[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 144 (Thursday, September 22, 2016)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1346]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




        PAKISTAN: FRIEND OR FOE IN THE FIGHT AGAINST TERRORISM?

                                 ______
                                 

                              HON. TED POE

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, September 22, 2016

  Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, on May 21, 2016, a U.S. drone strike 
killed the leader of the Afghan Taliban, Mullah Mansour. To no one's 
surprise, at the time of his death Mansour was in southwestern 
Pakistan. The drone strike Pakistan's longstanding support for 
terrorist groups. For example, Pakistan openly supported the Afghan 
Taliban both before and after the extremists took control of Kabul in 
1996.
  Islamabad's connection to terrorist groups is so close that in 2011 
Admiral Mike Mullen, then chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff 
testified before the Senate that ``the Haqqani network acts as a 
veritable arm of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency.'' The 
Inter-Services Intelligence Agency or the ``ISI'' is Pakistan's version 
of the CIA. The Haqqani Network is not a nice group of people. They 
have killed more Americans in the region than any other terrorist 
group.
  A leaked NATO report in 2012 detailed Pakistan's ongoing relationship 
with the Taliban. The report described Pakistan's ``manipulation of the 
Taliban senior leadership'' and claimed that the government was aware 
of locations of senior Taliban leaders, including some who lived in the 
vicinity of the ISI headquarters in Islamabad.
  The laundry list of evidence of Pakistan's support for terrorists 
goes on and on. We all remember where al-Qaeda's leader and America's 
most wanted terrorist Osama bin Laden was found: in Pakistan, of 
course. In response to the bin Laden raid, Pakistan put the doctor who 
helped us in jail and closed the U.S. military's supply route from 
Karachi port to Afghanistan for 7 months.
  While Pakistan has been harboring and supporting terrorists with 
American blood on their hands, it also has been receiving billions in 
U.S. foreign assistance. In fact, Pakistan is one of the leading 
recipients of U.S. aid in the last 14 years. Congress has appropriated 
more than $33 billion to Pakistan since fiscal year 2002.
  One of the ways we have given Pakistan money over the years is by 
reimbursing them for efforts they take to fight terrorists. But a GAO 
study from 2008 found that the Department of Defense could not verify 
the validity of Pakistan's claims. The GAO study concluded that some 
reimbursed costs were potentially duplicative or not based on actual 
activity. In 2010, Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan 
Ambassador Richard Holbrook said that roughly 40 percent of Pakistan's 
reimbursement requests were rejected.
  Each year we say that Pakistan is at the crossroads and needs to 
decide whether it is going to fight terrorists or fight on our side. In 
fact, just two months ago the State Department's Ambassador Richard 
Olson, used this very line. But the United States has been using this 
line for the last 15 years. Enough is enough. Pakistan is playing us. 
They are trying to have it both ways. They want our money and they keep 
supporting terrorists who target Americans.
  I invited Ambassador Olson to come testify before us and explain 
himself, but he refused. Instead, the State Department said this was a 
``particularly sensitive time in our relationship with Pakistan''. In 
other words, he was afraid Pakistan would come away looking bad. Well 
that might be just because Pakistan is bad.
  Now we have put conditions on aid to Pakistan before, requiring them 
to really go after terrorists if they want our money. But those 
conditions have always had a waiver attached to them and every year, 
the President has exercised that waiver. In other words, we paid 
Pakistan even though it did not go after terrorist groups. Well, for 
the first time last year, we did not include a waiver on $300 million 
of money for Pakistan. And guess what? Pakistan did not get the money 
because it had not gone after the terrorist groups. Even when there are 
hundreds of millions of dollars on the line, Pakistan refuses to go 
after terrorist groups.
  The reality is that Pakistan has chosen sides. And it isn't ours. It 
is time to change our policy towards Pakistan. We do not need to pay 
Pakistan to betray us. They will do it for free.
  And that's just the way it is.

                          ____________________