship with America
Historical Background
TOPICS: FROM
THE WIRES
Washington
(Framing
Coverage)
post: thiscantbehappening.
of net/
Daily beast
Turnabout is Fair Play: More
Many will profit if Proud to Be an Attacks on
Pakistan
reopens Extortionist!
NATO supply routes Fri, 05/25/2012 - 07:58 U.S. Supply
— Anonymous
Lines
By Richard
by:
Leiby, Published:
Feared
May 16
Yasmeen Ali
After
NATO
Strike
in
Pakistan
Nov
28,
2011 12:39
AM EST
Washington
(Framing
Coverage)
post:
Counter
Antiwar.com
of
Punch:
Pakistan
Reopens
Pakistan seeks
$5,000 transit
fee for each
NATO
container
By Richard
Leiby and Karen
DeYoung,
May 16
NATO Supply Routes With NATO
for $1 Million Per
Strike Crisis,
Day
Pakistan allowed the U.S. Should
use of its territory to
Act Now in
supply US troops in
Afghanistan at an Pakistan
29,
asking price of $1,800 Nov
2011 4:45
per supply truck
by John Glaser, May AM EST
16, 2012
Historical Background
New York
(Framing
Coverage)

Times: Reuters.com
of U.S. generals, Pakistan
army chief meet on
U.S.
and NATO skirmish
Pakistan Say
28 March 2012
Deal to Open
NATO Supply
Lines
Is
Imminent
By
SALMAN
MASOOD and ERIC
SCHMITT
Published: May 15,
2012
Wall Street Journal:
(Framing
of
Coverage)
Pakistan
Defers
NATO
Supply
Decision
By TOM
WRIGHTon May 15,
2012.
XTRA
INSIGHT:
U.S. Leaves
Pakistani
Airbase
December
11,
2011
7:12 PM
The
Economists:
Reuters.com
U.S. says
upbeat on
cooperation
Pakistan Pakistan
eventual and
America
Thu Feb 23, 2012
Till deaths
us do part
Relations
between the
two look
increasingly
poisonous
5 NOV 2011
REUTERS.COM XTRA
Times:
of Pakistan rejects U.S. INSIGHT:
report on NATO
attack
Afghans:
Pakistan
Mulls
By QasimNauman
Pakistan
Reopening
ISLAMABAD | Mon
New York
(Framing
Coverage)

Historical Background
Border Route Jan 23, 2012 2:06pm
Fired First
EST
For NATO
November
By
THE
27, 2011
ASSOCIATED
PRESS
Published: May 14,
2012
ATWAR.com
Times:
of U.S. Report Faults
NATO Delays on
 United States Pakistan Strike
Talks Fail as
By ERIC SCHMITT
Pakistanis
Seek Apology Published: December
26, 2011
By DECLAN
WALSH, ERIC
SCHMITT and STEV
EN LEE MYERS
Published: April 27,
2012
New York
(Framing
Coverage)
ATWAR.com
Chicago
(Framing
Coverage)

Tribune:
of

U.S. seeks to
C.I.A. Leaves
Base
in
Pakistan Used
for
Drone
Strikes
re-engage
By
SALMAN
Pakistan with MASOOD
Published: December
envoy visit
April
25, 11, 2011
2012Andrew Quinn
Chicago
(Framing
Coverage)
Tribune:
of
ATWAR.com

C.I.A.
Base
Leaves
in
Historical Background

Scaled-back
Pakistan
Pakistan Used
for
Drone
Strikes
drone strikes By
SALMAN
reflect
MASOOD
success: U.S. Published: December
11, 2011
official:
April
13,
2012Mark Hosenball

Was the Attack on
Pakistani
Outposts
Deliberate?: How Far
Will the US Go to
Target
Pakistan's
Military?
Mon, 12/19/2011 14:07 — Anonymous
By
SALMAN
 others
MASOOD
by:
and DECLAN
ShaukatQadir
WALSH
Published: April 12,
2012
Pakistan
Gives U.S. a
List
of
Demands,
Including an
End to C.I.A.
Drone Strike
Los Angeles Times
(Framing
of
Coverage)
 Pakistani
lawmakers
approve new
guidelines for
ties with U.S.
April
12,
2012 | 12:42 pm

Russia May
Let
NATO
Use Airfield
as
Afghan
ATWAR.COM
In Fog of War, Rift
Widens Between U.S.
and Pakistan
By STEVEN
LEE
MYERS
Published: November
27, 2011
ANTIWAR.C
OM
Historical Background
Hub
Supply
By
DAVID
M.
HERSZENHORN;
Eric
Schmitt
contributed reporting
from Washington.
Published: March 15,
2012
Cut
Leaves NATO
Trucks
Stranded
in
Pakistan
Southern
Supply Route
Severed After
NATO Attacks
Along Border
by Jason Ditz,
November 27,
2011
Antiwar.com
New York
(Framing
Coverage)
Times: Fury in Pakistan
of After NATO Attack
Kills 28 Soldiers
U.S. Plans No Attacks in Mohmand
Charges Over Province
Targeted
Deadly Strike
Two Army Bases
in Pakistan
by
Jason
Ditz,
By ERIC SCHMITT
November 26, 2011
Published: March 24,
2012

The
Independent:
Global research:
(Framing of Coverage)
Signaling
Tensions,
Pakistan
Shuts
NATO
 Nato supply
Route
route
is
reopened
By JANE
through
PERLEZ and HELEN
Pakistan
E COOPER
BY
AP
ON Published: November
WEDNESDAY
15 30, 2011.
FEBRUARY 2012
Historical Background

Pakistan:
NATO
Allowed
Ship Food
Examier.com:
to

NATO attack
allegedly kills
24
Pakistani
troops, prompts
Islamabad
to
retaliate
By
THE
ASSOCIATED
PRESS
Published: February
Isabelle Zehnder
14, 2012
International
Headlines Examiner
27 Nov 2011
Sarasota Herald
Tribune:
(Framing
of
Coverage)

Imran Khan
says
Americans
don't realize
CIA
drones
kill innocent
 Pakistan
Pakistanis
rejects
By
Michael
account
by
Hughes
U.S. of border
5 Nov 2011
clash
By
DECLAN
WALSH
Published: Tuesday,
January 24, 2012 at
1:00 a.m.
Last
Modified:
Monday, January 23,
2012 at 6:02 p.m.
The
Independent:
(Framing of Coverage)

US
accepts
some blame
for
Nato
strike
that
killed

Foreign
Policy: more
military sales
to
secure
"peace"
in
Pakistan
By
Historical Background
Pakistani
troops
Hopes
of
easing
fraught
diplomatic
relations come as
Islamabad faces fresh
political crisis
ANDREW
BUNCOMBE
FRIDAY
23
DECEMBER 2011

US
mistake
led to attack
on Pakistani
soldiers:
By Patrick
Quinn
and Slobodan Lekic
Associated Press
December 22, 2011
International Herald
Tribune: (Framing of
Coverage)

C.I.A. Leaves
Base
in
Pakistan Used
for
Drone
Strikes
By
SALMAN
MASOOD
Published: December
11, 2011
Washington
(Framing
Coverage)
DE
Times:
of
AiméeKligma
n
Foreign Policy
Examiner
Historical Background
BORCHGRA
VE:
Black
swans soar
Islamabad’s
relationship
with U.S. is a
moving target
By Arnaud de
Borchgrave
Monday,
December 5, 2011
Sarasota
Herald
Tribune: (Framing of
Coverage)

Obama Offers
‘Condolences’
in Deaths of
Pakistanis
JOHN
H.
CUSHMAN Jr.
Published:
Sunday,
December 4, 2011 at
9:04 p.m.
Last
Modified:
Sunday, December 4,
2011 at 9:04 p.m.
The
Independent:
(Framing of Coverage)

Pakistan hit
by claim that
army agreed
to Nato strike
Tensions rise as US
plans new wave of
Historical Background
cross-border raids on
Afghan militants
OMAR WARAICH ,
ISLAMABAD
ON
SATURDAY
03
DECEMBER 2011
The
Independent:
(Framing of Coverage)

Pakistani
cable
TV
blocks BBC
over Nato air
strike
coverage
OMAR WARAICH;
ISLAMABAD
ON
WEDNESDAY
30
NOVEMBER 2011
The
Independent
(framing of coverage)

Fury
at
'deliberate'
Nato
attack
rises
in
Pakistan
OMAR WARAICH;
ISLAMABAD
ON
TUESDAY
29
NOVEMBER 2011
The
Independent
(framing of coverage)

Pakistan
Historical Background
retaliation
leaves
Nato
drivers
in
limbo
RIAZ
KHAN , SEBASTIA
N
ABBOT
ON
SUNDAY
27
NOVEMBER 2011
Introduction:
Historical Background
In this world of communication where there is no hurdles present in the flow of communication;
yet we are limited to access the true information. While doing research on the “Western and
Foreign Media Coverage on NATO Supply Routes closure from November 2012 to May
2012” we faced much difficulties regarding the electronic media because the talk shows were not
available on the past months because they are not allowed to access in Pakistan. It is such awful
situation for us being researcher but “where there is a will; there is a way." We got transcripts’ of
talk shows but yet the information was limited.
The sequence of discussion is as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Print Media
Blogs
Magazines
Electronic Media
1. Print Media:
1.1 May 2012:
Wall Street Journal: (Framing of Coverage)
 U.S. Cuts Pakistan Aid
Associated Press on 25 May 2012
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. The overall foreign aid budget for next year had slashed more than half of the proposed
assistance and threatened further reductions if Islamabad failed to open overland supply
routes to U.S.-led NATO forces in Afghanistan.
2. He called Pakistan "a schizophrenic ally," helping the U.S. at one turn, but then aiding
the Haqqani network.
3. The U.S. and Pakistan failed to resolve the issue at the recent NATO summit in Chicago.
4. The congressional anger over the conviction and the supply routes extended to the Senate
Armed Services Committee, which completed a $631.4 billion defense budget Thursday.
Conclusion:
According to this article,
1.
It's obvious that Pakistan remained invited in Chicago after giving a clue to re-open both
the NATO supplies. As we all know, this summit was ended as failure and the US believes that
both the supply issue are solved because which route is actually key for them as it costs much
less and it is actually lots important with regard to either sides. However after this scene that
additional path is pricey rather than the Pakistani federal government offers demanded $5000
Historical Background
transit cost for each NATO bottle and also claimed we tend to know that US is actually using far
long transport ways via Central Asia, is actually having to pay at minimum double the a sum
they make necessary from these people. But still in vain….
2.
The U.S had told they but not agreed on any kind of figure.
Washington post: (Framing of Coverage)

White House doesn’t expect to finish talks with Pakistan on supply lines during
NATO summit
By Associated Press, Sunday, May 20, 7:12 AM
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. The White House says it is not expecting to finish negotiations with Pakistan over
reopening key supply lines during the NATO summit.
2. Deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes says the U.S. does believe the issue will be
resolved but says there is still work to be done.
3. The route is critical for getting supplies to NATO forces in Afghanistan.
Conclusion:
According to this article,
1. It is clear to everyone that Pakistan was invited in Chicago summit after showing interest
to re-open the NATO supplies but due to some issues the supplies are yet closed. The
issues which are hurdle in front of these are like payment on transit, apology and internal
pressures to both governments because both countries have elections near. If anyone
bends then how he/she can ask a nation to vote in his/her favor?
2. The US believes that the supply issue will be solved because this route is critical for
them because it costs less and it is much important for both sides.
Washington post: (Framing of Coverage)
Historical Background

Pakistani president to attend NATO summit amid signs country will reopen supply
route
By Associated Press, Published: May 17
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. Pakistan’s president announced Thursday that he will attend the upcoming NATO
summit in Chicago, accepting an invitation that was given after the country indicated it
plans to end its six-month blockade of supplies meant for coalition troops in Afghanistan.
2. The country’s powerful army has an interest in seeing the supplies resume because the
move could free up over $1 billion in frozen U.S. military aid.
3. Before the November attack, the U.S. and other NATO countries fighting in Afghanistan
shipped about 30 percent of their nonlethal supplies through Pakistan. Since then,
supplies have taken a far more expensive route through Eastern Europe and Asia.
4. AmirulAzeem, a senior leader of Pakistan’s largest religious party, Jamaat-e-Islami, said
Thursday that the group’s supporters would block NATO supplies because of
Washington’s refusal to honor parliament’s demands.
“We will soon launch a movement to occupy NATO supply routes,” said Azeem.
Conclusion:
According to this article,
1. It is clear that western media is hoping that Pakistan is interested in opening NATO
supplies that’s why Pakistani president is going to attend summit in Chicago because he
has plans to end its six-month blockade of the NATO supplies. The US believes that the
supply issue will be solved because this route is critical for them because it costs less and
it is much important for both sides.
2. It is pointing on the military establishment that they are forcing the government to open
supplies because the US has frozen the aid. It tells that military wants to could free up
over $1 billion in frozen by U.S.
3. At the end again they showed the biased attitude by putting an example that Pakistani
Islamic parties are the biggest hurdle in the opening of supplies because Pakistan is under
the influence of Taliban.
Wall Street Journal: (Framing of Coverage)
Historical Background
 U.S. Agonizes Over Apology to Pakistan
By ADAM ENTOUS, SIOBHAN GORMAN and JULIAN E. BARNES on 17 May 2012.
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. The U.S. had expressed "regret" for the Nov. 26 deaths.
2. The administration came to the brink of saying sorry several times. One mission to
deliver an apology by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was aborted midflight.
3. The drawn-out debate shows how the U.S. remains confounded by efforts to repair
relations with Pakistan. It was complicated by election year politics.
4. Advocates of apology, in particular among U.S. diplomats, said it was the best way to
mend relations.
5. Advocates of apology, in particular among U.S. diplomats, said it was the best way to
mend relations.
Washington post: (Framing of Coverage)

Many will profit if Pakistan reopens NATO supply routes
By Richard Leiby, Published: May 16
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. Pakistan would reap higher tariffs and a payout of at least $1.3 billion in withheld
“coalition support funds” for its contribution to the fight against Islamist militants.
2. Afridi said he sold food, daggers, computers and engineering equipment pillaged from
supply convoys. “We were getting quality goods, technological gadgets and American
flags at very reasonable prices,” he said Tuesday.
“But the supply suspension nearly stopped our business, and it becomes hard to meet
even daily expenses,” he said. “Lower-middle-class people like me will be happy with
the reopening of NATO supply lines.”
3. On the macroeconomic level, Islamabad needs help, too. The $1.3 billion has been
penciled into the proposed budget, according to Finance Ministry officials. And there are
other beneficiaries.
4. The Pakistani military — sometimes called Army Inc. because of its sizable stake in
commerce, corporations and land holdings — indirectly controls 30 percent of the NATO
oil tanker contracts, according to local transporter associations.
5. Tribal-area militants will profit, too: They demand protection money from the companies
that haul the freight.
Historical Background
6. “Even the Taliban is the beneficiary. . . . They get weapons and ammunition when they
attack the containers,” said a black-market trader in NATO goods, who spoke on the
condition of anonymity for fear of Taliban reprisals. “This is one of the financial sources
of the militants.”
Conclusion:
According to this article,
1. It tells us how the NATO supplies benefits the people in different ways. An ordinary
person tells that get quality things with reasonable prices by smuggling, the
government of Pakistan gets an aid from US, for US this route is cheaper than
western Asia and Russia and also Taliban gets weapons and ammunition when they
attack the containers.
Washington post: (Framing of Coverage)

Pakistan seeks $5,000 transit fee for each NATO container
By Richard Leiby and Karen DeYoung,
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. Pakistani negotiators have proposed a fee of about $5,000 for each NATO
shipping container and tanker that transits its territory by land into and out of
Afghanistan.
2. A U.S. official emphasized that the United States has not agreed to any figure.
3. Pakistani officials said they had also taken into account their belief that NATO,
by using alternative, far longer transport routes through Central Asia, is paying at
least double the amount they have requested.
4. Pakistan says it is still owed more than $3 billion for past operations; the United
States puts the figure at about $1.3 billion.
Conclusion:
According to this article,
1. It is clear that Pakistan was invited in Chicago summit after showing interest to re-open
the NATO supplies. The US believes that the supply issue will be solved because this
route is critical for them because it costs less and it is much important for both sides.
2. But after this thing that other route is costly than the Pakistani government has demanded
$5000 transit fee for each NATO container and also said that we know that US is using
Historical Background
far longer transport routes through Central Asia, is paying at least double the amount they
have requested from them.
3. The U.S had told that they yet not agreed on any figure.
New York Times: (Framing of Coverage)

U.S. and Pakistan Say Deal to Open NATO Supply Lines Is Imminent
By SALMAN MASOOD and ERIC SCHMITT
Published: May 15, 2012
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. A deal appeared imminent to reopen Afghan supply lines through Pakistan,
after NATO extended an invitation for Pakistan to attend the summit meeting in
Chicago this weekend.
2. Relations with the United States have remained deeply strained after an American
airstrike on the Pakistani side of the border killed 24 soldiers in November,
immediately leading Pakistan to close the supply routes through which NATO
shipped about 40 percent of its nonlethal supplies. Pakistani lawmakers have
demanded an unconditional apology for the strike and an end to American drone
attacks on Pakistani soil.
3. Pakistani officials have begun publicly backpedaling on their demands and
signaling that some deal on the supply lines.
4. A senior American official added that the two sides were still “far apart” on what
NATO would agree to pay Pakistan to use its supply routes.
5. “This meeting will underline the strong commitment of the international
community to the people of Afghanistan and to its future,” OanaLungescu, a
spokeswoman for NATO headquarters in Brussels, said in a statement. “Pakistan
has an important role to play in that future.”
6. Earlier on Monday, HinaRabbaniKhar, the Pakistani foreign minister, told
reporters in Islamabad that six months after the Salala border episode, time had
come to move on and that NATO supplies could not be stopped indefinitely.
7. Senior American officials said the two sides had not yet resolved two other thorny
issues: more than $1 billion in payments Pakistan says the United States owes for
deploying some 150,000 troops along the border with Afghanistan; and an
apology for the airstrike last November.
Conclusion:
Historical Background
After reading this article, it is clear that the NATO supply reopening is in the
benefit of two countries on both sides.
1. The deal is expected between both sides after getting invitation of Chicago
Summit. The selection of words like imminent to reopen clearly tells what is
actually going to happen.
2. The second point tells us that Pakistan closed these supplies after the attack of
NATO on Pakistani check post as condemnto record its strike against this
accident. This point is in the favor of Pakistan.
3. This summit is important for Pakistan because it will decide the future of
Pakistan when the Americans will withdraw in 2014. It is obvious that when
the US and its allies will leave Afghanistan then in my point of view, the
Taliban will come back because Karzai will also flow back but future will
answer this question better.
4. After making Pakistan innocent now the writer says that Pakistan is playing to
get money and apology. I think it is biased attitude of writer because US
point is totally missing and the thing told isagreement on payment, acceptance
of deals, HinaRabbani interview is clear identification.The payment is the
solution of this problem.
Wall Street Journal: (Framing of Coverage)
Pakistan Defers NATO Supply Decision
By TOM WRIGHTon May 15, 2012.
1.
2.
3.
4.
The framing of few important points are as follows:
Pakistan closed the routes to protest the deaths of 24 Pakistani soldiers in a NATO
airstrike in November. The U.S., in return, has held up over a $1 billion in military aid to
Pakistan.
Pakistani public opinion remains deeply anti-American.
Washington needs Pakistan to put pressure on Taliban militants that use Pakistani
territory to launch attacks on allied troops in Afghanistan.
Despite the deteriorating relationship in recent months, both sides appear keen to improve
ties.
New York Times: (Framing of Coverage)

Pakistan Mulls Reopening Border Route For NATO
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: May 14, 2012
The framing of few important points are as follows:
Historical Background
1. Pakistan’s foreign minister suggested that the country should reopen its Afghan
border to NATOtroop supplies, saying the government had made its point by
closing the route for nearly six months in retaliation for American airstrikes that
killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.
2. Reopening the border risks a domestic outcry in Pakistan given Washington’s
refusal to apologize for the attack, which it says was an accident. But it could help
ensure that Pakistan has a role in the future of Afghanistan as NATO prepares to
retool its strategy there during a conference that starts in Chicago.
3. Pakistan’s presence would benefit the American-led coalition as well, because the
country is seen as crucial to striking a peace deal with the Taliban and their allies
in Afghanistan that would allow foreign troops to withdraw without the nation
descending into further chaos.
4. The episode added to already rampant anti-American sentiment in Pakistan and
plunged the troubled relations between the countries to an all-time low,
threatening the vital, if spotty, antiterrorism cooperation Washington has received
since 2001 in exchange for billions of dollars in American aid.
Conclusion:
In this article,
1. It's clear that the NATO supplies reopening isin the benefit of both parts in several
manners.
2. But it tells us that the refusal of apology will bring a domestic outcry in Pakistan which
indicates that it will affect the US repute in the eyes of the people. Pakistan is divided
into different thoughts and cultures which is ruling by opinion leaders which will bring
different thoughts for US infront of their followers so dual minded set will form after that
rejection.
3. The option is giving to Pakistan that it’s presence is important because they will help
striking a peace deal with the Taliban for US.Also the HinaRabbani interview is actually
clear diagnosis of what will happen? Chicago meeting is about forthcoming of
Afghanistan once the withdrawal of Americans and also NATO in 2014.
4. Both the compensation is from both sides to reach at the solutionbut the major issue still
present of rampant of aid by US after blockage of routes.
1.2 April 2012:
New York Times: (Framing of Coverage)
Historical Background

United States Talks Fail as Pakistanis Seek Apology
By DECLAN WALSH, ERIC SCHMITT and STEVEN LEE MYERS
Published: April 27, 2012
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. The first concentrated high-level talks aimed at breaking a five-month diplomatic
deadlock between the United States and Pakistan ended in failure on Friday over
Pakistani demands for an unconditional apology from the Obama administration for an
airstrike.
2. The White House, angered by the recent spectacular Taliban attacks in Afghanistan,
refuses to apologize.
3. The negotiations are complicated by a complex web of interlocking demands from both
sides. Without the apology, Pakistani officials say they cannot reopen NATO supply
routes into Afghanistan that have been closed since November.
4. The Americans, in turn, are withholding between $1.18 billion and $3 billion of promised
military aid — the exact figure depending on which side is speaking.
5. Aside from the apparently intractable issues of drones and the apology, the two countries
focused on four specific areas of potential cooperation: counterterrorism, the NATO
supply lines, military aid payments and the Taliban peace process.
Conclusion:
This article states that:
1. The US and Pakistan talks have been failed due to the demand of the apology from
Pakistan side and in return the Americans are withholding the promised military aid.
2. Apart from these issues like drones and also the apology, the two countries targeted four
targeted things of energy cooperation: counterterrorism, the NATO provide lines, military
help payments and also the Taliban serenity process.
3. The both sides are firm in their demands because if anyone step back/ showed any bent
then it would not be good for its future in upcoming election. Obama if apologies with
Pakistan then its competitor will raise a question that Obama spend all his era apologizing
with other nations. Similarly, if Pakistan ruling alliances will open NATO supplies
without apology then same thing would happen with them.
Chicago Tribune: (Framing of Coverage)

U.S. seeks to re-engage Pakistan with envoy visit
April 25, 2012Andrew Quinn
Historical Background
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. The Obama administration's top envoy for Pakistan will arrive in Islamabad on
Wednesday for two days of meetings aimed at resetting the two countries' fractious
relationship after a series of damaging setbacks.
2. take part in a "core group" meeting with officials from both Pakistan and Afghanistan,
where the United States is hoping to revive stalled peace talks with the Taliban.
3. The country’s powerful army has an interest in seeing the supplies resume because the
move could free up over $1 billion in frozen U.S. military aid.
Chicago Tribune: (Framing of Coverage)

Scaled-back Pakistan drone strikes reflect success: U.S. official:
April 13, 2012Mark Hosenball
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. The United States suspended strikes by the unmanned aircraft in Pakistani borderlands
for nearly two months late last year, partly to ease anger over a November 26 NATO air
attack that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers and led Pakistan to close supply routes to U.S.-led
troops in Afghanistan.
2. Pakistani officials have begun publicly backpedaling on their demands and signaling that
some deal on the supply lines.
New York Times: (Framing of Coverage)

Pakistan Gives U.S. a List of Demands, Including an End to C.I.A. Drone Strike
By SALMAN MASOOD and DECLAN WALSH
Published: April 12, 2012
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. In a rare show of unity, the government and opposition joined on Thursday to
present the United States with a list of stringent demands, including an immediate
end to C.I.A. drone strikes, that were cast in uncompromising words but could
pave the way for a reopening of NATO supply lines through the country.
2. “This makes it easier for the government to negotiate with the U.S.,” said
HasanAskariRizvi, a defense expert based in Lahore. “That is why the
government agreed to the opposition demand on drones.”
3. ChaudhryNisar Ali Khan, the leader of the opposition in the National Assembly,
said that all political parties wanted to have good relations with the United States
but that “it cannot be an imbalanced relationship.”
“You cannot have a relationship which is tilted toward one country,” he said.
Historical Background
Conclusion:
This article is a taunt on the Pakistani politicians and also is clear identification of our respect in
the eyes of foreign media:
1. The word ‘In a rare show of unity’means that our unity of politicians are question
marked all over the world. The writer says that at last on the few demands the politicians
showed unity; werean immediate end to C.I.A. drone strikes.
2. Moreover, this step was considered to be a source for the government to negotiate with
the U.S. the important point discussed was that all political parties wanted to have good
relations with the United States but that “it cannot be an imbalanced relationship.” In
short, the peace road and relation is open between Pakistan and U.S but the step has to be
taken from both sides.
Los Angeles Times (Framing of Coverage)
 Pakistani lawmakers approve new guidelines for ties with U.S.
April 12, 2012 | 12:42 pm
1.
2.
3.
4.
The framing of few important points are as follows:
The Pakistani parliament on Thursday approved guidelines that will frame a reset of the
country’s relations with the United States, paving the way for an end to a nearly fivemonth disruption in ties that began when errant U.S. airstrikes killed 24 Pakistani soldiers
along the Afghan border.
Outside parliament, lawmakers said the supply routes probably will be opened soon,
though no time table has been established.
The Nov. 26 attack, which Pakistan insisted was unprovoked and deliberate, was just one
of a series of events last year that deeply angered Pakistanis.
Outside parliament, Sen. AfrasiabKhattak from the Zardari-allied Awami National Party
said it will be up to the government to decide how to enforce parliament’s call for a halt
to drone strikes. “Parliament doesn’t want to take over the powers of the executive and
decide everything for the government,” Khattak said.
Historical Background
1.3 March 2012

Russia May Let NATO Use Airfield as Afghan Hub
By DAVID M. HERSZENHORN; Eric Schmitt contributed reporting from Washington.
Published: March 15, 2012
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. The Kremlin expressed willingness on Wednesday to allow NATO to use an airfield in
the heart of European Russia, in a city best known as Lenin's birthplace, as a transit
center for moving troops and ''nonlethal'' cargo into Afghanistan.
2. When overland supply routes through Pakistan have been closed off. But it would also
increase American and NATO dependence on Russia amid serious foreign policy
disagreements between Washington and Moscow, particularly over Syria.
3. Pentagon officials are scrambling to reopen the overland routes through Pakistan that
were shut down by the Pakistani government in November in retaliation for NATO
airstrikes that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.
Conclusion:
This article is
1. A symbol of worry for Pakistan because if the US accepts this invitation then they will
pay the Russia for passage but the loss will be of Pakistan because US will cut off
Pakistan aid and will spend it in Russia. In both cases the danger is for Pakistan and for
US they are paying; either to Russia or Pakistan.
2. The note able thing for Americans is that they have to change their foreign policy for
Russia which is not so easy.
3. The good news for Pakistan is that Americans wants that the overland routes through
Pakistan should reopen.
New York Times: (Framing of Coverage)

U.S. Plans No Charges Over Deadly Strike in Pakistan
By ERIC SCHMITT
Published: March 24, 2012
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. The United States military has decided that no service members will face
disciplinary charges for their involvement in a NATO airstrike in November that
killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.
Historical Background
2. An American investigation in December found fault with both American and
Pakistani troops for the deadly exchange of fire.
3. Pakistan has rejected these conclusions and ascribed most of the blame to the
American forces.
4. That recently completed review said no, three senior military officials said,
explaining that the Americans fired in self-defense.
5. The military’s decision is expected to anger Pakistani officials at a time when the
two countries are gingerly trying to patch up a security relationship left in tatters
over the past year from a series of episodes, including the shooting of two
Pakistanis in Lahore by a C.I.A. contractor, the Navy SEALs raid in Abbottabad
that killed Osama bin Laden and the deadly airstrike in November.
6. That inquiry also concluded that checks and balances put in place to prevent
cross-border accidents with Pakistan failed in part because American officials did
not trust their Pakistani counterparts enough to give them detailed information
about American troop locations in Afghanistan.
Conclusion:
This article is totally biased:
1. It is proving that Pakistan is guilty of everything because they fired first and
NATO did was in defense.
2. It is also pointing out or taunting on Pakistan that the incident brought
distances between Pak-US relations include the shooting of two Pakistanis in
Lahore by a C.I.A. contractor, the Navy SEALs raid in Abbottabad that killed
Osama bin Laden and the deadly airstrike in November BUT this report
caused more distances between these nations which could not be removed.
3. The most important point discussed in this article confuses the reader by
saying that American officials did not trust their Pakistani counterparts
enough to give them detailed information about American troop locations in
Afghanistan. The reality is that there is no border clearly defined on the
incident place where NATO killed 24 soldiers.
1.4 February 2012
The Independent: (Framing of Coverage)

Nato supply route is reopened through Pakistan
BY AP ON WEDNESDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2012
The framing of few important points are as follows:
Historical Background
1. Pakistan has temporarily allowed Nato to ship perishable food to its troops in
Afghanistan, a sign of thawing tensions following US air strikes.
2. The closure has meant coalition forces have had to spend much more money to get goods
to Afghanistan using alternative routes.
Conclusion:
This article tells the importance of this route because:
1. The Pakistani government has temporary opened these routes to reduce the tension which
occurred after attacks and PAK-US relations but it is not permanently opened atall.
2. But after this thing that other route is costly than the Pakistani government was taking as
$250 transit fee for each NATO container and also said that we know that US is using far
longer transport routes through Central Asia.
International Herald Tribune :(Framing of Coverage)

Pakistan: NATO Allowed to Ship Food
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: February 14, 2012
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. Pakistan announced Tuesday that it has temporarily allowed NATOto ship
perishable food through Pakistani territory to troops inAfghanistan, a sign of
thawing tensions after American airstrikes last year that accidentally killed
24 Pakistani soldiers.
2.
the government would allow NATO to ship perishable items for only a
limited time.
1.5 January 2012
Sarasota Herald Tribune: (Framing of Coverage)
 Pakistan rejects account by U.S. of border clash
By DECLAN WALSH
Published: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 at 1:00 a.m.
Last Modified: Monday, January 23, 2012 at 6:02 p.m.
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. Pakistan's military issued an uncompromising formal rejection Monday of the U.S.
military's report last month on a contentious border exchange of fire that killed 24
Historical Background
2.
3.
4.
5.
Pakistani soldiers, dealing a fresh blow to U.S. hopes of reviving a troubled strategic
relationship.
Pakistan's military press office described the U.S. account of the Nov. 26 exchange as
"factually not correct,
It also ascribed blame to Pakistan, saying the military had failed to inform NATO of the
location of new military posts along the long, often poorly demarcated border.
Pakistan's military refused to cooperate with the U.S. inquiry, claiming that previous U.S.
investigations into disputed border attacks had been biased.
The crisis has also seen Islamabad freeze diplomatic relations in public, although U.S.
officials say that cooperation continues at lower levels.
1.6 December2011
The Independent: (Framing of Coverage)

US accepts some blame for Nato strike that killed Pakistani troops
Hopes of easing fraught diplomatic relations come as Islamabad faces fresh political crisis
ANDREW BUNCOMBE
FRIDAY 23 DECEMBER 2011
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. A lack of trust, poor coordination and inaccurate maps were responsible for the Nato
strike that left 24 Pakistani troops dead and relations between Washington and Islamabad
at a new low, a Pentagon investigation concludes.
2. While placing blame on both sides, the US report apparently accepts that American and
Afghan commandos were wrong.
3. It remains unclear why Pakistani forces fired at the Americans and Afghans.
4. The US's acceptance of at least some responsibility could help ease tensions.
5. The report comes at a time of fresh crisis for Pakistan, with its civilian government
locked in dispute with the powerful military over the ramifications of a now notorious
memo.
Conclusion:
This article is telling the report which came after the NATO attack that killed 24
Pakistani troops:
Historical Background
1. The first thing it mentioned that it was mistrust and bad maps which led to this incident
but as per information; it could not happen because the NATO war planes have GPS and
maps with accuracy of +-1 m resolution so the error is not expected. This statement was
rejected by Pakistan because they claim that they provided NATO with maps that clearly
showed where the border posts were located. I conclude that this is a lame excuse by this
report which has no truth involved in it.
2. It is proving that Pakistan is guilty of everything because they fired first and NATO did
was in defense.
3. It is also pointing out or taunting on Pakistan that the incident brought distances between
Pak-US relations include the shooting of two Pakistanis in Lahore by a C.I.A. contractor,
the Navy SEALs raid in Abbottabad that killed Osama bin Laden and the deadly airstrike
in November BUT this report caused more distances between these nations which could
not be removed.
4. The most important point discussed in this article confuses the reader by saying that
American officials did not trust their Pakistani counterparts enough to give them detailed
information about American troop locations in Afghanistan. The reality is that there is no
border clearly defined on the incident place where NATO killed 24 soldiers.
5. This article is biased because they discussed and taunted the crises we are dealing in a
topic which it was not needed.
 US mistake led to attack on Pakistani soldiers:
By Patrick Quinn and Slobodan Lekic
Associated Press
December 22, 2011
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. An investigation into a NATO attack that killed 24 Pakistani troops last month near the
Afghan border has concluded that a combination of mistrust and bad maps led to the
airstrikes on two Pakistani outposts.
2. The Pakistani army has said its troops did nothing wrong and claimed the attack was a
deliberate act of aggression.
3. A statement issued by the U.S. Department of Defense did not apologize for the attack.
4. The report says we recognize we made mistakes, and that mistakeswere also made by the
Pakistanis,” said the NATO official.
5. The Pakistani military has said it provided NATO with maps that clearly showed where
the border posts were located.
Historical Background
Conclusion:
This article is telling the report which came after the NATO attack that killed 24
Pakistani troops:
1. The first thing it mentioned that it was mistrust and bad maps which led to this incident
but as per information; it could not happen because the NATO war planes have GPS and
maps with accuracy of +-1 m resolution so the error is not expected. This statement was
rejected by Pakistan because they claim that they provided NATO with maps that clearly
showed where the border posts were located. I conclude that this is a lame excuse by this
report which has no truth involved in it.
2. The good statement which make this article unbiased was that “we made mistakes, and
that mistakes were also made by the Pakistanis.
International Herald Tribune: (Framing of Coverage)

C.I.A. Leaves Base in Pakistan Used for Drone Strikes
By SALMAN MASOOD
Published: December 11, 2011
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. The Central Intelligence Agency has vacated an air base in western Pakistan that it had
been using for drone strikes against militants in the country’s tribal areas, the Pakistani
military said on Sunday.
2. Pakistan had ordered the C.I.A. to leave the Shamsi air base in protest over NATO
airstrikes that killed at least 25 Pakistani soldiers near the border with Afghanistan on
Nov. 26.
3. Pakistan has also blocked all NATO logistical supplies from crossing the border into
Afghanistan since the clash.
4. Pakistani officials have repeatedly accused NATO forces of deliberately attacking the
Pakistani soldiers at two military check posts; American officials have said the airstrikes
were an unfortunate accident.
5. In response to the attacks, Pakistan gave the C.I.A. 15 days to vacate the Shamsi base,
which is about 200 miles southwest of the city of Quetta in Baluchistan Province.
Washington Times: (Framing of Coverage)
DE BORCHGRAVE: Black swans soar
Historical Background
Islamabad’s relationship with U.S. is a moving target
By Arnaud de Borchgrave
Monday, December 5, 2011
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. The U.S. and NATO command immediately regretted the loss of life but held back any
formal apology pending a thorough investigation.
2. Who first opened fire and then retreated into the army base appropriately named Camp
Volcano.
3. The twin NATO supply routes from Karachi into Afghanistan that supply 30 percent of
Afghan war requirements, were closed down, immobilizing hundreds of tanker trucks
over two 1,000-mile routes to Kandahar and Kabul.
4. Gone, too, is the notion that there is no solution to the Afghan war without Pakistan and
for Pakistan without the Taliban.
Conclusion:
This article is telling the report which came after the NATO attack that killed 24
Pakistani troops:
1. The US and Pakistan talks have been failed due to the demand of the apology from
Pakistan side and in return the Americans are withholding the promised military aid.
2. Apart from these issues like drones and also the apology, the two countries targeted four
targeted things of energy cooperation: counterterrorism, the NATO provide lines, military
help payments and also the Taliban serenity process.
3. The both sides are firm in their demands because if anyone step back/ showed any bent
then it would not be good for its future in upcoming election. Obama if apologies with
Pakistan then its competitor will raise a question that Obama spend all his era apologizing
with other nations. Similarly, if Pakistan ruling alliances will open NATO supplies
without apology then same thing would happen with them.
Sarasota Herald Tribune: (Framing of Coverage)
 Obama Offers ‘Condolences’ in Deaths of Pakistanis
JOHN H. CUSHMAN Jr.
Published: Sunday, December 4, 2011 at 9:04 p.m.
Last Modified: Sunday, December 4, 2011 at 9:04 p.m.
The framing of few important points are as follows:
Historical Background
1. President Obama phoned the president of Pakistan on Sunday to offer “condolences”
for the deaths of two dozen soldiers killed in NATO airstrikes along the Afghan border,
the White House said.
2. But Mr. Obama’s comments to President Asif Ali Zardari stopped short of a formal
apology or a videotaped statement to ease the public anger in Pakistan.
3. The Pakistanis said that NATO gave them the wrong coordinates for the strikes and that
their forces fired only after the attacks began.
4. Pakistan has responded to the attack by blocking NATO logistical supplies from
crossing into Afghanistan.
The Independent: (Framing of Coverage)

Pakistan hit by claim that army agreed to Nato strike
Tensions rise as US plans new wave of cross-border raids on Afghan militants
OMAR WARAICH , ISLAMABAD ON SATURDAY 03 DECEMBER 2011
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. Pakistan's army was on the defensive yesterday, trying to explain why its air force had
not reacted to the killing of 24 troops by Nato as it was confronted with a version of
events from US officials that starkly differed from the one it has presented.
2. The increase in aggression is likely to stoke tensions between Nato and Pakistan.
3. Nato is believed to be targeting several Pakistan-based groups.
4. The Pakistanis say that they were told of the incident before the air strikes, but deny that
any fire emanated from their side.
1.7 November 2011
The Independent: (Framing of Coverage)

Pakistani cable TV blocks BBC over Nato air strike coverage
OMAR WARAICH; ISLAMABAD ON WEDNESDAY 30 NOVEMBER 2011
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. Pakistani cable operators have pulled BBC World, CNN and other foreign news channels
off the air in protest at their coverage of last weekend’s Nato air strike that killed 24
Pakistani troops on the border with Afghanistan.
2. The decision has caused outrage among many English-speaking Pakistanis who see it as
an unreasonable denial of their contact with the wider world.
3. “The documentary was in bad taste,” said Palwasha Khan, a parliamentarian from the
ruling Pakistan People’s Party. “International channels as reputable as the BBC should
Historical Background
not distort facts. It was an insult to the feelings of 180 million people who have sacrificed
so much in the fight against terrorism.”
Conclusion:
This article is telling the factors which came after the NATO attack that killed 24
Pakistani troops:
1. After showing a documentary on terrorism, the government ordered cable operators to
block BBC coverage because “It was an insult to the feelings of 180 million people
who have sacrificed so much in the fight against terrorism.”
2. This article is trying to a shame Pakistan that it is not democratic country.
3. The reason behind is that BBC report says that Al Qaeda does not exist.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Gzun4ehFjeA
The BBC report "Secret Pakistan" says that Pakistan is in bed with Alqaeda.
We Pakistanis get to listen to such blaming after getting 35,000 our citizens killed in this war.
How many troops does the US have in Afghanistan? 90 K?
How many troops does the UK have? 5000?
We have 160,000 people just on the Afghan - Pak border and honestly we have had enough.
BBC has the right to air whatever fairy tale it wants. We Pakistanis have the right to ban it in
Pakistan
The Independent (framing of coverage)

Fury at 'deliberate' Nato attack rises in Pakistan
Islamabad denies claims its forces started firing to trigger tragic strike and cuts off Nato supply
route
OMAR WARAICH; ISLAMABAD ON TUESDAY 29 NOVEMBER 2011
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. Pakistan has angrily rejected claims that its troops opened fire on Afghan and Nato forces
before Nato airstrikes left 24 Pakistani soldiers dead on Saturday.
2. There was no fire from this direction," said Major General Athar Abbas, the Pakistan
military's chief spokesman.
3. Pakistan had already given Nato the coordinates of two border posts that were attacked,
300 metres inside Pakistani territory, dismissing suggestions of a mistake.
Historical Background
4. Pakistan had already given Nato the coordinates of two border posts that were attacked,
300 metres inside Pakistani territory, dismissing suggestions of a mistake.
5. "Pakistan is going to implode if we keep taking instructions from the US," said Imran
Khan.
The Independent (framing of coverage)

Pakistan retaliation leaves Nato drivers in limbo
RIAZ KHAN , SEBASTIAN ABBOT ON SUNDAY 27 NOVEMBER 2011
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. Stranded Pakistani truck drivers carrying fuel and other supplies to US-led troops in
Afghanistan said today that they were exposed to attacks by Islamist militants, after
Islamabad closed the country's border crossings in retaliation for coalition airstrikes that
allegedly killed 24 Pakistani troops.
2. The situation could be more dire this time because Pakistan, outraged at the alleged Nato
attack before dawn yesterday, has closed both its crossings.
Conclusion:
This article is telling the factors which came after the NATO attack that killed 24 Pakistani
troops:
1. The Pakistan is under the influence of Taliban is the simple conclusion of this article
and reason of writing it.
Readers Comments:

RizwanAslam
Well stupid Americans and stupid Indians who are the Most terrorist nations and they yet declare
sum1 else..Shalli name HINDU terrorist here?? Who's killing innocent peoples in IRAQ,
Afghanistan and in tribal areas in pakistan?? Hav u seen the babies age of 2 to 5 who were
attacked by the U.S Drones?? NO one will say that YEA thats terrorism as well....OBAMA
thinks that he is clever but is STUPID..
Historical Background
CLShaw
Yes you may rattle on with your uniform diatribe but realize this there Aslam; it Osama Bin
laden never attacked the US this would never be happening. We are not as stupid as you Muslims
think; we know where the terror originates and we slowly wipe them out; you on the other hand
think that your religion makes everything you do to everyone else who is not a Muslim right. I
think the rest of the none Muslim world which; out numbers all the Muslims in the world should
have something to say about that. Oh! By the way I love those drones; the more they kill you
SOB’s the better.
Virginia Perkins
Ron, Good thinking You are on the right track. Obama why not give a 10 million reward on
information about " Fast and Furious" You have something to hide? Or are you protecting your
Attorney General?
Hobbes Wayne
Interesting. The only uptick in Obama's foreign policy was the assassination of bin Laden. Now
he is exploiting it with an assassination team into Uganda after Kony who might or might not be
alive and a global bounty system. Is the I.C.C. in on this?
labraun
Obama & Hillary USE OUR money for blackmail, payolla, bribes, and bounty.
No budget ever...allows free reign on the Raid of the US Treasury...for their particular means
of Governance. Dispicable! Foreign and Domestics matters in Shambles.
CLShaw
Why does Pakistan produce so many Islamic radical terrorist? Could it possibly be the problem
all alone was Pakistan? We better start recognizing who is our friend and who definitely is not
our friend. Pakistan is not our friend; for if they were how in the world did Osama Bin Laden
hide there for almost 10 years? These people cannot be trusted.
Historical Background
Guardian56317
Bet the FBI won't be getting their man afterall, huh !
Ron
How about a $10 million dollar reward about information about "Fast and Furious" and who
thought it up, who proposed buying the machine guns with "Stimulus" funds and letting the ATF
run the operation into Mexico where subsequently 250 Mexican and American Police Officers
were butchered. Why isn't Senators Feinstein an Schumer's "KingPin Act" used to squeeze those
in the know, for what happened those guilty could easily get 50 years in prison for running guns
to the heroin cartels of Mexico. President Calderon apparently doesn't know about what the DOJ
and ATF has done, have him add his voice to bring those that got many, many murdered with
bought guns by the ATF and DOJ.
Guardian56317
So, if the Black Panthers can issue a bounty of $10,000 for Zimmerman, I guess that means
OBAMA can go right ahead and issue a bounty of 10 million for this guy.
2..Blogs:
2.1 May 2012:
Reuters.com
U.S. losing patience with Pakistan, says Panetta
31 May 2012
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. Pakistan has termed the attacks as illegal and a violation of its sovereignty.
2. Panetta blamed the group for an attack last week on a U.S. base in the east in which
several insurgents, including some wearing suicide vests, used rocket-propelled grenades.
3. Pakistan closed the shorter and cheaper routes through its territory last year to protest
against a cross-border NATO air attack that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers. Discussions to
reopen the Pakistan routes have stalled.
4. Resupplying troops in Afghanistan through the Northern Distribution Network is about
two and a half times more expensive than shipping items through Pakistan, a U.S.
defense official told Reuters, speaking on condition of anonymity.
Historical Background
Salon.com
TUESDAY, MAY 15, 2012 05:15 PM PST
 NATO invites Pakistan to summit
BY ASSOCIATED PRESS
TOPICS: FROM THE WIRES
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. NATO says it will invite Pakistan’s president Asif Ali Zardari to the alliance’s
summit in Chicago, after the country’s foreign minister proposed reopening its
Afghan border to NATO military supplies.
2. Supply route through Pakistan has been closed for nearly six months in
retaliation for U.S. airstrikes that killed 24 Pakistani troops.
3. This forced NATO to reorient its entire logistics chain through Russia and Central
Asia.
4. The routes through Pakistan are seen as vital as NATO begins to pull out of
Afghanistan.
Conclusion:
This article states that:
1. The Pakistan’s President was invited in the summit only because of it’s interest in
opening the NATO supply which means that if he did not show this interest then
NATO would not invite him to attend the summit.
2. The NATO supply has been closed from last 6 months and the reason behind it was a
protest resulted due to U.S airstrikes which killed the 24 Pakistani troops as result.
3. When Pakistan closed the routes for NATO then it forced them to find other route for
their supply which is from Russia and Central Asia.
4. This route is very important for U.S. because it costs less and the border is very
important for militants.
Salon.com
MONDAY, MAY 14, 2012 01:15 PM PST
 US, Pakistan negotiate reopening NATO supply line
BY SEBASTIAN ABBOT, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Historical Background
TOPICS: FROM THE WIRES
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. The United States has been holding intense negotiations with Pakistan to get the
country to reopen its border to supplies.
2. The clock is ticking ahead of a NATO summit in Chicago on May 20-21 that is
largely focused on the Afghan war.
3. A team of U.S. negotiators has been in the country for several weeks working out
the nuts and bolts of a potential agreement to reopen the supply line.
Conclusion:
In this article,
1. It's clear that the NATO supplies reopening is in the benefit of both parts in several
manners.
2. But it tells us that the refusal of apology will bring a domestic clamor in Pakistan which
indicates that it will affect the US repute in the eyes of the people. Pakistan is divided
into different thoughts and cultures which is ruling by opinion leaders which will bring
different thoughts for US in front of their followers so dual minded set will form after
that rejection.
3. The teams are trying to reopen the supplies through talks and negotiations.
Salon.com
MONDAY, MAY 21, 2012 11:50 PM PST
 NATO believes Pakistani supply lines to open soon
BY ASSOCIATED PRESS
TOPICS: FROM THE WIRES
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. NATO’s top official says he was optimistic that Pakistan will re-open key transit routes
to Afghanistan in the “very near future.”
2. NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen says the closure of the routes in
November have not had a major impact on alliance operations in Afghanistan.
3. Pakistan closed the supply routes in November in response to a U.S. airstrike that killed
two dozen Pakistani soldiers. The U.S. and Pakistan have been negotiating the reopening
of the routes, but those talks are stalled.
Conclusion:
Historical Background
After reading this article, it is clear that the NATO supply reopening is in the benefit of two
countries on both sides.
1. The deal is expected between both sides after getting invitation of Chicago Summit. The
selection of words like imminent to reopenclearly tells what is actually going to happen.
2. The second point tells us that Pakistan closed these supplies after the attack of NATO on
Pakistani check post as condemn to record its strike against this accident. This point is in
the favor of Pakistan.
3. This summit is important for Pakistan because it will decide the future of Pakistan when
the Americans will withdraw in 2014. It is obvious that when the US and its allies will
leave Afghanistan then in my point of view, the Taliban will come back because Karzai
will also flow back but future will answer this question better.
thiscantbehappening.net/
Turnabout is Fair Play: Proud to Be an Extortionist!
Fri, 05/25/2012 - 07:58 — Anonymous
by:
Yasmeen Ali
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. The Senate Armed Services Committee, say the US must not pay $5000 per truck as
demanded by Pakistan, for supplies being shipped through this country to American
troops in Afghanistan. McCain went further, calling the Pakistani demand
“extortion.”
2. Extortion, dear Sen. McCain, is defined as the crime of obtaining money or some
other thing of value through the abuse of one’s office or authority.
3. They have long been paying an average of about $250 a truck for transit, as a senior
US official has stated in a report by David S. Cloud in the Los Angeles
Timespublished May 19th.
4. NATO supply route to Afghanistan via Pakistan has damaged the country’s road
infrastructure to the tune of 100 billion rupees over the last 10 years, as reported in
the Pakistani newspaper The Nation.
Conclusion:
After reading this article,
1. The mindset of American depicts which says that 5000$ is the extortion amount
that has been asked by the Pakistani government. The use of word extortion by
such an important person is really quite shocking and feel sorry to know what
they think.
Historical Background
2. Pakistan is not holding guns and asking you to pay. Dear it is your decision pay or
go choose other route that will cost less than us.
3. Our infrastructure has been damaged a lot so you need to pay for it otherwise ; it
means that you want that we forgot blood of our soldiers which is sorry to say not
possible.
Antiwar.com
Pakistan Reopens NATO Supply Routes for $1 Million Per Day
Pakistan allowed the use of its territory to supply US troops in Afghanistan at an asking price
of $1,800 per supply truck
by John Glaser, May 16, 2012
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. After diplomatic pressure from Washington, the Pakistani government has agreed to
reopen NATO supply routes into Afghanistan, so long as the U.S. pays $1,800 for each
truck carrying supplies.
2. The deal struck with Pakistan will cost the U.S. an extra $365 million annually (that is,
$1 million every day).
3. ). But the deal is still better for the Obama administration: supplying troops in
Afghanistan for the past six months has cost six times as much money as when as before
the supply routes were closed.
4. Also part of the deal is that Pakistan has dropped its demand for the Obama
administration to issue a formal apology for killing the 24 soldiers “by mistake,” and that
the U.S. has offered Pakistan a formal invitation to a NATO conference in Chicago
beginning this weekend.
Conclusion:
This article tells the importance of this route because:
1. The Pakistani government has temporary opened these routes to reduce the tension which
occurred after attacks and PAK-US relations but it is not permanently opened atall.
2. But after this thing that other route is costly than the Pakistani government was taking as
$250 transit fee for each NATO container and also said that we know that US is using far
longer transport routes through Central Asia.
3. The both sides are firm in their demands because if anyone step back/ showed any bent
then it would not be good for its future in upcoming election. Obama if apologies with
Pakistan then its competitor will raise a question that Obama spend all his era apologizing
with other nations. Similarly, if Pakistan ruling alliances will open NATO supplies
without apology then same thing would happen with them.
Historical Background
2.2 March 2012
Reuters.com
U.S. generals, Pakistan army chief meet on NATO skirmish
28 March 2012
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. The head of U.S. Central Command and the commander of NATO forces
in Afghanistan met Pakistan's army chief on Wednesday in the first high-level military
visit since a cross-border U.S. attack last November killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.
2. and the possible reopening of overland supply routes to NATO troops in Afghanistan.
3. "We are hopeful that the ground supply routes will open in the near future. They are
important to our effort in Afghanistan.
4. The Pakistani military said in a statement before the session that Kayani, Mattis and
Allen would focus their discussions on the investigations into the November 26 incident.
Conclusion:
The conclusion of this article is as follows:
1. The second point tells us that Pakistan closed these supplies after the attack of NATO on
Pakistani check post as condemn to record its strike against this accident. This point is in
the favor of Pakistan.
This summit is important for Pakistan because it will decide the future of Pakistan when the
Americans will withdraw in 2014. It is obvious that when the US and its allies will leave
Afghanistan then in my point of view, the Taliban will come back because Karzai will also flow
back but future will answer this question better
2.3 Feb 2012
Reuters.com
U.S. says Pakistan upbeat on eventual cooperation
Thu Feb 23, 2012
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. Pakistan has welcomed the idea of resuming cooperation with the United States on
counter-terrorism and Afghanistan after its parliament reviews badly strained ties, a
senior U.S. official said Thursday.
Historical Background
2. The official gave an upbeat assessment of talks between the U.S. and Pakistani foreign
ministers designed to help repair relations pushed deep into crisis by an incident in
November when U.S. aircraft killed 24 Pakistani soldiers on the Afghan border.
3. The United States sees Pakistan as critical to its efforts to wind down the war in
neighboring Afghanistan.
2.4 Jan 2012
REUTERS.COM
Pakistan rejects U.S. report on NATO attack
By QasimNauman
ISLAMABAD | Mon Jan 23, 2012 2:06pm EST
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. Pakistan's military on Monday rejected U.S. findings on a November 26 NATO crossborder air attack that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers, reducing the chances of a resolution of
the dispute and an improvement in ties which are at their lowest in years.
2. The U.S. report released on December 22 found both American and Pakistani forces were
to blame for the incident near the Afghan border, inflaming already strained ties.
3. "This is going to affect the relationship. The relationship was already in the doldrums, it
was in bad shape. I don't know if it has the capacity to get any worse," said Mahmud
Durrani, a retired Pakistan army major general.
4. The death of the Pakistani soldiers dug in along the mountainous, isolated border area,
along with the initial NATO response, has incensed Pakistanis and marked yet another
setback in the Obama administration's efforts to improve chronically troubled ties with an
uneasy ally.
5. Pakistan admitted that its posts engaged in "speculative fire", including the use of mortar
bombs, which the U.S. interpreted as hostile fire.
Conclusion:
This article is telling the report which came after the NATO attack that killed 24
Pakistani troops:
1. It is proving that Pakistan is guilty of everything because they fired first and NATO did
was in defense.
2. The most important point discussed in this article confuses the reader by saying that
American officials did not trust their Pakistani counterparts enough to give them detailed
information about American troop locations in Afghanistan. The reality is that there is no
border clearly defined on the incident place where NATO killed 24 soldiers.
3. This article is biased because they discussed and taunted the crises we are dealing in a
topic which it was not needed.
Historical Background
2.5 December 2011
ATWAR.com
U.S. Report Faults NATO Delays on Pakistan Strike
By ERIC SCHMITT
Published: December 26, 2011
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. A military investigation has concluded that it took about 45 minutes for
a NATO operations officer in Afghanistan to notify a senior allied commander
about Pakistan’s calls that its outposts were under attack, one of several breakdowns in
communication that contributed to airstrikes that killed 26 Pakistani soldiers last month.
2. Once alerted, the commander immediately ordered a halt to American attacks on two
Pakistani border posts.
3. An American AC-130 gunship flew two miles into Pakistan’s airspace to return fire on
Pakistani troops.
4. The details released Monday add to those failures unexplained delays and a lack of
urgency by NATO officers.
5. The way to long-term peace and stability along the border is to be found in resolving the
longstanding border disputes that perpetuate a state of uncertainty and mistrust.
6. General Clark outlined a series of miscommunications on both sides that he said
contributed to the accident.
7. Pakistan has insisted that its forces did nothing wrong, and that they did not fire the first
shots.
Conclusion:
It is actually telling both the report which followed the NATO assault which killed 24
Pakistani soldiers:
1.The first thing it suggested which it remained mistrust and harmful maps that result in
this occasion but as per messages; it could not take place because the NATO battle plane
have GPS and also maps with accuracy on +-1 m resolution so that problem is not
necessary. It statement remained refused by Pakistan as they claim that they will provided
NATO to maps which clearly showed exactly where the border updates were discover. I
end up that this is actually a lame excuse through this statement with no truth involved in
this.
Historical Background
2. It is showing which Pakistan is guilty on everything because they will fireplace at first
and also NATO did stayed in defense.
3. It is and saying or taunting upon Pakistan that the occasion provided distances
involving Pak-US relations include both the shooting of both Pakistanis in Lahore
through a C.I.A. contractor, both the Navy SEALs raid beneath Abbottabad that killed
Osama bin Laden and also the deadly airstrike beneath November BUT this report
triggered more ranges between nations that could not be removed.
4. The largest component discussed in this article clouds the reader through saying that
Western legal did but not trust their Pakistani alternatives enough to increase these people
detailed messages on American troop parts in Afghanistan. The reality is which there is
actually absolutely no border actually defined on the occasion place where NATO wiped
out 24 soldiers.
5. This is biased as they will discussed and also taunted the crises we tend to are working
beneath a question that it remained not needed.
ATWAR.com

C.I.A. Leaves Base in Pakistan Used for Drone Strikes
By SALMAN MASOOD
Published: December 11, 2011
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. The Central Intelligence Agency has vacated an air base in western Pakistan that it had
been using for drone strikes against militants in the country’s tribal areas, the Pakistani
military said on Sunday.
2. Pakistan had ordered the C.I.A. to leave the Shamsi air base in protest over NATO
airstrikes that killed at least 25 Pakistani soldiers near the border with Afghanistan on
Nov. 26.
3. Pakistan has also blocked all NATO logistical supplies from crossing the border into
Afghanistan since the clash.
4. Pakistani officials have repeatedly accused NATO forces of deliberately attacking the
Pakistani soldiers at two military check posts; American officials have said the airstrikes
were an unfortunate accident.
5. In response to the attacks, Pakistan gave the C.I.A. 15 days to vacate the Shamsi base,
which is about 200 miles southwest of the city of Quetta in Baluchistan Province.
thiscantbehappening.net/

Was the Attack on Pakistani Outposts Deliberate?: How Far Will the US Go to Target Pakistan's
Military?
Mon, 12/19/2011 - 14:07 — Anonymous
others
by:
Historical Background
ShaukatQadir
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. On November 26th, NATO aircrafts and helicopter gunships launched an attack on
the recently constructed twin-posts “Volcano” and “Boulder” in Salala region of the
Mohmand Agency in Pakistan. Of the 40 soldiers, including two officers, occupying
these posts, 26, including both officers, were killed and 14 wounded. Not a single
soldier escaped unscathed.
2. As per international agreements, the Afghan government was informed of the
intention to construct these posts and map coordinates along with specifications
were provided.
3. The final excuse presented by NATO forces for this massacre is that some Taliban
probably engaged them with a rocket and, their response, resulted in the confusion.
Conclusion:
This article is telling the report which came after the NATO attack that killed 24
Pakistani troops:
1. The US and Pakistan talks have been failed due to the demand of the apology from
Pakistan side and in return the Americans are withholding the promised military aid.
2. Apart from these issues like drones and also the apology, the two countries targeted four
targeted things of energy cooperation: counterterrorism, the NATO provide lines, military
help payments and also the Taliban serenity process.
3. The both sides are firm in their demands because if anyone step back/ showed any bent
then it would not be good for its future in upcoming election. Obama if apologies with
Pakistan then its competitor will raise a question that Obama spend all his era apologizing
with other nations. Similarly, if Pakistan ruling alliances will open NATO supplies
without apology then same thing would happen with them.
4. The first thing it mentioned that it was mistrust and bad maps which led to this incident
but as per information; it could not happen because the NATO war planes have GPS and
maps with accuracy of +-1 m resolution so the error is not expected. This statement was
rejected by Pakistan because they claim that they provided NATO with maps that clearly
showed where the border posts were located. I conclude that this is a lame excuse by this
report which has no truth involved in it.
2.6 November 2011
Historical Background
ATWAR.COM
In Fog of War, Rift Widens Between U.S. and Pakistan
By STEVEN LEE MYERS
Published: November 27, 2011
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. — The NATO air attack that killed at least two dozen Pakistani soldiers over the
weekend reflected
2. : the tactics of war can easily undercut the broader strategy that leaders of both countries
say they share
3. The reaction inside Pakistan nonetheless followed a now-familiar pattern of anger and titfor-tat retaliation.
4. Pakistan had reason to feel that the United States had violated its sovereignty.
5. Recognizing that heightened military activity along the mountainous border with
Afghanistan increases the risks of deadly mistakes
6. ordered the C.I.A. to vacate a base it has used to launch drone strikes.
Conclusion:
This article is actually it was biased:
1. It is showing that Pakistan is guilty on everything because they will fired at first and
also NATO did stayed in defense.
2. It is and condition and taunting upon Pakistan that the occasion provided distances
involving Pak-US relations include both the shooting on both Pakistanis in Lahore <>
through a C.I.A. contractor, both the Navy SEALs raid in Abbottabad which killed
Osama bin Loaded the toxic airstrike in November BUT which statement caused other
distances between these states which could can no longer release.
3. The most important component described in this article clouds the reader through
saying that Western legal did but not trust their Pakistani alternatives enough to give
these people detailed messages on American troop parts in Afghanistan. The reality is
which there is actually absolutely no border actually particular on the occasion place
where NATO wiped out 24 soldiers.
ANTIWAR.COM
Supply Cut Leaves NATO Trucks Stranded in Pakistan
Southern Supply Route Severed After NATO Attacks Along Border
by Jason Ditz, November 27, 2011
The framing of few important points are as follows:
Historical Background
1. Responding to the overnight attack by NATO warplanes on Friday, Pakistan has cut
off all NATO supply routes through its country, effectively blocking about half of the
supplies brought into Afghanistan for the massive occupation force.
2. Though some are downplaying the seriousness of the matter, the northern supply
route through Russia is far more expensive, and Russia has restricted the types of
supplies that can be brought through it.
3. The US is loudly pressing Pakistan to end the border closure, but the Pakistani
government doesn’t seem to be in a position to do that, with anger over the Friday
attack still boiling over and NATO shrugging off the killings.
Conclusion:
This article is
1. NATO supply was blocked due to attack on Pakistani check post in which 24 soldiers
were killed.
2. A symbol of worry for Pakistan because if the US accepts this invitation then they will
pay the Russia for passage but the loss will be of Pakistan because US will cut off
Pakistan aid and will spend it in Russia. In both cases the danger is for Pakistan and for
US they are paying; either to Russia or Pakistan.
3. The note able thing for Americans is that they have to change their foreign policy for
Russia which is not so easy.
4. The good news for Pakistan is that Americans wants that the overland routes through
Pakistan should reopen.
Antiwar.com
Fury in Pakistan After NATO Attack Kills 28 Soldiers
Attacks in Mohmand Province Targeted Two Army Bases
by Jason Ditz, November 26, 2011
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. Long stretched to their breaking point, ties between the United States and Pakistan look
to have frayed dramatically overnight as NATO warplanes and helicopters attacked a pair
of Army bases in Pakistan’s Mohmand Agency, killing at least 28 soldiers.
2. NATO warplanes had been called in due to an “incident” near the border and that it was
“highly likely” they attacked Pakistan’s bases during the course of that operation.
Conclusion:
Historical Background
This article is telling the report which came after the NATO attack that killed 24
Pakistani troops:
1. The first thing it mentioned that it was mistrust and bad maps which led to this incident
but as per information; it could not happen because the NATO war planes have GPS and
maps with accuracy of +-1 m resolution so the error is not expected. This statement was
rejected by Pakistan because they claim that they provided NATO with maps that clearly
showed where the border posts were located. I conclude that this is a lame excuse by this
report which has no truth involved in it.
2. The good statement which make this article unbiased was that “we made mistakes, and
that mistakes were also made by the Pakistanis.
Global research:
Signaling Tensions, Pakistan Shuts NATO Route
By JANE PERLEZ and HELENE COOPER
Published: November 30, 2011.
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. American officials pressed their Pakistani counterparts on Thursday to reopen a
vital supply route for American and NATO forces in Afghanistan.
2. Pakistan's army was on the defensive yesterday, trying to explain why its air force
had not reacted to the killing of 24 troops by Nato as it was confronted with a version
of events from US officials that starkly differed from the one it has presented.
3. The increase in aggression is likely to stoke tensions between Nato and Pakistan.
4. Nato is believed to be targeting several Pakistan-based groups.
5. The Pakistanis say that they were told of the incident before the air strikes, but deny
that any fire emanated from their side.
Examier.com:

NATO attack allegedly kills 24 Pakistani troops, prompts Islamabad to retaliate
Isabelle Zehnder
International Headlines Examiner
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. Pakistan blocked vital supply routes for US-led troops in Afghanistan and demanded that
Washington vacate a base used by American drones after coalition aircraft allegedly
Historical Background
killed 24 Pakistani troops at two posts along a mountainous frontier that serves as a safe
haven for militants.
2. An investigation to determine the details of the attacks is underway, but a NATO
spokesman said it was likely that coalition airstrikes caused the Pakistani casualties.
3. The coalition has alternative but costlier and less efficient routes through Central Asia
into northern Afghanistan.
4. Suspected militants took advantage of the impasse to launch attacks against stranded or
rerouted trucks carrying NATO supplies. The government reopened the border after
about 10 days when the US apologized.
5. The White House said that senior U.S. civilian and military officials had expressed their
condolences to their Pakistani counterparts.
Conclusion:
According to this discussion which is pointing out the steps taken by Pakistan and US
just after the ‘NATO attack allegedly which kills 24 Pakistani troops’which includes
the condolence from the US side and the demand of Pakistan to vacate the base and
blockage of NATO supplies. The major thing discussed is about the alternative routes
which can be used after blockage by Pakistani officials but it is costly for US. Moreover,
they told that Pakistan has already blocked the supplies for 10 days before so they think
again this will be a short time block of routes.

Imran Khan says Americans don't realize CIA drones kill innocent Pakistanis
By Michael Hughes
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. Imran Khan, Pakistani cricketer-turned-politician, indicated on Sunday that if Americans
knew U.S. drone strikes were killing innocent women and children in Pakistan they
would be marching on Washington D.C.
2. Khan, Pakistan’s Tehrik-i-Insaf (PTI) chairman, made these comments after leading
protests against the CIA drone program that blocked a key road in Pakistan for three
days, holding up over 500 lorries which prevented supplies from reaching NATO forces
in Afghanistan.
3. The CIA program has come under fire by U.S. critics, including Noam Chomsky, who
recently said the drone attacks were target assassinations that violated international law.

Foreign Policy: more military sales to secure "peace" in Pakistan
Historical Background
By AiméeKligman
Foreign Policy Examiner
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. The US has just upped the ante in Pakistan to the tune of US$2 billion over the next five
years to enable Pakistan to purchase more war machine goods to fight the "Taliban".
2. There is also an awful lot of contradictory chatter going on about Pakistan: for instance,
last Friday, when Secretary ofState Hillary Clinton announced the arms sale plan
alongside Pakistan's foreign minister, Shah MahmoodQureshi, she said:
"The United States has no stronger partner when it comes to counterterrorism efforts
against the extremists who threaten us both than Pakistan".
3. It noted some of the actions taken by the Pakistanis which were counterproductive to the
war effort:
 Pakistan cut off an important supply route both for the U.S. and Nato combat forces in
retaliation for the deaths of 3 of their paramilitary units.
 Pakistan refuses to go after what the U.S. considers to be the most dangerous terrorist
groups: the Afghan Taliban and the Haqqini Network.
 Pakistan's intelligence unit, the ISI, continues to provide support to certain militant
groups as a means of expanding its influence in Afghanistan
4. This brings to mind the U.S. support of the Afghan Mujahedeen against Russian forces
back in the 1980's. We trained their military, gave them weapons, which they eventually
turned against us. When are we going to learn?
Conclusion:
The important points mentioned here is that Pakistan should develop the foreign policy
which it doesn’t have which always results problems for them. The Pakistan has no long
term policy in any field and it is the weak thing of them.
3 Magazines:
Economists:
The NATO summit
Historical Background
NATO’s risky Afghan endgame
A timetable for winding down the war leaves more questions than answers
May 26th 2012 | from the print edition
Summary:
It is clear to everyone that Pakistan’s President was invited in Chicago summit after showing
interest to re-open the NATO supplies but due to some issues the supplies are yet closed. The
issues which are hurdle in front of these are like payment on transit, apology and internal
pressures to both governments because both countries have elections near. If anyone bends then
how he/she can ask a nation to vote in his/her favor?
On the other hand, the US believes that the supply issue will be solved because this route is
critical for them because it costs less and it is much important for both sides.The largest
component discussed in this article clouds the reader through saying that Western legal did but
not trust their Pakistani alternatives enough to increase these people detailed messages on
American troop parts in Afghanistan. The reality is which there is actually absolutely no border
actually defined on the occasion place where NATO wiped out 24 soldiers. It means that the trust
in missing in both end because relations are actually according to personal interests.
The most important point discussed in this article confuses the reader by saying that American
officials did not trust their Pakistani counterparts enough to give them detailed information about
American troop locations in Afghanistan. The reality is that there is no border clearly defined on
the incident place where NATO killed 24 soldiers.
Economists:
“Pakistan and America come to terms” Keep on truckin'
May 16th 2012, 9:51 by S.S. | ISLAMABAD
IN THE end, Pakistan had to eat a bite of humble pie. But for its light serving it has won an
agreement with America that should let their battered relations start to mend.
Summary:
The roads were shut in a rage after American aircraft bombarded a Pakistani post near the
Afghan border in November, killing 24 soldiers and injuring over a dozen others. The incident
appears to have been a ghastly accident, though some in Pakistani officialdom suspect that it was
deliberate.
Pakistan had demanded an apology from the United States for the border deaths before it would
consider reopening the route, or accommodating the Americans on other issues. As it happens,
the government has chosen to go ahead without the apology, which leaves it in an awkward
position at home.
Historical Background
It is thought that the fee will come to $1,500-$1,800 per truck. With the NATO traffic expected
to bring 600 trucks per day barrelling in and out of Afghanistan on Pakistani roads, that should
earn a cool $1m a day8.
The Pakistani government has temporary opened these routes to reduce the tension which
occurred after attacks and PAK-US relations but it is not permanently opened atall. But after
this thing that other route is costly than the Pakistani government was taking as $250 transit
fee for each NATO container and also said that we know that US is using far longer transport
routes through Central Asia. The both sides are firm in their demands because if anyone step
back/ showed any bent then it would not be good for its future in upcoming election. Obama if
apologies with Pakistan then its competitor will raise a question that Obama spend all his era
apologizing with other nations. Similarly, if Pakistan ruling alliances will open NATO supplies
without apology then same thing would happen with them.
Counter Punch:
MAY 03, 2012
Drone-by-Drone
Sowing the Seeds of Hate in Pakistan
by ATIF K. BUTT
Summary:
This’s been 10 years when the US invaded Afghanistan with the world’s latest and well-trained
military army including soldiers on more than 40 parts with latest guns and ammunition. After
spending quite a span on decade and billions of dollars in this region, the US and its allies are
usually but not in a position to suggest that they will have it was taken over the handle of
Afghanistan.
This’s true that the US and its allies cannot remain in Afghanistan without Pakistan’s support so
they need them but when the NATO supply was blocked it was a big blow for them. It happened
due to attack on Pakistani check post killing 24 soldiers.
Pakistan works as a frontline friend of US in the battle on terror and also they and make a report
on healthy mutual understanding and project but it was runined by NATO attack in Pakistani
check post. Opinion makers and also parliamentarians in Pakistan feel that the drone
consumption inside Pakistani range are usually fuelling hatred against States. Which has and
been conveyed towards the US administration usually which these consumption are affecting
consumers opinion beneath Pakistan badly.
An important pinnacle of the risk holders in Afghanistan is being held on 20 and also 21 on this
week to be able to discuss both the withdrawal on NATO troops during the war-torn country
starting in an start on 2014. Pakistan offers already boycotted a significant meeting regarding the
fate on Afghanistan in Bonn, Germany, on a good airstrike by the NATO helicopters upon one
8
The Economists “Pakistan and America come to terms” Keep on truckin' May 16th 2012”
Historical Background
check submit killing 28 Pakistani soldiers. And, the future drone affects were able to halt both
the possibilities of reopening of NATO provide line beneath Pakistan. Now question arises can
this summit solve the issue that is afresh now.a.days.
Counter Punch:
MAY 14, 2012
A Global Crime Spree
What’s NATO Ever Done?
by JOHN LaFORGE
Wondering why anyone would confront NATO’s summit in Chicago this month? A look at some
of its more well-known crimes might spark some indignation.
Summary:
Desecration of corpses, indiscriminate attacks, bombing of allied troops, torture of prisoners and
unaccountable drone war are a few of NATO’s outrages in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Yemen
and elsewhere. On March 20, 2012 Pakistani lawmakers demanded an end to all NATO/CIA
drone strikes against their territory. As reported in The New York Times, Pakistan’s foreign
secretary JalilJilani said April 26, 2012, “We consider drones illegal, counter-productive and
accordingly, unacceptable.” On May 31 last year, Afghan President Hamid Karzai gave what he
called his “last” warning against NATO’s bombing of Afghani homes, saying “If they continue
their attacks on our houses … history shows what Afghans do with trespassers and with
occupiers.”9
NATO jets bombed and rocketed a Pakistani military base for two hours Nov. 26, 2011—the
Salala Incident— killing 26 Pakistani soldiers and wounding dozens more. NATO refuses to
apologize, so the Pakistani regime has kept military supply routes into Afghanistan closed since
November. This is clear identification of what NATO has did till now. In this article they have
clearly punched back the policies of NATO and its attack on different nations.
Daily beast
More Attacks on U.S. Supply Lines Feared After NATO Strike in Pakistan
Nov 28, 2011 12:39 AM EST
9
Counter Punch “What’s NATO Ever Done?” by JOHN LaFORGE
Historical Background
The U.S. is bracing for a spike in terrorist attacks on its Afghan supply lines after 27
Pakistani soldiers were killed by a NATO helicopter—which may have been fired on from
a Pakistani military post.
Summary:
This incident happened when The NATO helicopter crossed the Afghanistan/Pakistan border in
hot pursuit into Mohmand,” one U.S. military official said. “And in the process the helicopter
took fire from Pakistani Army positions. We don’t know if this was fire from militants provided
sanctuary at a Pakistani base or whether this was from the base itself.”
Pakistan has closed two border crossings between Pakistan and Afghanistan, effectively shutting
down the supply routes between Pakistan and the allied forces in Afghanistan. This helicopter
did an operation in which 24 Pakistani soldiers were killed. According to The New York
Times, the Pakistanis also have closed the Shamsi air base in western Pakistan, the hub for the
officially still secret CIA drone missions against suspected senior Taliban.
After this incident the relationships between Pakistan and US were effected which were on the
edge after two major events like CIA instructor killing of Pakistanis in Lahore and murder of Bin
Laden. The Pakistani government stopped/blocked the NATO supply this a big blow for the U.S.
The second point tells us that Pakistan closed these supplies after the attack of NATO on
Pakistani check post as condemn to record its strike against this accident. This point is in the
favor of Pakistan. It was the right of Pakistan to do it.
Counter Punch:
With NATO Strike Crisis, U.S. Should Act Now in Pakistan
Nov 29, 2011 4:45 AM EST
The U.S. should agree to a joint probe into the NATO strike, use the tragedy to push with
Islamabad to resolve the Afghanistan war, and start talking about what the region will look
like without American combat troops.
Summary:
The article tells us that the Central Intelligence Agency has ordered to vacate an air base in
western Pakistan that it had been using for drone strikes against militants in the country’s tribal
areas, the Pakistani military.Pakistan had ordered this to the C.I.A. to leave the Shamsi air
base in protest over NATO airstrikes that killed at least 25 Pakistani soldiers near the border
Historical Background
with Afghanistan on Nov. 26. Moreover, Pakistan has also blocked all NATO logistical supplies
from crossing the border into Afghanistan since the clash.
This thing happened because Pakistani officials have repeatedly accused NATO forces of
deliberately attacking the Pakistani soldiers at two military check posts; American officials have
said the airstrikes were an unfortunate accident.In response to the attacks, Pakistan gave the
C.I.A. 15 days to vacate the Shamsi base, which is about 200 miles southwest of the city of
Quetta in Baluchistan Province.
XTRA INSIGHT:
U.S. Leaves Pakistani Airbase
December 11, 2011 7:12 PM
Summary:
The U.S. was told to leave the Shamsi airbase following in 15-days from the Pakistani
Government. it was ordered after a major post for drone operations in Afghanistan and Northern
Pakistan—after a NATO raid left 24 Pakistani soldiers dead last month. Pakistan has said that it
will shoot down any drone that enters its airspace. They had also threatened that they will shoot
down any drone that will enter their territory. Pakistan also closed an important supply route into
Afghanistan.
The Economists:
Pakistan and America
Till deaths us do part
Relations between the two look increasingly poisonous
They shouldn’t have been killed THE NATO helicopters that on November
26th flattened Volcano and Boulder, two Pakistani military outposts on the
Afghan border, also blasted the alliance’s own strategic interests.
Summary:
PAKISTAN’S deeply troubled relationship with America has survived so many
intense provocations this year, it will probably also get over the latest bloody
incident. Yet there is no guarantee. At 2am on November 26th helicopters—
and perhaps other aircraft—from NATO attacked a Pakistani border position
in a remote corner of the Afghan frontier. The bloodiest single strike by
NATO (read Americans) on the Pakistani army, it killed 24 soldiers and
Historical Background
injured another 13. In the past, firing in Pakistan by American forces inside
Afghanistan, against Taliban or other forces fleeing there for sanctuary, has
killed one or two soldiers on the border. This time, say the Pakistanis, two
different buildings, 300 metres apart on two outcrops, were destroyed. The
soldiers in each one, many of whom were said to have been sleeping, were
2.5km inside Pakistani territory, and the Americans reportedly had gridreferences for these long-established army posts10.
The U.S. and NATO command immediately regretted the loss of life but held back any formal
apology pending a thorough investigation. They gave condolence to Pakistani officials. But still
a question present that who first opened fire and then retreated into the army base appropriately
which was named as a Camp Volcano. The twin NATO supply routes from Karachi
into Afghanistan that supply 30 percent of Afghan war requirements, were closed down,
stopping hundreds of tanker trucks over two 1,000-mile routes to Kandahar and Kabul.
The important points mentioned here is that Pakistan should develop the foreign policy which it
doesn’t have which always results problems for them. The Pakistan has no long term policy in
any field and it is the weak thing of them.
XTRA INSIGHT:
Afghans: Pakistan Fired First
November 27, 2011
Summary:
In retaliation over a deadly NATO strike that is said to have killed at least 24 Pakistani troops
early Saturday morning, Pakistan is giving the U.S. 15 days to leave the important Shamsi air
base. The Afghans has reported that Pakistan had fired first before the NATO. It was self defense
by the NATO after Pakistani action. Yet they ordered to leave the base which is a key position
for drones.
XTRA INSIGHT:
U.S. to Investigate Pakistan Deaths
November 26, 2011
Summary:
10
The Economists “Till deaths us do part”
Historical Background
The U.S. has promised to investigate the attack in which Pakistani soldiers were killed. The
White House also expressed condolences to Pakistan for the deaths, and one official indicated
that the U.S. will work with Pakistan to investigate the deaths. But there was no word in the
White House statement about Pakistan’s subsequent decision to block supply routes for the war
in the Afghanistan, or Pakistan’s demand that the U.S. vacate its bases on Pakistani soil within
15 days. Friday’s deadly airstrike is the latest blow to the U.S.’s crumbling relationship with
Pakistan.
Electronic Media:
The channels we are taking as case study include BBC News; Fox News; CNN.

CNN.COM
2. The anchor is WOLF BLITZER on CNN NEWS with guest KEITH DANE, HUMANE
SOCIETY OF THE U.S; BRIAN TODD, CNN CORRESPONDENT; JAMES
CARVILLE, CNN POLITICAL CONTRIBUTOR; BARBARA STARR, CNN
PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT:Interview with Sherry Rehman, Pakistani
Ambassador to U.S.; Cubs' Owners in Political Brawl with Team Obama; Obama's North
Carolina Problem; Jordan Taking in Refugees; Cruelty to High-Stepping Horses; Final
Frontier Open for Business? OnAired May 18, 2012 - 17:00 ET
The summary of this show is as follows:
The anchor tells us that we're taking that you to a isolated lot beneath Pakistan exactly where
U.S. supplies for soldiers are wellness kept detainee in would like of backbiting an apology open
of both the owner of the United States. Mitt Romney is actually blaming President Obama of
undermining both the NATO alliance, an assault on Mr. Obama's policies even as he greets
world leaders towards the United States with regard to critical pinnacle visits and he says that
Obama is not performing his duties. The President also met with his new French counterpart.
We know that President Obama supports what the White House has called a more balanced
approach, not just cutting spending, but government stimulus, government spending in the
correct manner. Obama needs a support. Everyone knows that U.S and its alliance are leaving
Afghanistan at the end of 2014. But France would find other ways, different ways, to support
Afghanistan.
The crisis that involves 17 European countries has entered year three, and with Greece on the
edge of financial ruin, it's a threat to the delicate, economic recovery of the United States.
America is eager for a solution, but quiet to bail Europe out and without much of a leg to stand
on considering how its own economic crisis shaken the world. President Obama will welcome
two new people to be with him like Mario Monti, Prime Minister of vulnerable Italy, and most
notably,
French
President,
Francois
Hollande.
The reason he told is that after the blockage of NATO supply by Pakistan; US has to find other
ways to continue to provide its supplies to its soldiers. Now, Russia is significant because its
Historical Background
resisted, as you know, Wolf, U.N. and us, U.S. attempts to put pressure on Syria and Iran. Syria
where casualties continue to mount as government forces take an in armed opposition in Iran
over its alleged nuclear weapons program. Moreover, the issues discussed in this talk show was
related to NATO. Then they talked to the Pakistani Ambassador SherryRehman related to this
matter. The major things discussed was that Under pressure from that kind of public fury,
Islamabad has demanded an apology. Pakistan also wants an end to U.S. drone strikes and transit
fees for each truck to reopen the supply routes. Washington has hit back with threats to cut
billions in aid so both the nations are trying their best. It's obvious that Pakistan remained invited
in Chicago after giving a clue to re-open both the NATO supplies. As we all know, this summit
was ended as failure and the US believes that both the supply issue are solved because which
route is actually key for them as it costs much less and it is actually lots important with regard to
either sides. However after this scene that additional path is pricey rather than the Pakistani
federal government offers demanded $5000 transit cost for each NATO bottle and also claimed
we tend to know that US is actually using far long transport ways via Central Asia, is actually
having to pay at minimum double the a sum they make necessary from these people. . At stake
for Pakistan, billions in aid and the backing of the world's military super power and due to
elections no one wants to step back because they have to answer infront of their own nation.
SHERRY REHMAN, PAKISTANI AMBASSADOR TO U.Stold that I think, Wolf, we've been
allowing diplomatic cargo through the airlock which is the airlines . As far as I know, truck
cargo was suspended. Some humanitarian supplies may have drifted through, you know, and
those as you know, are humanitarian supplies. But really, no serious material that had been
crossing over unsuspended for six months. So, this is a new beginning, and obviously, it brings
good tidings. She also added that, I think that we are looking at a conversation which is a very
positive. We have negotiating things that are trying to operationized (ph) an agreement, a
memorandum, perhaps, that can be transparent. She told that Pakistan is interested in opening
NATO supplies that’s why Pakistani president is going to attend summit in Chicago because he
has plans to end its six-month blockade of the NATO supplies. The US believes that the supply
issue will be solved because this route is critical for them because it costs less and it is much
important for both sides.
Conclusion:
The talk shows tells that the guilty is Pakistan which tells us the mind set of the Western Media
that it is continually creating problems and damaging the image of Pakistan in front of western
people telling us as guilty. All the Europeans hate us because do to its media; the truth is still
missing which is a question mark on the “laws of Freedom of expression” because you are
allowed to speak freely but it I think you forgot the limitations because these above are some
typically events that too much F.O.S has a bad effect on people. Moreover, same your F.O.S
should have given certain limitations and boundaries both by the government and the crowd
which it supports, therefore not making it a true F.O.S, but rather a slender freedom, and a
freedom which we do not fully have. No matter what decisions you are making about Pakistan
image and are expressing yourselves freely, being mankind you must remember to value your
valuable words, and never tighten his most divine freedom: the freedom of thought.
Historical Background
However, too much freedom also can influence people gradually. Hate speech is a hot issue
against F.O.S. Without knowing truth you are doing hate speech against a nation is against /
misuse of F.O.S. For Example as media attract readers, whether they violate fact and confuse the
people’s minds. Sorry to say that your F.O.S has already gone too far and it’s time for you to rewrite the charter or limit “freedom” which people can have safer and deserve their right.
3. EARLY START WITH ASHLEIGH BANFIELD AND ZORAIDA SAMBOLIN
NATO Summit: Day Two; Afghan Exit Strategy; Pakistan role and NATO supply;
DSK Could Face "Gang Rape" Charges; Robin Gibb Dead At 62; Deadly Prison
Riot; Lockerbie Bomber Dies; Italy Earthquake Worst In Centuries; Webcam Case
Sentencing Today; Workers Blame Bain In New Ad; Alberto Cancels Cruises; Chen
Arrives AT NYU; Obama Heads To Joplin; Edwards Verdict Watch; Police Brace
for New Demonstrations in Chicago
Aired May 21, 2012 - 06:00 ET
The guest of this show was ELISE LABOTT, CNN FOREIGN AFFAIRS REPORTER;
ASHLEIGH
BANFIELD,
CNN
ANCHOR;
ROB
MARCIANO,
AMS
METEOROLOGIST.
The summary of this talk show is as follows which tells us that
The talk show tells us that the big issue on the agenda today discussed was Afghanistan
and how NATO, the U.S. and its allies can get out of Afghanistan as planned by 2014.
Secondly the major thing discussed in this show was the role of Pakistan in helping U.S
related to withdraw its routes. So President Obama is really going to have the hat out as
you say to get these allies to pay, sustain the Afghan security forces. The U.S. is going to
be paying a bulk of that with the Afghans putting in their part. The talk show was purely
biased telling the people that NATO is doing good in the world and the example they put
was when the NATO went into Libya, they helped to get rid of Moammar Gadhafi and
you see the violence in Syria continuing to escalate and again NATO is trying to bring
peace. NATO is fighting in Afghanistan to bring peace but people were not
understanding it.
“Some protests were noted in the city as At least 45 people were arrested on Sunday as
demonstrators clashed with police. This is the picture on Sunday. Let me show you what
it looks like right now. We're monitoring these pictures from our affiliate WLS.This is a
makeshift police station, police location in case of trouble today. The sun is just rising in
Chicago. We are expecting -- police are bracing for potentially more protests. That's what
it's
looking
like
right
now
in
Chicago.
Good
morning.
Chicago police say the NATO Summit attracted three men who planned to carry out
terror attacks in the city. Officials say the suspects Jared Chase, Brent Betterly and Brian
Historical Background
Church were plotting attacks on President Obama's campaign headquarters also at the
home of Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel.Actor Christian Bails says he is hoping to meet
with Chinese activist Chen Guangcheng now that Chen has arrived in New York City.
Chen, a vocal critic of the Chinese government left his country and will now be studying
law at New York University. Bale tried to visit Chen back in December while he was
under house arrest in China. The actor and a CNN film crew were chased away by
security guards then. President Obama visiting Joplin, Missouri today one year after a
devastating tornado destroyed a third of the city and killed 161 people. The president will
be speaking at the graduation ceremony for Joplin High School. Families in Joplin are
still recovering from that devastating tornado. Hundreds are still living in FEMA trailers,
unable
yet
to
rebuild
their
homes”11.
The role of Pakistan was also discussed and were asked that Pakistan was allowed to
participate in Chicago Summit when they showed interest in opening the supplies but
they deceived yet by not giving any open clue that what they have to do in this position?
Also President Obama is being called one of the most divisive and destructive political
figures that this country has ever seen, but find out who it is saying those things.
Conclusion:
The conclusion of this talk show is that NATO is doing everything for the benefit of the
people and there dream is to bring peace in the world. Similarly, Pakistan is not serious in
opening NATO supply which is not good attitude of Pakistan. It is totally biased attitude.
FOX NEWS:

Outrage Grows in Pakistan After NATO Attack
Nov 30, 2011
- 4:15 Pakistan's deeply troubled relationship with America
The summary of this talk show is that which tells us the incident of 26 November when the
NATO attacked the Pakistani check post.
There is a statement from a Kabul Afghanistan through Conor Pollock down which Pakistan
offers agreed to boycott the government meeting on Afghanistan's forthcoming beneath protest
of the mist strikes that wiped out 24 Pakistani Pakistani soldiers right now. Both the US Joint
Chiefs on Staff chairman general Martin Dempsey expressed on Monday which Pakistan is
justified beneath as angry that the situation needs to be look at with more upon that damaged one
hash of a political consequences is actually Christian.
One former State Division official expressed as one of the questions that we need to understand
is. Since you actually think Pakistan and also how we're type of maybe uneasy on you know
which aspect they're upon. That you do that you think that these mist strikes remained really
unprovoked. I think they will and I think there're provoked in the feel of Pakistan this turns out
increasingly obvious acted against my moments and our moments were there with regard to
behaving in psyche criminal. We never know until the investigation is completed and also issues
11
Transcript CNN talk show
Historical Background
a statement for sure but. Convincingly you return to selecting bin Laden upon their territory
either it's with themselves access in certain omission or mission. However our friend and also
west not reminding these people we're going after Osama bin to that's which is its statement. I do
not response indeed convincingly it around the GOP international policy question of course
Newt Gingrich made both the point. That we tend to should make remained outraged and and
also the issue should can no longer that they're frustrated however that they remained harboring
our chief. Who adversary in the people that murdered thousands on Americans and also offers set
side our interest too much. But that you understand you have which business view which we
need to hire Pakistan for their own relationship. And that it is yielding something that you
Michelle Bachmann GOP debate seemed to mean that -- it's creating such terribly valuable
intelligence but.
The anchor said that Convincingly if they will remained harboring again either intentionally or
accidentally the chief enemy participant who's in the end key protagonist folks then. They will
have to request what is actually which getting me and the concept that there is to spend them
emotional their own nuclear guns. Which turns out disingenuous. As if more than exist -moment it did not open is which behind both the why we simply -- we can't express Pakistan
sponsored terrorism school and put these people on which database why can not we tend to get. I
consider so there have remained times of programs my past exactly where I've necessity we've
marry with people who definitively don't share my values -- friend to Stalin in War II. Let them
convincingly greatest mass murderers ever in his private power but we tend to were doing which
of programs to be able to fight other mass murder and also as someone that -- war. And also
resort Europe into one battlefield so. Convincingly we are usually they can this -- there is
personally this from time to time and also stagecraft however did both the theory is which if you
feel some thing in return and also the wonder is are usually we getting anything at all really
consequently. In less than now Pakistan's offers stopped our use of Afghanistan. Which really
ares -- hidden choice we tend to should so remain focusing I consider instead on beefing off
supply ways via Central Asia.
Young harder but that you can come across the Caspian convincingly go through Georgia Azerbaijan, Caspian and also Turkmenistan and also Afghanistan.Which -- remain better for later
of Afghanistan to promote provide routes to promote a good economy that is more oriented to
countries besides.Pakistan actually we simply paying Pakistan sort of stay in preserve rather than
both the status quo we tend to we tend to we do not moving -- either method. But that is both the
safest country I consider so the -- is actually divided into two general categories someone is
actually economic services in an other. Is actually military assistance both the economic
assistance turns out most definitely to be able to fund error if you try to correlate usaidwith.
Losses of corruption and also developing transparency financial development go back.
Accomplish you do this over ten years over twenty many years over thirty many years that you
can't connect these people. Because if that you pour money into corrupt computer it's certain to
to be able to go towards the people who are corrupt and -- military help to be able to Pakistan a
federal government make sure we have such friends there however they make.
Historical Background
Conclusion:
This talk show states that it is proving that Pakistan is guilty of everything because they fired
first and NATO did was in defense. It is also pointing out or taunting on Pakistan that the
incident brought distances between Pak-US relations include the shooting of two Pakistanis in
Lahore by a C.I.A. contractor, the Navy SEALs raid in Abbottabad that killed Osama bin
Laden and the deadly airstrike in November BUT this report caused more distances between
these nations which could not be removed. The most important point discussed in this article
confuses the reader by saying that American officials did not trust their Pakistani counterparts
enough to give them detailed information about American troop locations in Afghanistan. The
reality is that there is no border clearly defined on the incident place where NATO killed 24
soldiers.
Historical Background
Chapter 3
Muneeb Sheikh, Rhamsha Hassan
Local Media Coverage on NATOSupply Routes closure from
November 2012 to May 2012
Introduction:
In this world of communication where there is no hurdles present in the flow of communication;
yet we are limited to access the true information. While doing research on the “Local Media
Coverage on NATO Supply Routes closure from November 2012 to May 2012” but being
local viewers we were able to get detailed information related to this issue. We divided our work
different categories which are as follows.
The sequence of discussion is as follows:
5.
6.
7.
8.
Print Media
Blogs
Magazines
Electronic Media
Print Media
December 2012:
The News:
Pakistan: Nationwide Protests Against NATO Attack Continue
Associated Press of Pakistan
December 1, 2011
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. Nation-wide protests against a lethal NATO attack that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers
continued on Wednesday.
2. The resolution said that the NATO attack was in violation of international laws and was
an assault on Pakistan’s sovereignty.
3. The Lahore High Court (LHC) allowed lawyers to hold a rally on the Mall Road.
Historical Background
January 2012:
Pakistani Parliamentary Committee Deliberates On NATO Strike
DailyTimes
January,2,2012
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. The
top
parliamentary
body
on
national
security
will
hold
deliberations about the terms of engagement with the United States in the
backdrop of the NATO air strike on November 26 in a meeting, scheduled to beheld
today (Monday).
2. The immense USpressure for resumption of supply routes to its forces in Afghanistan,
an issuethat the government has asked the committee to decide about.
3. The killing triggered anoutrage in the country and the government decided to cut off
NATO supply routes.
4. Sources added that discussions had already started about imposing a tax on allthe
NATO supplies passing through Pakistan and that it would also come up duringthe
national security committee meeting.
Conclusion:
The article states that:
1. The Parliament of Pakistan wants good ties with Pakistan and similarly, wants a positive
approach from them to get this process of relation continues.
2. Both the compensation is from both sides to reach at the solution but the major issue still
present of rampant of aid by US after blockage of routes.
March 2012:
The Economic Times
Pakistan panel mulls proposal to link NATO supply to drone attacks
Mar 31, 2012
The framing of few important points are as follows:
Historical Background
1. The panel also dropped three key proposals related to the use of airbases, the presence of
foreign intelligence operatives and covert operations by foreign troops that were part of
the recommendations.
2. The Parliamentary Committee on National Security had said in its recommendations that
the "use of Pakistani bases or airspace by foreign forces would require parliamentary
approval" and that there "should be prior permission and transparency on the number and
presence of foreign intelligence operatives in Pakistan".
April 2012:
The Economic Times
Pakistan's interests will be basis for reopening NATO supply
Apr 5, 2012
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. In a meeting with US Deputy Secretary of State Thomas Nides at the Governor's House
in Lahore yesterday evening, Zardari said the government will make a final decision on
reopening the supply routes after parliamentarians debate recommendations made by the
Parliamentary Committee on National Security.
2. The government subsequently ordered a review of Pakistan-US relations but the exercise
has stalled due to reservations expressed by the main opposition PML-N.
3. Pakistan-US relations should be based on mutual respect and mutual interest,
4. He said the international community and NATO and ISAF should address the issue of
drugs and eliminate the funding of militants.
May 2012:
Voice Of America
Ayaz Gul
May 14, 2012
Historical Background

Pakistan Signals NATO Supply Routes Could Be Reopened
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. The incident led to the suspension of already tense ties between Islamabad and
Washington as well as Pakistan’s counter-insurgency cooperation with international
forces in Afghanistan.
2. The Pakistani government demanded a U.S. apology for the deadly cross-border
attack and an immediate end to U.S. drone attacks inside Pakistan targeting al-Qaida
and Taliban-linked militants.
3. Talks have also faced difficulties because Islamabad wants to impose heavy taxes on
future convoys carrying supplies for international forces in Afghanistan.
4. American diplomatic sources say the charges are too high.
5. Reopening the supply lines could also free up more than a billion dollars in U.S.
military aid that was withheld last year.
Conclusion:
This article is totally biased:
1. It is proving that Pakistan is guilty of everything because they fired first and NATO did
was in defense.
2. The most important point discussed in this article confuses the reader by saying that
American officials did not trust their Pakistani counterparts enough to give them detailed
information about American troop locations in Afghanistan. The reality is that there is no
border clearly defined on the incident place where NATO killed 24 soldiers.
The Dawn
Pakistan 'to move on' over NATO supply
May 15 2012
Sajjad Tarakzai
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. Foreign Minister HinaRabbaniKhar made the remarks on Monday, the day before
Pakistani leaders are to discuss ending the blockade, and so cave in to a key demand
from the West in time to attend a NATO summit in Chicago on May 20-21.
2. "It was important to make a point; Pakistan has made a point and we now need to
move on and go into a positive zone and try to conduct our relations," Pakistan's
foreign minister told a news conference.
Historical Background
3. Pakistani and US officials spent the weekend locked in talks on reaching an
understanding to govern fees, logistics and other obligations should trucks again carry
NATO supplies through Pakistan.
4. US General John Allen, the NATO commander in Afghanistan, said he was "very
encouraged" by the talks, which concentrated on improving border co-ordination.
Conclusion:
In this article,
1. It's clear that the NATO supplies reopening is in the benefit of both parts in several
manners.
2. But it tells us that the refusal of apology which indicates that it will affect the US repute
in the eyes of the people. Pakistan is divided into different thoughts and cultures which is
ruling by opinion leaders which will bring different thoughts for US in front of their
followers so dual minded set will form after that rejection.
3. HinaRabbani interview is actually clear diagnosis of what will happen? Chicago meeting
is about forthcoming of Afghanistan once the withdrawal of Americans and also NATO
in 2014.
4. Both the compensation is from both sides to reach at the solution but the major issue still
present of rampant of aid by US after blockage of routes
The Express Tribune
Confrontation over?: All set to unblock NATO supply routes
By Kamran Yousaf / Sumera Khan
Published: May 15, 2012
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. The meetings followed Sunday’s huddle of top military commanders from Pakistan,
Afghanistan and Nato in Rawalpindi where, according to officials, the issues of Nato
supply routes and last year’s deadly US air raid were also discussed.
2. On Monday, back-to-back statements by Prime Minister YousafRazaGilani and
Foreign Minister HinaRabbaniKhar made it abundantly clear that the government is
ready to drop its insistence on a formal US apology over the killing of two dozen
Pakistani troops in the airstrikes on border posts in Salala, Mohmand Agency.
3. Gilani conceded that “Pakistan and the US are engaged in a dialogue for the
resumption of Nato supplies in light of parliament’s recommendations.”
4. “There are protests in Islamabad, there are protests in other cities against drone
attacks, but why there are no such protests in the tribal areas,” the minister
questioned.
Historical Background
5. Ahead of the key meeting of the Defence Committee of the Cabinet today (Tuesday),
the Kaira-Khar press conference is being seen as an attempt to prepare ground for a
possible decision to lift the blockade.

The Express Tribune
Pakistan will Restore Conditional Nato Supply
16 May, 2012
By Zaheerul Hassan
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. According to President's spokesman Sectary General of Nato has called President
Zardari on Phone and officially invited him for North Atlantic Treaty Organisation
(Nato).
2. Early on May 11, 2012, Nato Secretary Gen Andre Fohg Rasmussen said that
Pakistan had not been invited to Nato conference in Chicago.
3. Reportedly, the participants of the said meeting have been agreed to conditional
supply of food items and other stuff (less arms and ammunition) to 130000 Nato's
troops deployed in Afghanistan.
4. Pakistani willingness of restoring of Nato supply reveals that apparently, US and
Nato countries remained successful in played dirty tricks of pressurizing Pakistan
over the Nato issue instead seeking apology over violating Pakistan sovereignty while
attacking Salala Check Post.
5. . Actually, the discontinuation of supplies has frustrated Nato and U.S has weighed
various options of supply of cargo but failed to go for change in supply route since it
can bring devastating effects on already crumbling U.S and European economy.
6. Pakistan should also ask US to release outstanding Coalition Support Fund (CSF)
worth $1.2 billion, which has been withheld since December 2010.
Conclusion:
According to this article,
1. It is clear that western media is hoping that Pakistan is interested in opening NATO
supplies that’s why Pakistani president is going to attend summit in Chicago because he
has plans to end its six-month blockade of the NATO supplies. The US believes that the
Historical Background
supply issue will be solved because this route is critical for them because it costs less and
it is much important for both sides.
2. It is pointing on the military establishment that they are forcing the government to open
supplies because the US has frozen the aid. It tells that military wants to could free up
over $1 billion in frozen by U.S.
3. At the end again they showed the biased attitude by putting an example that Pakistani
Islamic parties are the biggest hurdle in the opening of supplies because Pakistan is under
the influence of Taliban.
The Express Tribune
18th May 2012
Advantage from Nato supply route will not last forever: Husain Haqqani
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. With the United States and Pakistan busy behind the scenes, hammering out terms
for reopening the Nato supply route, the former Ambassador to US, Husain
Haqqani appearing on CNN on Thursday.
2. As the Americans withdraw, yes, they need Pakistan to withdraw their heavy equipment.
3. America will leave Afghanistan someday. But we will still be haunted by the remnants.”
4. “We are concerned about the future of Afghanistan. We don’t want India to create a kind
of presence in Afghanistan that the US wouldn’t have tolerated if the Soviets had created
it in Mexico during the Cold War.
5. Despite this, when Pakistan sought token retribution in the aftermath of the November
26, 2011, when a Nato airstrike killed 24 Pakistanis soldiers, it was ignored. “Pakistan
demanded an apology for the Salala incident (the lethal air strike) when Pakistan’s troops
were killed. America disregarded that request.”
The Dawn
Nato supplies not resumed despite containers crossing border: Malik
19th May 2012
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. The interior minister, who on Saturday met Jamaat-i-Islami (JI) chief Syed Munawar
Hassan at JI headquarters Mansoora, said Hassan has been invited for talks with President
Historical Background
AsifZardari at the Presidency on important national issues including resumption of Nato
supply routes and law and order situation in the country.
2. He said both, PPP and JI, agree on the point that there should be no drone attacks inside
Pakistan. “Nato supplies had been suspended to stop these drone attacks,” he added.

The Express Tribune
NATO supply restoration: DPC to march from Karachi to Islamabad
By PPI
Published: May 19, 2012
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. The announcement came after a meeting of the Difa-e-Pakistan Council was held under
Jamiat-e-Ulama-e-Islam (JUI-S) Chairman MaulanaSamiulHaq at the Jamaat-e-Islami
Headquarter at Mansoora on Saturday.
2. Addressing a press conference, Haq said the council had decided to start a march against
the reopening of Nato supply routes from the country.
3. He maintained that it would be a peaceful march in which people from all over the
country would take part to voice the sovereignty of the country.
Conclusion:
1. At the end again they showed the biased attitude by putting an example that Pakistani
Islamic parties are the biggest hurdle in the opening of supplies because Pakistan is
under the influence of Taliban.
2. This post is actually a taunt along Pakistani politicians and also is obvious
identification and image in the face of foreign media, moreover, this step qualified to
be one source for that federal government to transaction with the U.S. the important
component discussed remained which all political occasions would like to have
amazing relations with the United States however which “it can not be an disorders
relationship.” In quick, the peace street and relation is actually open up between
Pakistan and also U.S but the walk has to be bringed on both borders.
The Economic Times
May 21st 2012
US presses Pakistan to act against terror groups, reopen NATO routes
The framing of few important points are as follows:
Historical Background
1. "They discussed the importance of reopening the NATO supply lines; of taking
joint action against the extremists who threaten Pakistan, the United States, and
the region, including al-Qaeda and the Haqqani Network," a US State Department
official said after the nearly hour-long meeting between the two leaders.
2. The two sides are at loggerheads over issue of reopening the NATO supply routes
to Afghanistan, closed last November by Pakistan after an air raid killed 24 of its
soldiers.
3. Meanwhile, Pakistani presidential spokesman Farhatullah Babar said the two
leaders discussed the issue of CIA drone strikes and delay in payment of coalition
support fund.

The Express Tribune
Pak Tribune
21st May 2012
By AsifHaroon Raja
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. Finding that Pak Army was not mending its ways and continuing to defy Washington's
commands that were against the interest of Pakistan, NATO struck a deadly blow to it at
Salala on the night of 26 November and killed 24 soldiers and injured 13.
2. The US Congress proposed blocking $650 million unless Islamabad agreed to resume
supplies.
3. The US lawmakers have started dubbing Pakistan as a black hole for American aid.
4. There is a widely held perception that convicted PM Gilani badly in need of legitimacy
that he is still recognized by the west as an operational PM.
5. On his return he gave a green light and the announcement to this effect was to be made
on 15 May but in the DCC meeting, CJSC, COAS and DG ISI prevailed upon the
relenting doves to hold their horses for a while.
6. Pakistan has been on the move irrespective of the pitfalls of GWOT and its negative
impact on Pakistan's socio-politico-economic and military health.
7. They insisted that diplomatic efforts to extract an apology must continue.
Conclusion:
The conclusion is that
1. The United States suspended strikes by the unmanned aircraft in Pakistani borderlands
for nearly two months late last year, partly to ease anger over a November 26 NATO air
attack that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers and led Pakistan to close supply routes to U.S.-led
troops in Afghanistan. It was done by Pakistan as a protest and now U.S. is eager to open
the supplies.
Historical Background
2. Pakistani officials have begun publicly backpedaling on their demands and signaling that
some deal on the supply lines can be made because the Pakistan army wants the supplies
to be open.
3. Apart from these issues like drones and also the apology, the two countries targeted four
targeted things of energy cooperation: counterterrorism, the NATO provide lines, military
help payments and also the Taliban serenity process.
The Express Tribune

U.S. hopes for breakthrough in Pakistan NATO supply route talks
By Michael Georgy and QasimNauman
ISLAMABAD | Wed May 23, 2012 8:19am EDT
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. Pakistan closed the supply routes, seen as vital to the planned withdrawal of most
foreign troops from Afghanistan before the end of 2014, in protest against last
November's killing of 24 Pakistani soldiers in a NATO air attack along the Afghan
border.
2. A Western official said fees for use of the routes which Pakistan is demanding are
under discussion in talks currently focused on technical issues.
3. A U.S. Senate panel voted cuts in aid to Pakistan on Tuesday and threatened to
withhold even more cash if Islamabad did not reopen the routes, reflecting American
frustration over the standoff.
4. The Senate panel voted to cut aid to Pakistan by 58 percent in fiscal 2013 from the
request by the Obama administration, said the panel's chairman, Senator Patrick
Leahy, who like Obama is a Democrat.
Conclusion:
According to this article,
1. It's obvious that Pakistan remained invited in Chicago after giving a clue to reopen both the NATO supplies. As we all know, this summit was ended as failure and
the US believes that both the supply issue are solved because which route is actually
key for them as it costs much less and it is actually lots important with regard to
either sides. However after this scene that additional path is pricey rather than the
Pakistani federal government offers demanded $5000 transit cost for each NATO
bottle and also claimed we tend to know that US is actually using far long transport
ways via Central Asia, is actually having to pay at minimum double the a sum they
make necessary from these people. But still in vain….
2. The U.S had already cut off the aid of Pakistan
Historical Background
The Express Tribune

Pakistan Defers NATO Supply Decision
By TOM WRIGHT
ISLAMABAD |May 26, 2012 8:19am EDT
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. Pakistan's civilian and military leaders concluded a late-night meeting Tuesday without
giving a clear indication on whether they would allow the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization to resume supplying allied troops in Afghanistan through Pakistani
territory.
2. Pakistan closed the routes to protest the deaths of 24 Pakistani soldiers in a NATO
airstrike in November. The U.S., in return, has held up over a $1 billion in military aid to
Pakistan.
3. The U.S.'s top generals in recent weeks have made a push for Pakistan to reopen the
routes, which are crucial for supplying troops in Afghanistan.
4. Pakistani public opinion remains deeply anti-American. The continuation of U.S. drone
strikes on Pakistani territory and the failure of Washington to apologize for the Pakistani
soldiers' deaths has added to this sentiment, complicating the government's efforts to
soften its stance on the NATO routes.
5. The statement said Pakistan should negotiate with NATO to allow only "nonlethal"
supplies like fuel and provisions—not weapons—to transit through Pakistan.
Conclusion:
The articles tells us that:
1. Due to American policies the people of Pakistan do not like them and the feeling is
anti- American.
2. The US believes that the supply issue will be solved because this route is critical for
them because it costs less and it is much important for both sides.
3. It is pointing on the military establishment that they are forcing the government to
open supplies because the US has frozen the aid. It tells that military wants to could
free up over $1 billion in frozen by U.S.
4. Pakistanis demand an apology for opening the NATO supplies.
The Express Tribune
Historical Background

NATO supply routes: Panetta says US will not be price ‘gouged’
By Agencies
Published:May 28, 2012
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. The statement which is likely to further incense Pakistani officials follows
months of gingerly steps by the US to make up with Islamabad.
2. Pakistan had closed the land route to Nato supplies in November as punishment
for the Nato air strike in Mohmand Agency that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers
3. US defence officials have said the Pakistanis are demanding several thousand dollars
for every truck crossing its border with the supplies, up from $250 per truck before
the closure.
4. Pakistani officials have justified the demand of $5,000 per container, saying it is
“neither irrational nor out of the blue”. They added that nearly a decade of
cooperation without any infrastructure-related charges had ruined Pakistan’s roads.
5. The infrastructure was used for eight years without paying any charges. In the ninth
year, the US started paying a nominal handling fee of $250 per container to the
National Logistic Cell – Pakistan Army’s logistics arm, officials said.
Conclusion:
This article states that:
1. The deny by U.S not to agree with the price makes the situation very intense because the
hopes have been indeed of reopening the NATO supply. The U.S has rejected the amount
told by U.S.
2. The Pakistan block the routes due to killing of his 24 soldiers in Mohmand agency as a
protest.
3. The U.S has said that we paid $250 per truck before the closure.
4. The infrastructure was used for eight years without paying any charges and it has ruined
our roads and for rebuilding them we need amount so Pakistani officials have justified the
demand of $5,000 per container.
The Express Tribune
Historical Background

Reopening NATO supply: Yes or No?
By Mr. Abdul Quayyum Khan Kundi
The framing of few important points are as follows:
1. NATO supply routes through Pakistan were blocked after the Salala incident in
November 2011 in which NATO troops were involved in killing of 26 Pakistani soldiers
and destruction of two border posts.
2. Leaders are responsible to inform and educate the masses about an important policy
decision to create a national consensus.
3. The other serious concern is the lack of unity in formulation of our foreign policy.
Opposition leaders were part of the deliberation process of the draft but are now crying
foul about it. If they disagreed with the recommendations then they should have raised
their objections during the committee meetings and ascertained that it is not released until
a consensus is reached.
Conclusion:
This article is a taunt on the Pakistani politicians and also is clear identification of our respect in
the eyes of foreign media:
1. Our unity of politicians are question marked all over the world. The writer says that at
last on the few demands the politicians showed unity; were an immediate end
to C.I.A. drone strikes.
2. Moreover, this step was considered to be a source for the government to negotiate with
the U.S. the important point discussed was that all political parties wanted to have good
relations with the United States. In short, the peace road and relation is open between
Pakistan and U.S but the step has to be taken from both sides.
Blogs:
Pakistan Defence Blog
SATURDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2011
Historical Background
Pakistani truckers back Nato supply route blockade
CHAMAN: Sleeping in a freezing cab, running out of money and worried about militant
attacks, Ghulab Jan is one of thousands of truck drivers stranded as a result of Pakistan’s
blockade of the Afghan border to Nato and US war supplies.
But they and the businessmen who run what has been a lucrative trade for most of the last decade
say they support the decision to shut the frontier in retaliation for coalition air strikes almost two
weeks ago that killed 24 Pakistani troops in two remote border outposts.
”We risk our lives and take these supplies to Afghanistan for Nato, and in return they are killing
our soldiers,” said Jan, whose fuel truck is parked in a terminal in the dusty, dangerous border
town of Chaman in southwestern Baluchistan.
“This is unacceptable, and we unanimously support the government over closing the border.”
Given the current anti-US sentiment in Pakistan, drivers might not want to call publicly for the
border to reopen. There is broad anger throughout the country over the attack, and the US faces a
challenge in repairing a relationship critical to its hopes of ending the Afghan war.
”I hope Allah grants my prayer that this Nato supply ends permanently,” said Ghaza Gul, a 45year-old driver who has been in the trucking profession since was he was 10, when he washed
the vehicles and made tea. ”I would rather die of hunger than carry these shipments,” he said,
sitting on a dirty mat with other drivers at a terminal in Karachi, the port city where the supplies
are unloaded.
Despite such declarations, the drivers have remained with their vehicles. That suggests
the trucking companies believe the stoppage will be temporary. The trucks are currently parked
at terminals close to the border, some in large towns in the area.
Pakistan closed its two Afghan crossings in Chaman and Torkham, in the northwest Khyber
tribal area, almost immediately after Nato aircraft attacked two army posts along the border on
November 26. The supply lines account for 40 per cent of the fuel, clothes, vehicles and other
”non-lethal” supplies for the Afghan war.
President Barack Obama and other American officials have expressed their condolences for the
deaths and promised a full investigation into what they have said was an accident. But this has
done little to assuage anger in Pakistan, where the military has continued to describe the attack as
a deliberate act of aggression.
The government, needing to show a firm response to placate critics who have long protested its
alliance with Washington, has also retaliated by demanding that the US vacate an air base used
for CIA drones and by boycotting an international conference aimed at stabilising Afghanistan.
Many analysts believe Pakistan and the US want to avoid a total rupture of their difficult
relationship because of its mutual strategic importance. Pakistan needs American aid and cannot
afford diplomatic isolation; Washington wants Islamabad’s help with Afghanistan.For that
reason, most people think the trucks will start rolling again soon, likely within a few weeks.
”It won’t be much longer,” said Imtiaz Gul, director of the Center for Research and Security
Studies in Islamabad. ”They can’t sustain it indefinitely. It would alienate the whole world,” he
said, referring to the many countries that have troops in the coalition. Nato officials have said the
Historical Background
coalition has built a stockpile of military and other supplies that could keep operations
in Afghanistan running at their current level for several months even if the route through
Pakistan remains closed.
The coalition has reduced its dependence on Pakistan over time by developing alternative routes
that enter Afghanistan through Central Asia. Nato could seek to expand those routes, but that
would make the coalition heavily dependent on Russia at a time when ties with Moscow are
increasingly strained.
Last year, Pakistan kept the Torkham crossing closed for 11 days after US helicopters
accidentally killed two Pakistani troops. It reopened the route along the fabled Khyber Pass after
Washington formally apologised.
Militants and criminals, some reportedly working with trucking companies engaging in
insurance scams, took advantage of the situation to carry out near-daily attacks against trucks
stacked up in poorly guarded terminals and roadside rest stops. The attacks killed several people
and destroyed about 150 vehicles.
Authorities have taken stronger steps to protect the trucks this time around. Many of the vehicles
were ordered to drive south away from the militant-infested border areas in the northwest, said
truck owners and drivers. Those that remained were prohibited to park along the road, where
they were most vulnerable, and were instead put in terminals that may not be 100 per cent safe
but at least have some security.
Voice Of America
Pakistan: Time to ‘Move On’ Over NATO Supply Routes
Posted Monday, May 14th, 2012 at 8:40 pm
Pakistan said Monday talks with the United States on reopening ground supply routes to
international troops in neighboring Afghanistan are progressing well, indicating that Islamabad
could lift the nearly six-month blockade ahead of next week's NATO summit on Afghanistan.
Pakistan shut down the supply lines after U.S. air strikes mistakenly killed 24 Pakistani troops
near the Afghan border last November. The incident plunged U.S.-Pakistani ties into a
diplomatic deadlock and led to the suspension of Pakistan's counter-insurgency cooperation with
NATO in Afghanistan.
Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar said Pakistan needs closure on the cross-border attack. She
said it was important to make a point and that “Pakistan has made the point and we now need to
move on and go into a positive zone of trying to conduct our relations” with the United States.
Historical Background
But she dismissed suggestions that Pakistan is undermining the anti-terror campaign in
Afghanistan by keeping its border for NATO convoys closed.
Pakistan's Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani said Monday his government was in serious
discussions with U.S. officials on reopening the supply routes and that talks have been “very
constructive” and would “yield results.”
Pakistan's military and civilian leadership are to meet Tuesday on the issue.
After the deadly NATO air strike, already tense U.S.-Pakistani ties plunged into a diplomatic
deadlock. Pakistani officials demanded an unconditional apology. But Washington refused and
Islamabad retaliated by cutting off NATO ground supply routes to international forces in
Afghanistan. In return, the U.S. withdrew as much as $3 billion of promised military aid.
The attack also prompted Pakistan's parliament to review its future engagement with the United
States, including an end to the U.S. drone strikes. Washington says the strikes are crucial to
defeating al-Qaida and the Taliban.
A reopening of supply routes could pave the way for Pakistan to attend the NATO summit in
Chicago on May 20 and 21 that will focus on the future of Afghanistan after coalition combat
troops leave in 2014. The move could also free up more than a $1 billion in U.S. military aid.
The Express Tribune Blog
Start the rails: Of the NATO supply route
May 23, 2012
All major parties, except government allies, found an opportunity to shine their politics on the
issue. They would not tire of announcinglarge-scale protests and long marches if the government
opened the route.
On the other hand, the US and Nato are repeatedly asking Pakistan to open the route which
means that either there is no alternative for them to take equipment to their forces or it is more
expensive to export it through other routes using Central Asian channels.
Historical Background
No doubt, it is a bold step on the part of our rulers to protest against the aggression of Nato
forces, but it is also a fact that at the end, we have to resume the supply lines as war-torn
Pakistan is not in a position to go into isolation.
As containers were transported via the road route, it was not well-defined who was benefitting
from the income received from each container transported to Afghanistan. The heavy transport
has made our roads insufferable, with no compensation received per se.
It is also learnt that Pakistan demanded $5,000 transit fees per container instead of $250
currently applied which was rejected by the US and its allies.
So, it is recommended that coalition, opposition and other parties come up with a simple and
effective solution that can be directly beneficial for our country’s economy to get out of this
situation.
Since our railways have become history, why not take steps towards resuming Nato supply lines
using our railways? Transportation via railway is much more economical if Nato supply lines are
delivered from Karachi to Khyber via rail route.
According to Mussarat Ahmad Zeb, a royal family member and social activist from Swat Valley,
our country’s economy is in jeopardy and the debt is increasing day by day due to incompetent
hands. Thus, it is high time our government strikes a deal with the US-led Nato forces for the
benefit of common people and the railways.
Pakpottporri.com
Two Perspectives on NATO Supply Line Blockade
Demonstrators Protest The NATO Summit In Chicago
At Chicago Pakistan Retrieves Some Lost Diplomatic Space
Nasim Zehra
Chicago: The Chicago summit that fell in the middle of hard negotiations between two troubled
allies generated both tensions and an opportunity for both Pakistan and the United States to steer
forward the negotiations.
Historical Background
Day one at the summit was dominated with the straight forward story, put out in leading US
newspapers quoting US officials, that the US administration
for not opening of NATO supply lines Pakistan’s President Zardari gets no bilateral meeting with
President Obama. Similarly the stories that were circulated in the NATO media center by
“sources” immediately after President Zardari’s meeting with the Secretary Clinton, were that
the Secretary essentially presented Washington’s demand list ranging from opening of the
NATO supply routes to ending support for the militants and that US had taken the issue of
apology off its check list of issues that needed to be addressed. The bottom-line was that that
there was no meeting ground between the two as Pakistan presented its demands.
(NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen talking to the President of Pakistan, Asif Ali
Zardari)
By contrast day two was dominated by Pakistan clearly presenting its position on Afghanistan
ranging from Pakistan’s commitment to regional peace, stability and trade, to the setback from
the Salala attack to the sacrifices made by Pakistan and the parameters set by Pakistan’s
parliament for negotiating the reopening of NATO supply routes. He emphasized that the DCC
decision on the NATO supply routes were now being implemented by a negotiating team
mandated to do so. President Zardari also announced a 20 million dollar contribution towards the
Afghan National Forces.
Before the NATO meeting on Afghanistan began a very brief exchange of pleasantries between
the Pakistan and US Presidents also took place. The US president again spoke of the need for
Pakistan to “play its very imortant role in Afghanistan.”
Significantly soon after the President’s address, the NATO Secretary General said NATO invited
Pakistan to the summit because it sought “positive engagement with Pakistan,” appreciated
Pakistan’s commitment to Afghan peace and was hopeful about Pakistan reopening the NATO
supply lines.
Meanwhile on the Zardari-Clinton meeting as details emerge there was agreement between the
two to take specific steps on the two of the four issues on which the negotiations have yet to
result in a settlement. One, on the NATO supply routes a decision was taken that a very senior
Pakistani and US official will step in to resolve the outstanding issue of the container fee. Two,
the issue of apology could be addressed within a package agreement that could simultaneously
address all the four issues.
On the two other issues, including no repeat of Salala and no unilateral drone attacks, the two
militaries and intelligence agencies have been engaged in dialogue. While border control
Historical Background
mechanisms to avoid another Salala like attack are almost in place, discussions between ISI and
CIA to agree on specific parameters within which drone attacks would take place, are almost
near finalization. Clearly the parliament’s no drones recommendation has been translated into no
unilateral drone attacks. This will continue to weigh heavy
On the government politically while the army concedes , the best possible way out is to ensure
that these attacks take place with prior notice to Pakistan based on shared intel and also within
certain geographical areas.
Pakistan’s participation in the Chicago summit has helped the troubled Pakistan-US relations
move a step forward towards some resolution. No quick break through was expected but more
hospitality and diplomacy by the US was.
However in the middle of hard negotiations on the NATO supply routes, the US decided to use a
‘no meeting with Obama’ pressure to force Pakistan to re-open the routes. While remaining
committed to facilitating NATO’s role of ensuring security and stability in Afghanistan, Pakistan
made its case of having the right to pursue its own national interest too. This includes a demand
for US apology, no unilateral drone strikes and no repeat of Salala.
Meanwhile by indicating before the summit that Pakistan was willing to open the NATO supply
routes and then by subsequently attending the Chicago summit, Pakistan has retrieved some of
the negotiating space that it lost by unnecessarily prolonging the parliamentary process and
unwisely asking for a US delay in publicly apologizing over Salala.
Nasim Zehra is a known political columnist & TV Anchor.She was personally present in
Chicago to cover the Summit.
US-Pak Relations – The Salala Hangover!
By Imran Malik
A good strategist is one who is never caught without options. He continually monitors the
implementation of his strategy, makes adjustments and course corrections if needed while always
maintaining strategic direction and keeping the desired ends in sight. The national interests
however always remain “supreme”!
Did our strategists manage to do so post Salala?
Pakistan’s response to Salala was essentially the correct one. Instead of going headlong into a
confrontation with the US and other NATO/ISAF countries she chose to follow the strategy of
indirect approach. Her reactions were generally asymmetric in nature. She decided to apply
subtle pressures on all such US/NATO/ISAF vulnerabilities which would yield
disproportionately large and strong strategic dividends without going to war. Thus the Pakistani
reaction of closing the NATO supply routes, taking back control of the Shamsi Airbase,
Historical Background
boycotting the Bonn Conference and stopping/limiting operational, intelligence, administrative,
logistic and technical cooperation with the US/NATO/ISAF amongst a host of other measures
was justified and correct.
The strategy should have worked. It almost did. Almost.
The Errors :
Strategic Direction: As said earlier Pakistan should have kept her policy/strategy under constant
review and made prompt course corrections whenever required. The overall strategic
environment in the Afghan theater of war and US-Pak relations underwent a massive change in
the past six months or so. We should have made compatible adjustments to our strategy to
maintain strategic direction and keep our desired end state in sight. But we were static and
pedantic in our thinking and approach. And as a result events overtook us. Now we are moving
at tangents to our so called allies if not on parallel axis.
The Timing: Salala occurred in November 2011 and by February 2012 the strategic and
diplomatic environment had been so deftly managed by Pakistan that the US was ready to
apologize at the appropriate level. We should have grabbed the opportunity with both hands.
That would have met Pakistan’s major condition and would have smoothly brought the US-Pak
relationship back to an even keel within the relevant time frame. The GWOT could have carried
on as usual. However, our political government erred by asking for a deferment of the apology to
garner political mileage out of the evolving situation.
The Leverage: The closure of the NATO supply routes and the stopping of all operational,
intelligence, logistic, administrative and technical cooperation with the US actually hurt them the
most. US/NATO/ISAF/ had about three to six months reserves and stocks in Afghanistan at the
start of this issue. They successfully opened up the Northern Distribution Network (NDN) to
relieve pressure on their supplies. However the NDN was a far more expensive enterprise both in
cost and time. The US could bear the cost but could not overcome the time factor. Thus Pakistan
had by default moved into a great position to exercise its leverage over the US. And at just about
the most critical time, Pakistan let go and missed the opportunity. Pakistan was ill-served by its
strategists.
The Political Dimension: The PPP Government miscalculated grossly when it decided to exploit
the strategic environment for domestic political advantage. Unable to take a firm decision on the
issue they palmed it off to a Parliamentary Committee on National Security (PCNS) to gain time
and space to find a way out of the imbroglio. And when the stage was set for the US to apologize
and all details had been worked out they deferred it to a later time to garner political mileage out
of it. The shenanigans of the Haqqani NW in Kabul in mid-April 2012 put paid to all these
domestic political maneouverings and desires. A costly error of judgement and poor
understanding of the international strategic environment, indeed.
The Financial Dimension: Pakistan’s sordid climb down from a high position of moral strength
vis a vis US to one of a beggar has been precipitated by the Government’s terrible governance,
unmatchable corruption, destruction of the country’s economy and the pending budget
Historical Background
requirements. Its greed to milk the situation for political gains backfired horribly and in its wake
relegated Pakistan into an extremely weak negotiating and bargaining position. Our impending
elections too were a very major factor in the PPP Governments gross miscalculations.
The US Posturing: The posturing of the US Administration and some of its Congressmen like
Rep Dana Rohrabacher vitiated the environment making crisis management and resolution of the
issues extremely difficult if not impossible. Post April terrorist attacks in Kabul they started
blaming Pakistan and further dithering on the apology and other matters. Slowly and gradually
Pakistan’s leverage lost its clout. Now it has been reduced to the inconsequential.
The Chicago Summit: Thus by frittering away our political, diplomatic and strategic advantage
our President has literally managed an invitation to Chicago where, as announced by the US
spokesman, there is no scheduled meeting between the US and Pakistan Presidents! What we
may expect from the Chicago Summit is perhaps a part-release of the CSF and may be some
restoration of economic and military aid. Period. There is no likelihood of a worthwhile and
significant apology coming from any acceptable level. There is also no question of the drone
attacks coming to a halt!
Then what was all this commotion about? If after the manifestation of our policy post-Salala this
is the outcome then what have we actually achieved? Were we better off vis a vis US before
Salala or post-Salala? Where is our leverage now? We have no worthwhile apology forthcoming
and the drones will not stop raining death and destruction. Economic and military aid will
continue to come with strings. The Government’s befuddled handling of the entire situation has
allowed the fleeting opportunities to slip by unexploited. Our national interests have not been
secured either. The loss of face, dignity, self-respect and pride is additional.
Was Pakistan better off pre-Chicago or will there be any improvement post Chicago?
Pakistan FM: Time to reopen NATO supply route
CBS/AP) ISLAMABAD - Pakistan's foreign minister indicated Monday the time has come to
reopen the country's Afghan border to NATO troop supplies, saying the government had made
its point by closing the route for nearly six months in retaliation for deadly U.S. airstrikes on its
troops.
Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar's comments offered the clearest indication yet that Pakistan
is ready to give in to U.S. pressure to reopen the supply line, even though Washington has so far
refused to apologize for last year's attack and end drone strikes in the country as demanded by
Pakistan's parliament.
Historical Background
The Pakistani government is likely to face domestic backlash for reopening the NATO route
given rampant anti-American sentiment in the country and vocal opposition to the move by
hardline Islamists and their political allies still angry the U.S. killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.
Washington says the November attack was an accident.
But there could be clear benefits to reopening the route as well.
NATO supply route closure leaves 1000s jobless
Pakistan-NATO standoff leads to border party
Pakistan may tax ground shipments to NATO troops
Pakistan is keen to attend a NATO summit in Chicago on May 20-21 that will largely focus on
the Afghan war, and an invitation is likely contingent on the country allowing troop supplies to
resume. The move could also free up over a billion dollars in U.S. military aid that has been
frozen for the last year.
"It was important to make a point, Pakistan has made a point and now we can move on," Khar
said during a press conference in Islamabad when asked whether she believed Pakistan should
reopen the supply route.
A team of U.S. negotiators has been in the country for several weeks working out the nuts and
bolts of a potential agreement to reopen the supply line, said a U.S. official, speaking on
condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue. The Americans met with their
Pakistani counterparts all day Sunday and were scheduled to resume discussions Monday, the
official said.
Pakistan's parliament demanded an "unconditional apology" for the deaths of the Pakistani
soldiers and an end to U.S. drone strikes in the country. Although it did not explicitly link these
issues to reopening the supply line, they have complicated matters since the U.S. has refused
both demands.
Analysts have speculated that the Obama administration is reluctant to apologize for the errant
airstrikes because of potential criticism from Congress and Republican presidential contender
Mitt Romney. Anger at Pakistan is high in the U.S. because of the country's alleged support for
Islamist militants killing U.S. troops in Afghanistan.
U.S. officials have said in private that they have no intention of stopping covert CIA drone
strikes in Pakistan, which they see as key to targeting militants in the country who pose a threat
to the West. The strikes are immensely unpopular in Pakistan because many people believe they
mostly kill civilians, allegations disputed by the U.S. and independent research.
Historical Background
The issue is complicated by the fact that Pakistan is widely believed to have supported some of
the strikes in the past, although that cooperation has come under strain as the relationship
between the Washington and Islamabad has deteriorated.
Electronic Media:
Talk Show:SaayasatManaHai
Anchor:ShehnazAli , Abdul Qayuom , Ahemd Bilal
Guest:
Channel: CNBC
Date: 28 Nov 2012
Summary:
The program tells us that Pakistan had ordered the C.I.A. to leave the Shamsi air base in protest
over NATO airstrikes that killed at least 25 Pakistani soldiers near the border
with Afghanistan on Nov. 26. Pakistan has also blocked all NATO logistical supplies from
crossing the border into Afghanistan since the clash.Pentagon and Obama administration
officials declined to comment publicly on the departure from the Shamsi air base. In response to
the attacks, Pakistan gave the C.I.A. 15 days to vacate the Shamsi base, which is about 200 miles
southwest of the city of Quetta in Baluchistan Province. “The base has been taken over by the
army,” they said. He told that the United States officials do not comment publicly on drone
operations against militants who plan attacks on Afghanistan from havens in the Pakistani tribal
areas, operations had been reduced at the Shamsi air base since May, when a Navy Seal
commando raid killed Osama bin Laden near Islamabad.
Talk Show:Laikin
Anchor: Sana Bhucha
Channel: Geo TV
Date: 2 Dec 2012
Summary:
The program tells usan unclassified version of the report, released Monday by the military’s
Central Command, also revealed for the first time that an American AC-130 gunship flew two
Historical Background
miles into Pakistan’s airspace to return fire on Pakistani troops who had attacked a joint
American-Afghan ground patrol just across the border in Afghanistan.The 30-page report, which
expanded upon a briefing last week by the chief investigator, Brig. Gen. Stephen A. Clark of the
Air Force, also found that competing NATO and American rules of engagement related to
operations along the border “lacked clarity and precision, and were not followed.”The full report
alters and expands upon the impression of the inquiry’s findings created by General Clark’s
briefing, which had emphasized how checks on both sides failed. Among the reason the checks
failed, he said, were because American officials did not trust Pakistan enough to give it detailed
information about American troop locations in Afghanistan, and Pakistan had not informed
NATO of the locations of its new border posts.The details released Monday add to those failures
unexplained delays and a lack of urgency by NATO officers in notifying their superiors of the
unfolding late-night disaster that has plunged relations between the two countries to new
depressions.
Talk Show:AAPAS KI BAAT
Date: 12 DEC 2011
Anchor:NajamSethi
Guest: FirdousAshiqawan; Maulanafazal-ur-rehman
Summary:
In this programNajamSethi advertised to the controversies local beneath Pakistan President
Zardari save along with the government and also military posture uponNato blockade
FirdousAshiqAwan talk to both the hit and advertised about health on President Zardari and
alsoMaulanaFazal-ur-Rehman and given one statement on which but its but not the all country is
searching on because Presidents physical health there're some other key issues to whom my
attention were going to be went like on Salala supply attack beneath 2011 the Nato supply would
blocked and also absolutely no one is actually taking notice on this issue this is a key error for
my country it impacts the PAK US relations which must be tempered as soon as probably
because if we tend to wont accomplish this that would be not better with regard to our
forthcoming and also PAK US relations.
Talk Show:CAPITAL TALK SHOW
Anchor: Hamid Mir
Historical Background
Guest: Bashir Ahmed ,KamarZamanQueri
Channel: GEO TV
Date:29 MARCH 2012
Summary:
In this program anchor discusses about other features and errors of Pakistan like stress shading
and a great problem as everyone knows is actuallyNato supply path block. Different seminars of
people account for the society by which we tend to are residing like a common guy had many
other errors daily process errors which they are usually facing in general life and also presently
there are such higher class individuals who had some other errors and vice versa however any
nation offers its own markets and foreign relationships and family members to other countries so
that major problem now which our nation is looking at is actually blockade of Nato provide ways
as we all know both the Salala base attack understand as Nato assault due to them both the
supplies stop and also do not submit in Afghanistan some other parts and here the PAK US
relation also damaged and now presently there is one heavy question that is surrounding in entire
local and also international media which reopening of Nato supplies and also Pakistan parliament
wont issue both the transactions of reopening onNato provide line therefore abroad and disturbed
that are linked with Nato supplies considerably this error ought to be solved when we love better
relation to US and other countries that are linked with which condition
Talk Show: Capital Talk
Anchor: Hamid Mirr
Channel: GEO TV
Date: 17 April 2012
Summary:
The program tells us that Pakistan angrily closed the crossing to protest the strikes on its side of
the border, leaving American officials to use meetings and phone calls to try to soothe relations
and get the route reopened. Both sides indicated that they might be able to resolve the dispute
with a joint investigation.But the border closing, and the exceptional series of strikes by piloted
aircraft, as opposed to drones, signaled a general increase in tensions between Pakistan and the
United States, already uncomfortable allies that are pursuing competing interests in the Afghan
war.The C.I.A. carried out a record number of drone attacks inside Pakistan last month, and new
reports surfaced this week of unlawful executions by the Pakistani Army in areas where it has
Historical Background
opened operations against Taliban forces threatening the government. The Pakistani offensives
have not extended to North Waziristan, the prime stronghold of the insurgents who infiltrate
Afghanistan, a growing source of frustration for American officials who face a deadline this year
to show progress in the Afghan war.
Talk Show: Capital Talk
Anchor: Hamid Mirr
Guest:HinaRabbaniKhar ,DrFareedparacha , Asma Jahangir
Channel: Geo TV
Date: 5 may 2012
Summary:
In this program HinaRabbniKhar bring private interview upon GEO and anchor Hamid Mir
questions Hina on the issue of reopening on Nato supply lines and also she asked him through
reminding different features of the issue and also parliament of Pakistan wont condition any kind
of orders on reopening of Nato supply outlines and Prime minister YousafRazaGillani alone not
in both the advantage of reopening on Nato supply lines but a bit form my personal basis its
harmful effect on abroad but to some extent its power because of that Salala supply assault but if
we need to develop improve relation with US we tend to should reopen the Nato provide line
because here many errors are solved and also we developed better relations with US that is
amazing for my states future and also we should account for ourselves across abroad because
other countries are related tomato supply
Talk Show:TONIGHT WITH JASMEEN
Anchor:Jasmeen
Channel:Samaa TV
Date:15 MAY 2012
Summary:
My personal analysis on which show as the resident of Pakistan which our nation is actually
ruled by members who accomplish not even believe what they're statement to anyone live on the
camera the world is watch these people but they will don’t understand what they are statement as
we all know the Nato assault in 2011 is actually became a key problem for Pakistan and also our
leaders are usually like they will don’t pay attention to anything that which is going on beneath
their country my relation with US are going wrong because on both the stoppage of Nato provide
Historical Background
routes many other questions are concerned here issue and also our media made covered these
condition very highly and when the situation cannot better in forthcoming we may look a heavy
error in my economies and other features so reopening onNato provide routes were going to be
considered positively and also develop one better relation to other countries.
Talk Show: Opinion Maker
Anchor:S M Hali
Guest:TallatMasood ,AslamRizvi Ambassador , Rehman Malik
Channel: PTV NEWS
Date: 15 May 2012
Summary:
The program tells us that border closing signaled the limits of Pakistan’s tolerance for
interruptions on its sovereignty and for the pressure it was willing to absorb from American
officials on any range of issues, despite receiving nearly $2 billion a year in military aid from
Washington.The Pakistani government indicated Thursday that the cross-border strikes were
more than it could bear without protest. “We will have to see whether we are allies or enemies,”
said the Pakistani interior minister, Rehman Malik.At the same time, Pakistani officials tried to
contain the damage from a video that came to the attention of American officials in recent days
showing the execution of six young men, bound and blindfolded, by Pakistani Army soldiers.We
Pakistanis, facing economic collapse after the devastating floods of the summer, need American
military aid — some $10 billion since 2001 — which could be cut off from units committing
atrocities, He said.
Talk Show:NEWS NIGHT WITH TALAT
Anchor:Tallat
Guest: Hassan Nisar ,FirdausAshiqAwan
Channel: Dawn News
Date:16 MAY 2012
Summary:
Historical Background
My personal analysis upon which show as the citizen of Pakistan which condition for any nation
should be assess through its rules as we all know that rules we would understand of Pakistan are
usually not at the general that it were going to be . Such american journalists arrived Pakistan
and ask both the media which if the Pakistanis do not reopen both the Nato supplies both the
PAK US family members will not as improve in screen nor in future considerably if Pakistan
would like amazing relation with US they will should reopen the Nato resources.
Talk Show: MazratKaSaat
Anchor:Siyal Khan
Guest:HaroonAkhtar , Faisal Khan (PTI) , Shehnaz (PP)
Channel:
Date:19 May 2012
Summary:
The program tells us thatit is clear to everyone that Pakistan was invited in Chicago summit after
showing interest to re-open the NATO supplies but due to some issues the supplies are yet
closed. The issues which are hurdle in front of these are like payment on transit, apology and
internal pressures to both governments because both countries have elections near. If anyone
bends then how he/she can ask a nation to vote in his/her favor? The US believes that the supply
issue will be solved because this route is critical for them because it costs less and it is much
important for both sides.
Magazine:
MAGAZINE ARTICLES
News Line
12 Nov 2011
Historical Background
Nato supplies under attack: by Abdul Wahab
These attacks hit their climax on a good attack upon one security examine post of Pakistani
confidence forces beneath Khurram Organization in FATA upon September 30, 2010, by NATO
forces. Both the responsibility every bomb great time, attack upon confidence forces and also
target killing are usually fallened at the doorstep of the nationalist militants, however there is part
of no longer surrounding these types of consumption on NATO provide tankers between Karachi
and Mastung on Khuzdar.A few days once the October 6 assault on NATO essential oil tankers
in Quetta, a report was release in an leading paper on Quetta on account of Lashkar-e-Umar,
previously a good unknown business, caution the employer of a fire brigade beneath Kalat to
desist from trying to extinguish both the drives consuming both the NATO trailers, or else they
would be goal. Growing consumption upon NATO supplies beneath Baluchistan make been
cause of great concern of NATO and ISAF critics. The main of pursuit in Islamabad and the
Karachi-based US Consul Common met with Balochistan Chief Minister Nawab Muhammad
Aslam Khan Raisani some other members on both the provincial government beneath Quetta and
Islamabad. The uniform attaché with regard to Britian and met Raisani beneath Islamabad.
Sources in the provincial federal government maintain that NATO and also ISAF officials make
condition serious condition around the growing consumption on supplies via Baluchistan and
have necessary for ideal confidence."The provincial federal government is providing both the
maximum probably confidence cover to be able to NATO provide trucks beneath Baluchistan.
However, if NATO has us key help with capacity-building of the public and Levies Moments,
better performance can be done," the chief minister apparently advertised US and Britain
diplomats beneath his meetings with them.
Daily Nawa-e-waqt
Feb2012
Fregmented media , Fregmented nation
Are the equal persons reading Both the Friday Times reading Both the Nation also? Just how
much joke upon top exist between readers among the News and also Arrival? While there are
probably some overlap involving readers of these types of large blood circulation paper, how lots
The News customers cannot stand Nadeem Paracha? And also just how many Arrival customers
refuse learned anything by Ikram Sehgal? However its but not simply the actors that differentiate
moderates groups. Rather than contending over condition describing, different moderates groups
are just providing other circles 'news' which supports their basis. Liberals have liberal voices to
Historical Background
be able to look to be able to with regard to analysis, traditional have conservative sounds, and to
on the market publishing energy both the development of other moderates, extremists and plot
mongers have their own moderates groups and. Fragmented moderates might remain one good
business by allowing moderates groups to be able to goal appealing to be able to one specific
niche market, however the question were going to be asked either it creates errors for society. To
do which, we tend to should but not limit ourselves to be able to one or both media circles which
we are usually comfortable with, but would venture outdoors my comfort zone to know just how
other moderates groups are describing the gossip. When we see you know that media group,
including, is treating one story it was in a different way than together media group, probably we
would request ourselves and if they're reporting both the news or trying to influence this.
Nawa-e-waqt
23 April 2012
India hell burnt on destroying Pakistan says Nizami
LAHORE - Nawa-i-Waqt Group of Publications Managing Director Majid Nizami on Sunday
urged the Pakistani residents living beneath States to energetically engage in lobbying for
Pakistan to be able to protect their own homeland towards the conspiracies as hatched around the
Indians in connivance with the Americans.The MD claimed India which fundamentalist friend
US make nefarious designs to strip Pakistan of atomic control. The Nawa-i-Waqt MD expressed
India can't be my friend as this is still attempting to destabilize Pakistan and also wants to engulf
"My freedom". He said everyone will witness at first atomic battle involving Pakistan and India
and if India continued its wicked designs towards my country. However Dr Iqbal can't live to
know the creation on Pakistan, the Quaid made complete the task Iqbal made given to be able to
him or her, he added. According to be able to his vision, Pakistan and Bangladesh makes a
confederation beneath potential but both the main hurdle along the way was both the child of
Sheikh Mujib-ur-Rehman.
DAWN.com
19 May 2012
Four trucks carrying supplies for US cross Torkham
Pakistan federal government has never left prevent on the range of motion on supplies for the
diplomatic adventures, which includes both American Embassy beneath Kabul," one senior
lawful, whose dealing with the moment, said."Limit on transportation on Nato resources is still
intact." There remained study both the four cars made crossed to be able to Afghanistan upon
Historical Background
Friday. Pakistan closed country steps used with regard to containing Nato supplies to
Afghanistan beneath protest towards last year's Nato air affects along Salala border submit by
which 24 Pakistani troops continued to be wiped out.AFP gives: Pakistan appropriate the 4
containers to spend to Afghanistan for the in the beginning period subsequent someone sixmonth blockade."I can't provide both exact report however a large number other will go to
Afghanistan beneath forthcoming period. These all of are diplomatic shipments - I supposed nonNato resources," one of the lawful expressed. Approximately 300 containers of US embassy
resources, which includes stationery, computers and also printers, are was to be continued to be
stranded in Pakistan around the blockade.
DAWN.com
20 May 2012
Border still shuts as NATO seeks Pakistan resolution
A furious Pakistan hit switched the Torkham boundaries gate in its northwest to be able to
NATO vehicles beneath November on air affects killed 24 Pakistani soldiers, souring currently
fragile relations between friends Washington and Islamabad. Who departed hundreds on
containers of resources intended for both the 130,000 NATO soldiers in surrounding Afghanistan
stranded at a convey in Karachi, although both the Western relationship expressed it made other
ways of learning up with regard to both the shortfall. Six several weeks upon, Pakistan on Friday
acceptable containers of workplace supplies for the US embassy beneath Kabul to pass to
Afghanistan via Torkham, providing improve to would like that Islamabad would imminently
allowed NATO again handle both the crossing. Legal at Torkham, a pollute and mountainous
outpost where cars packed with probably energy and supper for NATO used to trundle via daily,
advertised AFP presently there was absolutely no link between resources for embassies and
NATO products. An AFP reporter that upon Sunday went from the northwestern Peshawar city
to be able to Torkham, on the unsafe Khyber Spend, confirmed absolutely no NATO when it
comes to were moving through, nor were there also any ready around the pass."We tend to are
only giving private vehicles and also commercial cars, there is even absolutely no intimation for
the reopening of NATO resources." Pakistan tribal police and also soldiers were trying to every
vehicle spending through the key iron gate on Torkham, exactly where thousands on veiled
women and kids were also passing on foot. Both the lone storing airport for NATO on Torkham
has been left with such residential vehicles and also personal trucks going to the opportunity to
park their own vehicles presently there.
News Line
31 May 2012
Historical Background
US Pak relation: A war of narratives : by Imtiaz Gul
Asia, especially in Pakistan.For 2010, the United States budgeted approximately The United
States should seriously review its commitments in South and Central $1.2 billion in economic
assistance to Pakistan." The Reuters report cited figures from the US Transportation Command
to underline that only 29% of cargo now goes through Pakistan.The Foreign Relations
Committee however, conceded that the NDN is not an ideal replacement for current supply
routes in Pakistan because a) it only allows goods to be sent to Afghanistan and not back b) it
only allows for the transit of non-lethal supplies, and c) the NDN supply route is far more
expensive than the southern, i.e. the Pakistan route; a 20-feet container via the NDN costs some
$10,000, while a similar container by air would cost about $40,000.The cumulative political and
economic loss would be Pakistan's; besides international diplomatic isolation, total suspension of
US-NATO cargo via Pakistan means substantial loss of business for almost 7000 trucks that are
involved in these supplies.
DAWN.com
19 May 2012
Nato supplies not resumed despite containers crossing border: Malik
LAHORE: Federal Inner Minister Rehman Malik upon Saturday clarified that the provide cars
passed into Afghanistan upon Friday didn't belong to Nato when he denies resumption of Nato
provide routes via Pakistani dirt, DawnNew reported.Both the inner minister, who upon Saturday
met Jamaat-i-Islami chief Syed Munawar Hassan on JI headquarters Mansoora, expressed
Hassan offers been asked for talks to President Asif Zardari around the Government on key
government issues which includes resumption of Nato supply ways and regulation and also order
example in the country. Speaking to moderates representatives after the date, Malik said both the
Pakistan People's Party-led coalition federal government is subsequent the guidelines and also
principles brought around the parliament regarding resumption on provide routes via Pakistan.
He said both, PPP and also JI, agree on both the component that presently there should be no
drone consumption inside Pakistan.
MAGAZINE ARTICLES
News Line
Historical Background
12 Nov 2011
Nato supplies under attack: by Abdul Wahab
These attacks hit their climax on a good attack upon one security examine post of Pakistani
confidence forces beneath Khurram Organization in FATA upon September 30, 2010, by NATO
forces. Both the responsibility every bomb great time, attack upon confidence forces and also
target killing are usually fallened at the doorstep of the nationalist militants, however there is part
of no longer surrounding these types of consumption on NATO provide tankers between Karachi
and Mastung on Khuzdar.A few days once the October 6 assault on NATO essential oil tankers
in Quetta, a report was release in an leading paper on Quetta on account of Lashkar-e-Umar,
previously a good unknown business, caution the employer of a fire brigade beneath Kalat to
desist from trying to extinguish both the drives consuming both the NATO trailers, or else they
would be goal. Growing consumption upon NATO supplies beneath Baluchistan make been
cause of great concern of NATO and ISAF critics. The main of pursuit in Islamabad and the
Karachi-based US Consul Common met with Balochistan Chief Minister Nawab Muhammad
Aslam Khan Raisani some other members on both the provincial government beneath Quetta and
Islamabad. The uniform attaché with regard to Britian and met Raisani beneath Islamabad.
Sources in the provincial federal government maintain that NATO and also ISAF officials make
condition serious condition around the growing consumption on supplies via Baluchistan and
have necessary for ideal confidence."The provincial federal government is providing both the
maximum probably confidence cover to be able to NATO provide trucks beneath Baluchistan.
However, if NATO has us key help with capacity-building of the public and Levies Moments,
better performance can be done," the chief minister apparently advertised US and Britain
diplomats beneath his meetings with them.
Daily Nawa-e-waqt
Feb2012
Fregmented media , Fregmented nation
Historical Background
Are the equal persons reading Both the Friday Times reading Both the Nation also? Just how
much joke upon top exist between readers among the News and also Arrival? While there are
probably some overlap involving readers of these types of large blood circulation paper, how lots
The News customers cannot stand Nadeem Paracha? And also just how many Arrival customers
refuse learned anything by Ikram Sehgal? However its but not simply the actors that differentiate
moderates groups. Rather than contending over condition describing, different moderates groups
are just providing other circles 'news' which supports their basis. Liberals have liberal voices to
be able to look to be able to with regard to analysis, traditional have conservative sounds, and to
on the market publishing energy both the development of other moderates, extremists and plot
mongers have their own moderates groups and. Fragmented moderates might remain one good
business by allowing moderates groups to be able to goal appealing to be able to one specific
niche market, however the question were going to be asked either it creates errors for society. To
do which, we tend to should but not limit ourselves to be able to one or both media circles which
we are usually comfortable with, but would venture outdoors my comfort zone to know just how
other moderates groups are describing the gossip. When we see you know that media group,
including, is treating one story it was in a different way than together media group, probably we
would request ourselves and if they're reporting both the news or trying to influence this.
Nawa-e-waqt
23 April 2012
India hell burnt on destroying Pakistan says Nizami
LAHORE - Nawa-i-Waqt Group of Publications Managing Director Majid Nizami on Sunday
urged the Pakistani residents living beneath States to energetically engage in lobbying for
Pakistan to be able to protect their own homeland towards the conspiracies as hatched around the
Indians in connivance with the Americans.The MD claimed India which fundamentalist friend
US make nefarious designs to strip Pakistan of atomic control. The Nawa-i-Waqt MD expressed
India can't be my friend as this is still attempting to destabilize Pakistan and also wants to engulf
"My freedom". He said everyone will witness at first atomic battle involving Pakistan and India
and if India continued its wicked designs towards my country. However Dr Iqbal can't live to
know the creation on Pakistan, the Quaid made complete the task Iqbal made given to be able to
him or her, he added. According to be able to his vision, Pakistan and Bangladesh makes a
confederation beneath potential but both the main hurdle along the way was both the child of
Sheikh Mujib-ur-Rehman.
Historical Background
DAWN.com
19 May 2012
Four trucks carrying supplies for US cross Torkham
Pakistan federal government has never left prevent on the range of motion on supplies for the
diplomatic adventures, which includes both American Embassy beneath Kabul," one senior
lawful, whose dealing with the moment, said."Limit on transportation on Nato resources is still
intact." There remained study both the four cars made crossed to be able to Afghanistan upon
Friday. Pakistan closed country steps used with regard to containing Nato supplies to
Afghanistan beneath protest towards last year's Nato air affects along Salala border submit by
which 24 Pakistani troops continued to be wiped out.AFP gives: Pakistan appropriate the 4
containers to spend to Afghanistan for the in the beginning period subsequent someone sixmonth blockade."I can't provide both exact report however a large number other will go to
Afghanistan beneath forthcoming period. These all of are diplomatic shipments - I supposed nonNato resources," one of the lawful expressed. Approximately 300 containers of US embassy
resources, which includes stationery, computers and also printers, are was to be continued to be
stranded in Pakistan around the blockade.
DAWN.com
20 May 2012
Border still shuts as NATO seeks Pakistan resolution
A furious Pakistan hit switched the Torkham boundaries gate in its northwest to be able to
NATO vehicles beneath November on air affects killed 24 Pakistani soldiers, souring currently
fragile relations between friends Washington and Islamabad. Who departed hundreds on
containers of resources intended for both the 130,000 NATO soldiers in surrounding Afghanistan
stranded at a convey in Karachi, although both the Western relationship expressed it made other
ways of learning up with regard to both the shortfall. Six several weeks upon, Pakistan on Friday
acceptable containers of workplace supplies for the US embassy beneath Kabul to pass to
Afghanistan via Torkham, providing improve to would like that Islamabad would imminently
allowed NATO again handle both the crossing. Legal at Torkham, a pollute and mountainous
outpost where cars packed with probably energy and supper for NATO used to trundle via daily,
advertised AFP presently there was absolutely no link between resources for embassies and
NATO products. An AFP reporter that upon Sunday went from the northwestern Peshawar city
to be able to Torkham, on the unsafe Khyber Spend, confirmed absolutely no NATO when it
comes to were moving through, nor were there also any ready around the pass."We tend to are
Historical Background
only giving private vehicles and also commercial cars, there is even absolutely no intimation for
the reopening of NATO resources." Pakistan tribal police and also soldiers were trying to every
vehicle spending through the key iron gate on Torkham, exactly where thousands on veiled
women and kids were also passing on foot. Both the lone storing airport for NATO on Torkham
has been left with such residential vehicles and also personal trucks going to the opportunity to
park their own vehicles presently there.
News Line
31 May 2012
US Pak relation: A war of narratives : by Imtiaz Gul
Asia, especially in Pakistan.For 2010, the United States budgeted approximately The United
States should seriously review its commitments in South and Central $1.2 billion in economic
assistance to Pakistan." The Reuters report cited figures from the US Transportation Command
to underline that only 29% of cargo now goes through Pakistan.The Foreign Relations
Committee however, conceded that the NDN is not an ideal replacement for current supply
routes in Pakistan because a) it only allows goods to be sent to Afghanistan and not back b) it
only allows for the transit of non-lethal supplies, and c) the NDN supply route is far more
expensive than the southern, i.e. the Pakistan route; a 20-feet container via the NDN costs some
$10,000, while a similar container by air would cost about $40,000.The cumulative political and
economic loss would be Pakistan's; besides international diplomatic isolation, total suspension of
US-NATO cargo via Pakistan means substantial loss of business for almost 7000 trucks that are
involved in these supplies.
DAWN.com
19 May 2012
Historical Background
Nato supplies not resumed despite containers crossing border: Malik
LAHORE: Federal Inner Minister Rehman Malik upon Saturday clarified that the provide cars
passed into Afghanistan upon Friday didn't belong to Nato when he denies resumption of Nato
provide routes via Pakistani dirt, DawnNew reported.Both the inner minister, who upon Saturday
met Jamaat-i-Islami chief Syed Munawar Hassan on JI headquarters Mansoora, expressed
Hassan offers been asked for talks to President Asif Zardari around the Government on key
government issues which includes resumption of Nato supply ways and regulation and also order
example in the country. Speaking to moderates representatives after the date, Malik said both the
Pakistan People's Party-led coalition federal government is subsequent the guidelines and also
principles brought around the parliament regarding resumption on provide routes via Pakistan.
He said both, PPP and also JI, agree on both the component that presently there should be no
drone consumption inside Pakistan.
Historical Background
Syed Ali Raza Hassan
Chapter 4
Data Analysis and Conclusion
PAK-US Relations:
The relations between both the countries were remained critical since the start. The reason
behind it was that both of the nation always remained firm in their attitudes and benefits. The
relations were totally selfish for own benefits. According to former Ambassador Bilminar, “I
think Pak-US relations are somewhat rocky but both nations have always processed the benefits
instead of friendship.”
It is felt many times that these relations were seemed and balanced agreed on same agenda but in
reality they were not same in any point and certain situations. Even our politicians and rulers
showed loyalty for U.S like Ayub Khan which was seen when he was given warm welcome in
America, Zia ulHaq and famous Musharif who decided to be a partner of U.S in the war against
terrorism. The U.S chosen this country for its benefit and the first example in the history falls
when the United States first developed diplomatic family members with Pakistan upon 20
October 1947.The American aid played a vital role in this friendship because this money was
given many times. American money was first given to Pakistan in 1954, on a mutual defense
basis was record. The strategic dialogues were supposed to be a welcome step for this friendship
but it has always seen many ups and downs in its road map. The drone attacks on Pakistan by
U.S has always brought a hatred among the people. This friendship shook when the CIA
contractor killed innocent citizens in Lahore and was arrested but he was then suddenly flown
away by America. After that incident, the killing of Al.Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden in
Abottabad put a question mark on this friendship between Pak-US. Similarly such incidents were
responsible for increasing the distances between these two nations. It is also pointing out that the
incident brought distances between Pak-US relations include the shooting of two Pakistanis in
Lahore by a C.I.A. contractor, the Navy SEALs raid in Abbottabad that killed Osama bin
Laden and the deadly airstrike in November BUT this report caused more distances between
these nations which could not be removed.
Historical Background
When the war between Pakistan and India were started, it was shocking for Pakistanis that
Americans did not help us in this situation. Yet again, in 1971 and 1999, the U.S did not help us
in the war against India. But Zia got a chance when Soviet Union attacked the Afghanistan and
to defeat the super power the Americans needed someone in that region to help her to defeat that
time’s super power in the Afghan war. After a long fight, the Soviet Union was defeated and this
was the time when Taliban came into existence.
These are the few examples which depict that Pak-US relations were always used for their own
benefits.
NATO Attack on Pakistani Check post:
On 26 November 2011, the NATO planes bombarded the Salala Check Post near the Mahmund
Agency in which 26 soldiers were martyred. It was not the first time that such incident took place
but the martyrs were greater in number this time that the Pakistani Government had to take
action due the Pak army’s involvement and pressure. Pakistani official condemned this US drone
attack and they demanded immediate action called inquiry of this incident. After sometime; the
United States claimed that the incident has come into their notice; they offered their condolence
to Government of Pakistan and they assured for timely inquiries.
Pakistan closed these supplies after the attack of NATO on Pakistani check post as a protest
against this accident. Its Pakistan’s right!Pakistan reaction; stopping NATO supply Pakistani
Government demanded U.S troops to vacate the Shamsi Air Base within 15 days. According to
the inquiry report given by U.S that was released; it was mentioned that NATO had made a
drone attack as a self defense from Pakistani troop’ firing. This increased the relationship barrier
between the two countries. It is proving that Pakistan is guilty of everything because they fired
first and NATO did was in defense. The most important point discussed in this article confuses
the reader by saying that American officials did not trust their Pakistani counterparts enough to
give them detailed information about American troop locations in Afghanistan. The reality is that
there is no border clearly defined on the incident place where NATO killed 24 soldiers.
Collateral Interest:
1. United States:
The interest for U.S is as follows:
 Pakistan was charging negligible fee of transit which was just US$250 per truck.
 The price for the same trucks would have cost double; if the transportation route
would have been Russia and Central Asia. In addition, if America would adopt
Russia’s route, she would have to change her policies. In that case, Russia might
put forth several conditions before U.S.
Historical Background

Other route is costly than the Pakistani government has demanded US$5000
transit fee for each NATO container and also said that we know that US is using
far longer transport routes through Central Asia, is paying at least double the
amount they have requested from them.
2. Pakistan:
The interest for Pakistan is as follows:
 Pakistan gets aid of billions of dollars.
 Pakistan is given ammunition from America as exchange deals.
 It remains convenient for Pakistan to continue its nuclear programs since no
sanctions are imposed by U.S.
Mutual Interest:
It tells us how the NATO supplies benefits the people in different ways. An ordinary person tells
that get quality things with reasonable prices by smuggling, the government of Pakistan gets an
aid from US, for US this route is cheaper than western Asia and Russia and also Taliban gets
weapons and ammunition when they attack the containers.
The option is giving to Pakistan that its presence is important because they will help striking a
peace deal with the Taliban for US. Also HinaRabbani interview is actually clear diagnosis of
what will happen? Chicago meeting is about forthcoming of Afghanistan once the withdrawal of
Americans and also NATO in 2014.Apart from these issues like drones and also the apology, the
two countries targeted four targeted things of energy cooperation: counterterrorism, the NATO
provide lines, military help payments and also the Taliban serenity process are yet to be solved.
Threat to Pakistan:
In any case the sufferer is Pakistan; if it keeps the NATO supply block U.S would block
Pakistan’s aid and on the contrary if Pakistan opens the NATO supply, it might suffer future
repercussions from the Taliban’s side since U.S is expected to call back its troops in 2014. Now
it is up to Pakistan to make the decision whether it need short term or long term advantage.
Media Coverage Analysis:
This scenario reached its critical situation when as a time of Chicago Summit; U.S imposed a
condition on Pakistan that she would be allowed to attend the Summit when the NATO supply
would be restored. So it's obvious that Pakistan was invited in Chicago after giving a clue to re-
Historical Background
open the NATO supplies.The deal was expected between both sides after getting invitation of
Chicago Summit. But the results of the summit were not so fruitful since Pakistan had charged a
new price of rupees US$5000 per truck and the US expectations were not met. US still wants the
NATO supply to be restored because this route is actually the key for them as it costs much less.
The reason given by Pakistan for charging high prices were that NATO trucks are quite heavy
and they cause a significance damage to the roads thus for maintaining the infrastructure
Pakistan added the cost for the infrastructure maintenance. In addition to that Pakistan included
the cost for scanning and road taxes. Pakistan held the stance that it needs to boost up its
economy; this included the expenditures in upcoming elections and the budget. Regardless to
interest to any specific country U.S has either ways to pay for the NATO trucks.
The US believes that the supply issue will be solved because this route is critical for them
because it costs less and it is much important for both sides.
It is clear that western media is hoping that Pakistan is interested in opening NATO supplies
that’s why Pakistani president is going to attend summit in Chicago because he has plans to end
its six-month blockade of the NATO supplies. It is pointing on the military establishment that
they are forcing the government to open supplies because the US has frozen the flow of aid
which is rated over $1 billionby U.S.
The western media has shown biased attitude by putting the examples that Pakistani Islamic
parties are the biggest hurdle in the opening of supplies since Pakistan is under the influence of
Taliban.
The second point tells us that this summit is important for Pakistan because it will decide the
future of Pakistan when the Americans will withdraw in 2014. It is obvious that when the US and
its allies will leave Afghanistan then in my point of view, the Taliban will come back because
Karzai will also flow back but future will answer this question better.
It's evident that the restoration of the NATO supplies hold the mutual interest for both the
countries.
But it tells us that the refusal of apology by U.S would bring a domestic outcry in Pakistan which
indicates that it will affect the US repute in the eyes of the people. Pakistan is divided into
different thoughts and cultures which is ruling by an opinion leaders which will bring different
thoughts for US in front of their followers so dual minded set will form after that refusal.
The facilitation is needed from both sides to reach the solution but the major issue still present of
rampant of aid by US after blockage of routes.
The US and Pakistan talks have been failed due to the demand of the apology from Pakistan side
and in return the Americans are withholding the promised military aid.
Political Interests:
The both sides are firm in their demands because if anyone step back/ showed any bent then it
would not be good for its future in upcoming election. Obama if apologies with Pakistan then its
Historical Background
competitor will raise a question that Obama spend all his era apologizing with other nations.
Similarly, if Pakistan ruling alliances will open NATO supplies without apology then same thing
would happen during elections.
Our unity is looked upon as a question mark in the whole world. Moreover, this step was
considered to be a source for the government to negotiate with the U.S. the important point
discussed was that all political parties wanted to have good relations with the United States but
that “it cannot be an imbalanced relationship.” In short, the peace road and relation is open
between Pakistan and U.S but the step has to be taken from both sides.
Propaganda of West:
The west is continually doing a propaganda against Pakistan by giving their biased option and
telecasting the biased articles.
Our local channels are just reproducing the west propaganda because they work for money and
majority of them only spreads distress and worry in society.
Data Analysis:
The questionnaire was given to 100 sample spaces. After collection of data we got following
results which are as follows:
Do NATO Supply be opened?
Historical Background
S.N Age groups
Yes
No
Dn’t know
Total
1.
19-28
15
35
10
60
2.
29-38
9
20
1
30
3.
39-48
6
4
0
10
Total
30
59
11
40
35
30
25
Yes
20
No
Don’t Know
15
10
5
0
19-28
29-38
39-48
Educational Level Awareness:
S.N Education
Yes
No
Total
1.
Media Students
12
8
20
2.
Others Students
2
18
20
Total
14
26
Historical Background
20
18
16
14
12
Yes
10
No
8
Column1
6
4
2
0
Medias Students
Other Students
Transit Fee:
S.N
Age Group
Yes
No
Total
1
19-28
14
46
60
2
29-38
14
16
30
3
39-48
7
3
10
Total
35
65
100
Historical Background
50
45
40
35
30
Yes
25
No
20
Column1
15
10
5
0
19-28
29-38
39-48
Media Coverage:
S.N
Age Group
Satisfied
Not-Satisfied
Total
1
19-28
28
32
60
2
29-38
15
15
30
3
39-48
8
2
10
Total
51
49
100
Historical Background
39-48
Column1
Noy Satisfied
Satisfied
29-38
19-28
0
5
10
15
20
Do you like American policies?
25
30
35
Historical Background
S.N
Age Group
Yes
No
Total
1.
19-28
0
60
60
2.
29-38
0
30
30
3.
39-48
0
10
10
Total
0
100
100
39-48
Column1
No
Yes
29-38
19-28
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Historical Background
Do Drone kill terroists:S.N Age Group
Yes
No
Total
1.
19-28
18
42
60
2.
29-38
11
19
30
3.
39-48
2
8
10
Total
31
69
100
Historical Background
45
40
35
30
Yes
25
No
20
Column1
15
10
5
0
19-28
29-38
39-48