By ERIC SCHMITT and DAVID E. SANGER for The New York Times

The Pentagon quietly notified Congress this month that it would reimburse Pakistan nearly $700 million for the cost of stationing 140,000 troops on the border with Afghanistan, an effort to normalize support for the Pakistani military after nearly two years of crises and mutual retaliation.
The biggest proponent of putting foreign aid and military reimbursements to Pakistan on a steady footing is the man President Barack Obama is leaning toward naming as secretary of state: Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts. Mr. Kerry, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has frequently served as an envoy to Pakistan, including after the killing of Osama bin Laden, and was a co-author of a law that authorized five years and about $7.5 billion of nonmilitary assistance to Pakistan.
The United States also provides about $2 billion in annual security assistance, roughly half of which goes to reimburse Pakistan for conducting military operations to fight terrorism.
Until now, many of these reimbursements, called coalition support funds, have been held up, in part because of disputes with Pakistan over the Bin Laden raid, the operations of the C.I.A., and its decision to block supply lines into Afghanistan last year.
The $688 million payment â the first since this summer, covering food, ammunition and other expenses from June through November 2011 â has caused barely a ripple of protest since it was sent to Capitol Hill on Dec. 7.
The absence of a reaction, American and Pakistani officials say, underscores how relations between the two countries have been gradually thawing since Pakistan reopened the NATO supply routes in July after an apology from the Obama administration for an errant American airstrike that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers in November 2011.
Mr. Kerryâs nomination would be welcomed in Pakistan, where he is seen as perhaps the most sympathetic to Pakistani concerns of any senior lawmaker. He has nurtured relationships with top civilian and military officials, as well as the I.S.I., Pakistanâs most powerful intelligence agency.
But if he becomes secretary of state, Mr. Kerry will inherit one of the hardest diplomatic tasks in South Asia: helping Pakistan find a role in steering Afghanistan toward a political agreement with the Taliban. As the United States, which tried and failed to broker such an agreement, begins to step back, Pakistanâs role is increasing.
For a relationship rocked in the past two years by a C.I.A. contractorâs shooting of two Pakistanis, the Navy SEAL raid that killed Bin Laden and the accidental airstrike, perhaps the most remarkable event in recent months has been relative calm. A senior American official dealing with Pakistan said recently that âthis is the longest weâve gone in a while without a crisis.â
Sherry Rehman, Pakistanâs ambassador to the United States, said, âPakistan-United States relations are settling down to a more stable trajectory.â
The interlude has allowed the United States to reduce the huge backlog of NATO supplies at the border â down to about 3,000 containers from 7,000 when the border crossings reopened â and to conduct dry runs for the tons of equipment that will flow out of Afghanistan to Pakistani ports when the American drawdown steps up early next year.
Moreover, the two sides have resumed a series of high-level meetings â capped by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clintonâs meeting this month with top Pakistani officials in Brussels â on a range of topics including counterterrorism, economic cooperation, energy and the security of Pakistanâs growing nuclear arsenal.
Maleeha Lodhi, a former Pakistani ambassador to Washington, concurred. âThereâs greater convergence between the two countries than there has been in eight years,â she said. âItâs been a fairly quick kiss and make up, but itâs been driven by the approaching urgency of 2014, and by their shared desire for a stable outcome in the region.â
The one exception to the state of calm has been a tense set of discussions about Pakistanâs nuclear arsenal. United States officials have told their Pakistani colleagues that Islamabadâs move to smaller, more portable weapons creates a greater risk that one could be stolen or diverted. A delegation of American nuclear experts was in Pakistan last week, but found that the two countries had fundamentally divergent views about whether Pakistanâs changes to its arsenal pose a danger.
The greatest progress, officials say, has been in the relationship between Pakistan and Afghanistan, after years of mutual recrimination. A high-level Afghan delegation visited Pakistan in November, resulting in the release of several midlevel Taliban commanders from Pakistani jails as a sign of good will in restarting the peace process.
The United States, which was quietly in the background of those meetings, approved of the release of the prisoners, but has still held back on releasing five militants from GuantĂĄnamo Bay, Cuba, a key Taliban demand.
One American official said there was a âbig pushâ to move the talks process forward during the current winter lull in fighting. The United States is quietly seeking to revive a peace channel in Qatar, which was frozen earlier this year after the Taliban refused to participate.
Despite the easing of tensions in recent months, there are still plenty of sore spots in the relationship.
Lt. Gen. Michael D. Barbero, who heads the Pentagon agency responsible for combating roadside bombs, known as improvised explosive devices, or I.E.D.âs, told a Senate hearing last week that Pakistanâs efforts to stem the flow of a common agricultural fertilizer, calcium ammonium nitrate, that Taliban insurgents use to make roadside bombs had fallen woefully short.
âOur Pakistani partners can and must do more,â General Barbero told a Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee hearing.
American officials have also all but given up on Pakistanâs carrying out a clearing operation in North Waziristan, a major militant safe haven.
âPakistanâs continued acceptance of sanctuaries for Afghan-focused insurgents and failure to interdict I.E.D. materials and components continue to undermine the security of Afghanistan and pose an enduring threat to U.S., coalition and Afghan forces,â a Pentagon report, mandated by Congress, concluded last week.
Declan Walsh contributed reporting from Islamabad, Pakistan.
Pakistanis for Peace Editor’s Note– Kerry for Secretary is a great choice now that Susan Rice did not work out. We love Hillary Clinton and as a Democrat and Liberal through and through, as much as we wish Secretary Clinton a speedy recovery and look forward to voting for her as the first woman President of the United States, it is high time to have a man in there as a Secretary working together with Secretary Panetta. John Kerry is a good and honorable soldier who is a patriot and will uphold American interests but will be a person who is very familiar with Pakistan and the need to have a dialogue with the men who man the barracks in Rawalpindi, regardless who happens to be the Prime Minister in Islamabad. We hope he has a speedy confirmation and no obstructionism by the Do Nothing GOP~
Like this:
Like Loading...
Pakistan: Between a Rock and A Hard Place
By Yekaterina Kudashkina for The Voice of Russia
Interview with Dr. Theodore Karasik â the Director of Research and Development at the Institute for Near East and Gulf Military Analysis (INEGMA) in Dubai.
Particularly you have to first understand that the situation in Pakistan is rather icy politically, as well as on the religious scale. Pakistan now finds itself between a rock and a hard place when it comes to how it fits into the US and Western plans to halt fighting in Afghanistan as well as to get rid of terrorist events in the northwest frontier province. So, the Pakistani press is going to be very inflamed though, not only because of the NATO Summit, but also because of the sentencing of the doctor who outed Bin Laden for a sentence of 33 years.
Apparently what happened was that the US had managed to find a Pakistani physician who was able to pinpoint the location of Bin Ladenâs compound and as a result of the leakage of this information in the US and foreign press this doctor was arrested and tried very quickly in Pakistan and sentenced to 33 years in jail for giving up Bin Ladenâs position. This is a political trial where Pakistanis want to make an example of this individual by arguing that he managed to fail the state by giving up the secret of where Bin Laden was hiding.
Do you think that this case is going to further deteriorate the relations between the US and Pakistan or is it just a root in development?
I think it is a bit of both. I think that will embarrass the US-Pakistani relations. I think that will be pressuring the United States of why did the US revealed the identity of this doctor. There is also a discussion about how this relationship with Pakistan and the United States will continue in terms of transport of nonlethal goods to Afghanistan.
Now, talking about that issue. Do I get it right that the negotiations are still under way in Islamabad regarding the transportation routes agreement, the new one?
Yes, the negotiations are still ongoing in Islamabad about transferring nonlethal goods into the Afghan theatre. And Pakistanis are using this episode to put political pressure on US to make concessions, particularly when it comes to military aid or paying of very high prices for use of this supply lines.
Are we talking about concessions in terms of money or in some other aspects?
Itâs a combination of both money and political support for the Zardari Government.
Is the US prepared to offer a political support for Zardari Government in the present circumstances?
At this time I would say that the United States is going to play quite tough with Pakistan. Letâs face it â Pakistan is just barely above a failed state. And the US needs to make sure that Pakistan does not descend in the total chaos while at the same time applying pressure on Pakistan to guarantee that the state remains somewhat coherent together.
The signals of the resumption of negotiations in Islamabad were generally seen as a sign that perhaps they could be ameliorating. And then came Zardariâs visit to Chicago. By the way, why would the Pakistanis be so disappointed with the results of his visit? What were their expectations?
I think that they were expecting to be treated more as an equal and key to solving the Afghan problem as well as to part of trying to help with the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan. But instead you had this political issues popup and then you had Zardari acting in a very strange way by missing the key events like the group of progress of all the leaders and so on. I think that they left Chicago messed.
Does the United States want to ameliorate them and what needs to be done if there is a certain desire to make them better?
Clearly a lot of problems need to be discussed and we need to find the right remedies that would help both countries work together in this difficult time. I think it is going to get more difficult as tensions build over what to do with Afghanistan and the withdrawal from Afghanistan of NATO forces. Pakistan has an important role to play in all this because of the supply routes as we talked about previously. So, I think we are going to be entering a period of more jostling for position, negotiation that could get quite ugly at some points.
Share this:
Like this:
Pakistan
Pakistan Army
Pakistanis
United States
US Army
US-Pakistan Relations
Afghanistan
Bin Laden
Commentary
Dr. Theodore Karasik
INEGMA
Institute for Near East and Gulf Military Analys
Interview
Islamabad
NATO
Obama Administration
OBL
Pakistan
Politics
U.S.- Pakistani relations
United States
US-Pakistani relations
Voice of Russia
World
Yekaterina Kudashkina