Congressman Ted Poe, Chairman of the House Subcommittee on Terrorism, introduced the Pakistain State Sponsor of Terrorism Act (HR 1449) in the US House of Representatives yesterday.
Introducing the bill, Poe said, "not only is Pakistain an untrustworthy ally, Islamabad has also aided and abetted enemies of the United States for years."
"From harbouring the late Osama bin Laden
... who doesn't live anywhere anymore...
to its cozy relationship with the Haqqani network
, there is more than enough evidence to determine whose side Pakistain is on in the War on Terror. And it’s not America’s," he said."It is time we stop paying Pakistain for its betrayal and designate it for what it is: a state sponsor of terrorism," the Texas politician said.
The bill requires US President Donald Trump
...New York real estate developer, described by Dems as illiterate, racist, misogynistic, and what ever other unpleasant descriptions they can think of, elected by the rest of us as 45th President of the United States...
to issue a report within 90 days, detailing whether Pakistain has provided support for international terrorism.
Thirty days after that, the Secretary of State is required to a submit a follow-up report containing either a determination that Pakistain is a "state sponsor of terrorism", or a detailed justification why it does not meet the legal criteria for such a designation.
Separately in a joint piece in The National Interest magazine with James Clad, who was US Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defence for Asia in the George W Bush administration, Poe called for a "radical reset" of ties with Pakistain.
Arguing that all efforts to change Pakistain’s behaviour have failed, they said it was time that the US "sets, unilaterally, the limits of its indulgence".
They urged the US Government not to let the next crisis in South or Southwest Asia deflect America’s focus. "Don’t rush to shore up Pakistain’s balance of payments via the IMF or other intermediaries, as we’ve done in the past," they said.
"Let China pay that, if the Paks wish to mortgage their future in that way. (China’s ’One Belt, One Road’ infrastructure plans for Pakistain are running into big problems)," the two said in the piece.
They said, "something must change in US dealings with a terrorist-supporting, irresponsible nuclear-weapons state, and it must change soon." "Acquiescing in the current trends is not an option."
"Changing our reactive accommodating stance vis-a-vis Pakistain won’t come quickly. But it must change--irrespective of trends in US-India relations, which have steadily come to be on a sounder footing since the George W Bush administration. There’s a tendency to think of Pakistain as part of a troubling duality, with India and Pakistain in a death spiral. That’s out of date--and we have our issues with India too," Poe and Clad wrote.