We pointed out some examples through which we raised concerns about whether or not the funds have been used. We are not particularly in a position to say that the funds were completely improperly used. What we are saying is that there is not sufficient oversight or credibility over the funds. We give a figure of over $2 billion (about Rs 8,000 crore), that figure could be even higher than that. They were just based on the information we were able to look at. We cannot fully account for how the money ($2 billion) was actually spent.

In your report you say roads were not built as claimed, and equipment invoiced that was not given to the soldiers. So how exactly was Pakistan fudging the books, and diverting the money? Also, where was this diverted money going?

We don't have an indication of where the funds are going. That is a part of the problem. The inability to account for the funds on the part of the US government has been where the problem really lies. Again, we don't even know exactly if the funds are being used for its intended purposes, because there is no sufficient oversight of the funds on behalf of the US government. And the Pakistani government, in the past, as we pointed out from January 4, 2002, to June 2007, while making reimbursement claims has not provided us sufficient evidence, information to support the claims.

You report that auditors have uncovered questionable costs, including $45 million for bunkers and roads that may never have been built, and $200 million for the operation of an air defence system, even though Al Qaeda has no known aircraft. There is also mention of overcharges for vehicles used by Pakistani troops. How have you arrived at this? It means that you must have touched upon the end use of US money, also -- so what does that money-tracking effort point to?

We pointed out that example. We suspected the air defence radar, particularly. That's where there were some discrepancies within our own defence department. The officer of American defence representatives in Pakistan suggested the money be disallowed, with the concerns that there was no need for air defence radars because Al Qaeda and the Taliban did not have air attack capabilities. On the other hand, the comptroller's office decided to actually allow those claims.

Do you think political leaders were involved in this diversion of funds?

Again, we are not in the position to say there is corruption. There are serious concerns that we have in respect to enable oversight, we have a lot of evidence that the Pakistani government hasn't been providing the US government evidence to support their claims. We think it's credible that the US government step up and do more in terms of giving more sufficient information before we reimburse the Pakistani government or any other coalition partners.

Image: US armoured vehicles patrol the Pakistan/Afghanistan border at Torkham. Photograph: STR/AFP/Getty Images.

Also read: Why Pakistan is reactivating the Kashmir front

Back

|

Next