Military aid explained: How the US may end up funding Pakistan
Getting the money boils down to US politics and Obama's vote.
The United States (US) House of Representatives voted in favour of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) 2017, a defence policy bill which may block $450 million in military aid for Pakistan unless the following conditions are met:
Pakistan does more to disrupt the Haqqani network
Pakistan releases Dr Shakil Afridi from prison
Military funding is not used to persecute minority groups
Getting the money boils down to US politics
The US Congress is part of the legislative branch and comprises the upper house (the Senate) and the lower house (House of Representatives), and the vice president.
The lower house is in favour of conditional military aid
The lower house has 435 representatives who can vote on legislation:
Republicans: 247
Democrats: 188
Most Republicans favoured the bill
Most Democrats voted against it
The bill will now go to the upper house where members must vote in favour of the bill for it to go on to the White House.
How will senators vote?
The Senate has a total of 100 seats with Republicans holding a majority:
Republicans: 54
Democrats: 44
Independent: 2
Republicans are against funding Pakistan but show willingness to compromise if certain conditions are met.
Democrats are open to discussion on provision of funds but expect the aid to go ahead.
The White House may approve of funding without preconditions.
Members of Congress are not required to vote with the position of their party i.e. a democrat in favour of the bill may vote against the party position. Lobbyists can sway representatives, but party leaders (chief whips) urge members to vote according to party policy.
So will Pakistan get funding?
There are two possible ways Pakistan can still get funding:
If the Senate rejects the bill or strikes down the House’s amendments to withhold the conditional provision of aid.
If the bill goes through both the House and the Senate as it is, the president may veto the bill, sending it back to the House and beginning the process all over again.
Correction: An earlier version of this article incorrectly linked the NDAA to blocking funding for the F-16 deal
59
Mahnoor Bari is assistant editor at Prism at Dawn.com. She studied International Relations and Middle Eastern Studies at the American University of Sharjah and International Journalism at Brunel University London. She tweets at @wlayti
Hufsa Chaudhry is a Dawn.com staffer.
Comments (59) Closed
May 20, 2016 05:32pm
So, the conclusion is:
"If the bill goes through both the House and the Senate as it is, the president may veto the bill, sending it back to the House and beginning the process all over again."
Right. too many ifs, mays.
Waiting for 'Buts'.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 05:34pm
Wake up Pakistan. Stand on your feet.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 05:37pm
For a change, Pak should stop begging to America. Try to stand up on your own feet and buy your things, with your own money as there is no free lunch in the world.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 05:55pm
If Trump wins the election, it is not going to happen. Especially if Republicans control the Senate.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 05:59pm
US has no other options but approve the F-16s. US can't afford to lose Pakistan.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 06:07pm
Pakistanis cannot accept the reality of their economic situation not even their leaders. Thats a hard truth.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 06:09pm
"Military funding is not used to persecute minority groups"
Are they talking about BLA and TTP? I believe both India and US are not too happy with positive outcome of Zarb e Azb.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 06:24pm
There is also the third possibility, the November 8 elections. It might become an election issue. Pakistan is NOT the flavour of the month. It is not unlikely that the two Presidential candidates Trump & Mrs Clinton will came out against any assistance to Pakistan. Trump is very likely to do so and Mrs Clinton will be forced to follow suit. Most of the Senator & House members fighting for re-election will also take a stance against Pakistan. I cannot see any advantage for Pakistan to pursue it. Pakistan should not allow herself to become an election issue in the US elections.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 06:29pm
@NITIN SATI: Nobody gives such a big alms today, it's a give & take policy. It is correct to say that the subsequent rulers in Pakistan cared more about filling their personal accounts than benefitting Pakistan to make it stand tall on its own feet but it is not correct to say that Pakistan has not given its best shot in curbing the menace of terrorism in & out of Pakistan. While America & partners were responsible for creating the genie of Al Qaida after the war with the soviet was over by totally neglecting the islamists fighters, it is with the courageous action by Pakistan that the gofree genie was put back in the bottle. No other country has given even half the sacrifices as Pakistan.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 06:32pm
@Atam Vetta Do you really think an average American Joe/Jane is this much clued up to know all the intricacies of any deal with Pakistan? This is more of an issue in Washington and not outside of it.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 06:37pm
Be aware Pakistan, Be aware
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 06:38pm
bottom-line, US cannot afford to lose a good and loyal customer like Pakistan. # Eyewash
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 06:40pm
@Mahmood and after that waiting for " what if" :)
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 06:42pm
Pakistan's obsession with F-16s is going to consume much of the defence policy of the country.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 06:46pm
US has lost its influence in the region all the way from Syria to Pakistan. Even KSA and Isreal are not listening to them anymore. Slowly China is emerging to be the positive factor in the neighborhood. Congress is seriously missing the big picture here!
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 06:49pm
@lafanga. Your comments are absolutely right.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 07:23pm
@NITIN SATI Yes it is possible if they bring back the billions in Panama offshore companies.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 07:39pm
@Abdulla Hussain "While America & partners were responsible for creating the genie of Al Qaida"
Yes. Pakistan had absolutely nothing to do with it.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 07:42pm
@East indian;
'Pakistanis cannot accept the reality of their economic situation not even their leaders. '
The leaders are the cause of this reality,
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 07:53pm
@Pubh - Thank you for the 'wake up call'...we would never have thought about it!!!
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 07:54pm
The same cabal was much more charged up about the Iran nuclear deal but at the end they all caved in. It is all for public consumption, honest politicians are more or less as rare a commodity in USA as in Pakistan.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 08:02pm
Pakistan will get the F-16s because Obama's tail is stuck in Afghanistan and Pakistan can help him get out. Obama's last chance to salvage an ill-deserved Nobel peace prize.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 08:04pm
@NITIN SATI - "begging to America"!!! Says who...the biggest recipient of us aid?
http://www.dawn.com/news/1194228
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 08:08pm
Not need to worry about the peanuts. Just refuse the aid and move on.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 08:18pm
@Skeptic;
Trump or Clinton, they both need to put a facade on Afghan defeat and Pakistan has the mask.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 08:18pm
The bill entailed the entire budget of the US armed forces and not merely the clauses cited. The voting details therefore has no relevance here since the stance of any representative would be based on the entirety of the document and not solely for the clauses in question which block pakistans aid.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 08:26pm
United States politics is complicated, pulled in different directions by lobbyists and can often be against US national interests. Indian lobby machinations in Washington, has influenced some US law makers in creating hurdles for assistance to Pakistan. This is what PM Nawaz Sharif's gets for his friendly overtures to India?
PM Nawaz Sharif's diplomacy has failed. Why has he not appointed full-time Foreign Minister for last 3 years? He failed to mediate between Saudi Arabia and Iran, offending both? PM Nawaz Sharif has also failed to take up with UN Security Council, India's state-sponsored terrorism, using Afghanistan and Iran's territory? We demand answers.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 08:27pm
@Ghaznavi : I agree with you. Pakistan made do without US aid for many years. Most of the US aid is stolen by the politicians and the beaurocrats, very little trickles down to the man on the street.
Pakistan should not be subservient to any aid or the little ME shaikhs.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 08:27pm
In 1980s Pakistan had no choice. In 2016 Pakistan's economic, military plus international geo-political situation has improved. In present time Pakistan has other options if F 16s are not delivered by US. US has proved itself to be an unreliable friend since independence of Pakistan. Strategic planning by authorities in Pakistan government must now have a long term plan for relying less and finally zero reliance on US. People in Pakistan have had enough of US arm twisting and pressures. Its time to reduce influence and reliance on US and bring the graph to Zero in the long run. Pakistan may continue to have good relations with US but reliance on US is against the interest of people of Pakistan and for Pakistan's independence. Time has come to end reliance and put plans in the long term to free the nation & people of Pakistan from strangle hold of the " The Great Wolf" of the West.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 08:36pm
Getting military aid from US will always be an uphill task as there will always be this condition of "do More" so why does Pakistan look elsewhere for it military requirements.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 08:51pm
Just because the F16 sales gets approved with strings or without strings---they can be sanctioned or sale stopped anytime before delivery.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 08:59pm
pakistan will get f16s but US will try and humiliate Pakistan first
do more and the likes
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 09:35pm
F-16 is a dated plane!
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 09:43pm
@Mustafa R. elected by the people like you. Please stop passing the blame just on (so called )leaders
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 10:13pm
US Senate will pass the bill and Obama will not veto....... Inshallah
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 10:31pm
@Harmony-1© The aid you mentioned is not for Indian government or government agencies. It's selected NGOs by USA with its ulterior motive.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 10:44pm
F-16's are overkill for fighting terrorism. A much cheaper jet will suffice.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 11:01pm
A country like USA who is financially and morally bankrupt is dictating terms to Pakistan to benefit their proxy war. Pakistan should decline any offers.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 11:11pm
@Changez_Khan
I think its the other way around..
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 11:11pm
Why not just get j-10 ,j-11 and jf-17s and maybe even su-35mkP ;)
The argument that we can buy so many schools for this does not really fly. It's money we need to spend on our defense. How about taxing the politicians and thier billions.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 11:31pm
Pakistan may not be worry what the decision comes,every thing will be done if corruption is eliminated.
Recommend
0
May 20, 2016 11:35pm
Their problem, not ours. They need us, they come to us. If not, we'd scrape through.
Recommend
0
May 21, 2016 12:04am
Mr. Prime Minister, Do you need 28 factories? Do you need mentions all over the world? Do you need 2million dollar watch? Do you need luxury cars and clothing? You are a leader of poor nation..."Maqroooz Awam" ....
Recommend
0
May 21, 2016 12:12am
@Skeptic you may be surprised. If trump wins it is in his favor to veto the bill. American foreign policy has always been the domain of the white house and not congress.
With this bill Congress is overstepping it's traditional role. Trump will not like that, he will like congress telling him what to do.
And Trump knows that he will be subverting the office of the President if he agrees with congress.
Trump does not need Congress to win, Congress needs trump to win.
Recommend
0
May 21, 2016 12:47am
For goodness sake; why so shameless? Its high time Pakistan gets rid permenantly of that Big Begging Bowl.
Recommend
0
May 21, 2016 04:43am
So it's official now. Our survival hinges on the dynamics of American political process.
Recommend
0
May 21, 2016 05:36am
@Changez_Khan The U.S. has provided over $30Billion directly to Pakistan over several decades. In financial terms, if the U.S. stopped providing another $1Billion, what is the risk/ loss? Help me understand why the U.S. "can't afford to lose Pakistan".
Recommend
0
May 21, 2016 05:42am
@Changez_Khan
Wake up and realize the new realities...
Old days of US vs USSR are gone
Recommend
0
May 21, 2016 05:45am
@Muhammad Farooq
Wake up!
Customer pays full price ... Not ask for help to pay for it!
Recommend
0
May 21, 2016 05:54am
Over 65 years USA dumped more than $40 plus billions in various aid but nothing changed and now Pakistan thinks that $45 billion for CPEC and everybody thinks that this Chinese investment will make Pakistan a super economy.
Why the $40+ billion from US failed to make Pakistan a super economy and Chinese $45 billion will make a difference?
Has anyone think about that?
Recommend
0
May 21, 2016 06:04am
Why do we not stop us military so called aid once and for all....
Recommend
0
May 21, 2016 06:47am
Dear Pak friends,
Pak don't need F-16. First try to become economically strong. Provide your people with proper education especially the women who are 46% educated (literacy rate) where it is 80% in Bangladesh. According to world Bank and Unicef Pak is far behind of Bangladesh in many social development index. When you will become economidally strong with better social development index, then you don't have to beg to anybody. They will come to you to sell their products.
Recommend
0
May 21, 2016 10:31am
If there are interests the aid will go through regardless of the both housses.
Recommend
0
May 21, 2016 10:33am
@Harmony-1© yes we were taking aid from usa. but not like pakistan who are ready to send thier own military for money . Also you should consider the population of india compared to pakistan. Last point, we are self-reliable now. But pakistan is depending on aid since its independence untill now.
Recommend
0
May 21, 2016 02:23pm
@ Harmony , Indian Govt. stops taking aid from any country since 2012.
Infact we have separate $1.2 Billion fund / aid for underdeveloped countries.
But Indian NGO's were getting aid from USA
Recommend
0
May 21, 2016 02:34pm
@Sachin - Excuses galore...aid is aid whichever way it comes. What makes you say you "are self-reliable now"? Charities like Gates Foundation, Ford Foundation etc spend billions still...if your government can't they are...so what's the difference except twisting facts? And before taking a dig at the army, don't forget our army has been fighting America's war for years. So, no good making sweeping statements like "begging to America"!!!
Recommend
0
May 21, 2016 11:46pm
@venkob;
'elected by the people like you. Please stop passing the blame just on (so called )leaders'
I am from Pakistan's largest city and don't know one single person who voted for Nawaz Sharif. Among 100 friends, neighbor, family and colleagues who voted, I know two who voted for Zardari.
Recommend
0
May 22, 2016 12:50am
So does that mean our relationship with US depends only on subsidies? In this case for F16. We really need to improve our economy.
Recommend
0
May 22, 2016 09:13am
The lower house is in favour of conditional military aid, what is wrong ?
Is unconditional support is your condition?
Recommend
0
