Some of it has to do with the cold-war mindset and India’s non-aligned, non violent, holier then thou BS. Also one has to credit Pakistan’s ability to fool the Americans in being the perp and the victim all at the same time. As someone said people usually rob others by putting a gun on their victims head, Pakis will rob you by putting a gun on their own heads. Its really a beautiful farce if it wasnt so detrimental to Indian interests.

Its not that Americans want to pay of Paks to love them. They just hope to pay them off to stop attacking the US, as a bonus what they do in Af-central asia-india will be met with benign neglect.

Furthermore, your tone sounds whiny. This is how the situation is – deal with it.It is India’s fault that we have absolute cowards in charge of our foreign policy and have let the interests of the US in the region subsume its own – actually, it is an insult to cowards to tar them with the Indian Government.

There is absolutely NOTHING that India can do about this – we cannot claim to be for a democratic Pakistan while at the same time rejecting US assistance towards it – and I dont think we have ever opposed this aid – of course we know that most of this is going to end in the hands of corruptocrats or military jihadists – but so does the US – and it STILL insists on giving them money !

The Pakis are using their geostrategic adavantage to the hilt – while we are passive as sheep no matter how many terrorist strikes originates against us.

For God sakes we have a PM who is ready to appease Pakistan to no end – and you are worried about the NYT clowns ?

For things to move towards the formation of Pashtunisthan, the pakistani army needs to antagonize the pashtuns some more in order for the Pashtuns to response appropriately. India needs to be “helping” things move in that direction.

“What is this “problem of western pakistan”? That the Pashtuns want independence from Pakistan and create their own Pastunisthan, thereby erasing the Durand line?”

No problem with this. Except that no Pashtun SEEMS to want this. Or even if a few do, they are much less “prominent” than “the Taliban” (Afg or Pak, I don’t think either of them want a separate land for Pashtuns). So it is wishful thinking that “Pashtunistan” will be formed by itself. Aint gonna happen.

“If Abdullah Abdullah wins the election in Afghanisthan against Hamid Karzai, then that would be an indicator that the Pakistani (pro Army) Taliban will regain control of Af-Pak, exactly as in the earlier tenure of Robin Raphael.”

Not really. This guy is Tajik, not to mention his prior association with Northern Alliance. So IMO he will be even more vitriolic than Karzai against Pak. I don’t think Pak has “good choices” in this Afghan election.

they say, Jarurat ke waqt pe gadhe ko bhi baap banana padta hai.

And regarding money US is sending hardly matters who knows where the money is coming from taxpayers, world bank, United Nations they are having hands in every thing.

“it warns against “bullying language on Pakistan’s nuclear program that would inevitably increase tensions with Islamabad and alienate the Pakistani public.” But isn’t nuclear proliferation something that it should care about? “We, too, are very concerned about Pakistan’s history of nuclear proliferation” it says, “But this aid bill is clearly not the vehicle.” Then pray, what is?”

So the entire paragraph can be summarized into “give more money to Pakistan and allow them to retain their nukes”. Given how careful the people at the NY times are about saving their own butts from being charred by a nuclear war, the above language indicates that the US’s goal is to fund all the terrorist movements in Pakistan while appearing to be “fixing the situation”. Articles like the above seem to be providing plausible deniability to the US to work with Pakistani terrorist groups to retain control of Af-Pak region.