Our PM recently went to India, and make an aggressive speech about Pakistan and how elements of its security forces is actively exporting terrorism, now in light of what he said, and the reaction too it, was it a stupid comment or is he someone who has finally called Pakistan out about it’s hypocritical stance? Taking note, he didn’t say he held the government responsible, so it’s not like he’s declaring that Pakistan as a whole is the culprit.
C’mon it’s not like the government of Pakistan is gonna say, “Oh we got found out.” So what if he called them out, it’s not like it was a secret. In the end it’s a lot of talk that will result in no action and no change
Pakistan has nukes so there is little anyone can do about it. See this is why other countries want them 
Yeah but if that’s the case, why is Pakistan all in a tantrum about it? Surely it must recognise the hypocrisy it engineers.
I think it’s a mistake to think of the Pakistani government as an “it” rather than a “them.” It’s never been very clear to me how independently the ISI or the military operate from each other, but they’ve never struck me as having completely coordinated policies, and their policies may (and probably do) differ from the civilian government. If the goal is to strengthen the civilian government, then it’s probably best to avoid publicly embarrassing the civilian government or making it look weak. Certainly back-channel/diplomatic pressure is to be applied, but ultimately, the question for the UK is what is in the UK’s security interest? And I think the way this is playing out strengthens the hand of the ISI while diminishing that of the civilian government inside Pakistan. That doesn’t seem wise from a national security standpoint to me.
But couldn’t calling them out publicly force them to look at the issue and actually do something about it? I mean back channelling is fine, but the advantage Pak’s government has in that is that it would still be able to do one thing and say another, just as it’s currently been doing for years.
The British government gives Pakistan billions in aid, training and support in which very little is shown as a result. Corruption is a massive problem, as well as the culture of passing the buck. I think Pakistan should be called to account for this publicly and deserves a dressing down for it’s incompetence and duplicity. If it’s that mad about being humiliated, then next time maybe they should work a little harder in making sure they cannot be blamed for what is currently going on and indirectly killing coalition troops.
Force them? How? What is the mechanism by which a public dressing down creates such significant change in the Pakistani government? If we’re going to posit radical change from a public dressing down, then you should include the possibility that this dressing down leads to such outrage that the civilian government falls and ISI elements take control of the government, thereby causing the Afghani operation to fall into chaos. Civilian governments have fallen for less.
All governments have to appeal to their domestic audiences, and nobody likes being criticized by foreigners. While I don’t think the civilian government is going to fall over this, I do think these kind of statements incrementally weaken the civilian government’s ability to operate with respect to the ISI.
They’re going to keep doing this regardless of what Cameron puts in his speeches. What you want (and what would be nice, of course) is fundamental governmental restructuring in Pakistan. You’re not going to get that overnight, so the question is which way are you going to nudge the government. If you’re not going to take into account Pakistani domestic politics and history, why would you think your solution is going to work?
The bottom line is that the Pakistani security apparatus does not view the type of government the US wants to set up in Afghanistan as being in Pakistani security interests. If NATO is unwilling to recognize this, then the next best option is to try and strengthen the civilian government wherever possible in order to slowly minimize this viewpoint in Pakistani government.
Personally, I think NATO needs to understand exactly what the various Pakistani elements think are in their security security interests and where they place their focus. Until then, if NATO is unwilling to cut aid to Pakistan and still wants to make use of whatever Pakistani elements it can to assist in Afghanistan, then NATO governments need to tread a fine line when dealing with the various elements in the Pakistani government.
Just to clarify, at the end of the day, I don’t think it amounts to much. But I think it’s a nudge in the wrong direction, given NATO’s stated goals in the region.
Just Camerloon grandstanding.
The message wasn’t primarily intended for the Pakisanis and publicly embarrassing their government wasn’t the brightest of things to do.
I’d agree with that. The speech was made in India and he was playing to the gallery.
I’m not a supporter of George Galloway’s politics, but if he was going to make that speech he’d have made it in Pakistan.