A meeting between Pakistani and American officials on Wednesday could “help redefine one of America's thorniest foreign-policy relationships,” report the Wall Street Journal’s Matthew Rosenberg and Peter Spiegel. They write:
“Pakistan sent a 56-page document to the U.S. ahead of strategic talks scheduled for Wednesday, seeking expanded military and economic aid in what some American officials believe is an implicit offer to crack down in return on the Afghan Taliban.
The previously undisclosed document includes requests ranging from U.S. help to alleviate Pakistan's chronic water and power shortages to pleas for surveillance aircraft and support in developing the country's civilian nuclear program.
U.S. officials say the document and the talks surrounding it could help redefine one of America's thorniest foreign-policy relationships, if it leads to a serious Pakistani clampdown on the Taliban.”
Over at the BBC, Chris Bowlby looks at what might be included in a deal with the Taliban.
“In a speech earlier this month British Foreign Secretary David Miliband said, while violence had begun the Afghan conflict, ‘politics will bring it to an end’,” Bowlby writes.
“But how would Britain and the US get a deal with an enemy not only opposed to their occupation of its land, but also diametrically at odds with many of its values?”
Some other news reports and perspectives:
- C. Christine Fair (Foreign Policy): “Should Pakistan get a nuke deal?"
- Candace Rondeaux and Nick Grono (International Herald Tribune/New York Times): “Prosecuting Taliban war criminals”
- Robert Mackey (New York Times): “Bin Laden’s daughter allowed to leave Iran”