Defense spending legislation for 2017 provides for up to $900 million in Coalition Support Funds, of which $400 million can only be released to Pakistan if Defense Secretary Jim Mattis certifies Pakistan has taken specific actions against the Haqqani network.
Last week, the Trump administration suspended approximately $2 billion in security assistance to Pakistan, resulting in an outrage from Islamabad. We consider them to be destabilising the region and also targeting USA personnel.
"What the U.S.is doing now is not good for its policy against terrorism and for a lasting peace in this region", she said, adding that Pakistan has always "played a vital role in the war on terror".
'I'm not concerned, ' the defense secretary tells reporters after the White House announced an intention to suspend military aid to Islamabad. "I also agree on some confidentiality there", he said. Mattis traveled to Pakistan last month.
"Pakistan has the ability to get this money back, in the future, but they have to take decisive action. They have to take decisive steps", she added. While the current USA administration has certainly adopted a harsh tone against Pakistan, both Bush and Obama administrations have also kept demanding that Pakistan needed to "do more" in the Global War on Terrorism (GWoT), and they remained perpetually suspicious of our role of "running with the hare and hunting with the hound".
Nuzhat Sadiq, chairwoman of the Senate Foreign Affairs committee in the upper house of parliament, says Islamabad can manage without the United States as it did in the 1990s, but would prefer to move the troubled relationship forward.
Now, the money that has been suspended at this time does not mean that it will be suspended forever, she said. It was therefore not unexpected to now see Haqqani show little sympathy for Pakistan as he is being asked to respond to Trump's tweet about his former homeland.
"We have not done anything that's irreversible here".
Pakistan is anxious about the influence of old rival India in Afghanistan, and at the same time has been battling a Pakistani Taliban insurgency that Pakistan says was largely fueled by its support for the us war on terrorism launched after the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States.
"If the funding is cut, the Pakistanis will obviously retaliate by ceasing to cooperate with the U.S.", Dr. Zubair Iqbal, an economist focusing on Pakistan, told Newsweek.
Mr Mattis said "no" again when asked if he was anxious that China would move in to fill the gap created by the absence of USA military aid to Pakistan.
"So, I wouldn't classify it is looking at Pakistan through the Afghanistan lens". Pakistan could shut down American access at any moment, and some Pakistani officials are threatening to do just that'. Exceptions may be made on a case-by-case basis if they are determined to be critical to national security interests.
Referring to crucial supply lines for United States military in Afghanistan, the NYT warned that Pakistan could shut Ground Lines of Communication as it did in 2011 after attack on a post at Afghan border.
This suspension includes FMF 2016 ($255 million) as well as prior year FMF that has not yet been spent or delivered. But cutting funding to Pakistan will do little to advance USA interests in the region, analysts note. "Well Pakistan didn't even help us find Bin Laden, even though he was living in one of their cities for years", he said in a video statement on Twitter. The State Department official defended the decision not to suspend civilian assistance. "We can not continue business as usual with the Pakistani government if they are not going to partner with us".
"There is little doubt that both are on a collision course and their bilateral relationship is set for a very rough ride if back-channel efforts are not made to address the US concerns", said Vinay Kaura, an Indian security analyst.