Has the department not done enough? We think they have done satisfactorily what they were supposed to do. That shows, from the statutory standpoint, they did what was needed to do, but not enough in view of the requirement.

(Mr Johnson's colleague adds:) The problem we found is that they just implemented the guidelines they promulgated on those funds. They should have required more documentation from the Pakistani government on military spending. However, we believed that this explains why the documentation was not necessary or could not be provided.

But is it possible that this was intentional? The defence department wants to work with the Pakistani military and does not want to pressurise them too much. Maybe that's why there were no guidelines.

Again, that story would not require guidelines. This is something they did on their own initiative. Getting back to your point about corruption, I think the US government's control is so stringent -- it would be pretty difficult that there could be corruption with respect to the US department of defence and the Pakistan government.

(Mr Johnson's colleague adds:) We make no judgments on the Pakistan government. Our entire report is about the US department of defence. We require enough information from the department of defence on aid to Pakistan. We have no comments on how Pakistan spends money.

Many experts have said that the absence of convincing action from the US government against Pakistan is encouraging Pakistan rulers into believing that they can do anything and get away with it, because the US wants its help in their war against terror.

Again, I have to point out Pakistan's role in our effort to combat terrorism and to adjust the threat of Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Pakistan is a key ally in helping us. You are correct in noting that we worked previously in terms of the military effort with the previous government and (then President Pervez) Musharraf. Now there's a new government in place.

The US recognises this and is going forward. Again, we pointed out in our report that it's good to work with the new government in terms of trying to reach some agreement on getting their assistance and moving forward on some of the initiatives we have. That's going to be a challenge in terms of getting what we get for our money.

The department of defence has pointed out, and we are seeing indications, of how the Pakistani efforts have resulted in some successes in terms of destroying some terrorists, but not the threat totally.

There have been over 120,000 Pakistani military and paramilitary forces in that region. They were not there previously. These are reports from the department of defence. So, I won't say that there is surely nothing that the US is getting for the billions that it has invested.

The department of defence has pointed out various examples where they see some successes. It has helped capture hundreds of suspected Al Qaeda operatives and these efforts cost the lives of approximately 1,400 members of Pakistan's security forces in 91 military operations that Pakistan has undertaken in FATA.

We at the GAO are doing our work. The department of defence and the department of state are the official administrative bodies to decide as to whether we got from Pakistan what we expected. There is no question that our intelligence community recognizes the importance of Pakistan. And this is the region where a lot needs to be done and there has not been the overall success we want in that particular region, post 9/11.

It's almost seven years and in terms of achieving that goal, it has not completely happened.

Image: Pro-Taliban militants with their weapons on a street in Manglor village, 10 kilometers northeast of Mingora, the main town in the Swat valley in Pakistan's North West Frontier Province. Photograph: STR/AFP/Getty Images.

Also read: Pakistan is the 'world's most dangerous place'

Back

|

Next