#congratulations NSC | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

coralmusiccreator-blog · 1 year ago

Text

STATEMENT ABOUT THE DR. J.J. SPYCHALA’S CHARACTER AND QUALITIES TO LEAVE A LASTING IMPRESSION ON THE WHOLE SOCIETY

The best testimonials connect with the members of the target audience on an emotional level, with a healthy dose of evidence to reassure them that the scientific pursuits have a proven track record in the groundbreaking discoveries, experiments, and thought processes.

“Warm greetings from JOURNAL OF PHYSICS AND CHEMISTRY RESEARCH. Subject: The CON−H…+NH2 Blue-Shifting H-Bond Stabilizing Effect on Z Secondary Amides and Cyclic System Conformational Rearrangement through an Alkylamine-Chain Migration Pathway.” Senior Managing Editor, New Research, By Email of May 26, 2023 at 11:10 am

“We came across your article with the title Antitumor activity of triazine mimic antibiotics for DNA-binding implications (impressive activity in vitro against a variety of tumor types in the NCI-60 screen): NSC 710607 to fight HCT-116 human colon carcinoma cell lines in vivo using the hollow fiber assay and xenograft mouse models and thought to be very innovative.” CANCER ARCHIVES, By Email of May 28, 2023 at 02:03 pm

“JOURNAL OF CANCER RESEARCH AND THERAPEUTIC ONCOLOGY promotes and publishes the articles for spreading the cutting-edge research in Cancer Research and Oncology. We came across your article with the title Selective cytostatic and cytotoxic anticancer effects of bisfunctional agents: A strategy for the design of DNA binding agents and thought to be very innovative.” Unfold Your Innovations, Editor-Cancer Research, JCRTO, By Email of April 14, 2023 at 07:59 am

“After coming across your article titled Selective cytostatic and cytotoxic anticancer effects of bisfunctional agents: A strategy for the design of DNA binding agents, we felt it very informative. We anticipate your earnest response and your interest to contribute your valuable research.” PHARMACOLOGY AND CLINICAL TOXICOLOGY, By Email of April 16, 2023 at 07:01 am

“Upon a keen observation of your scientific profile in the field, our journal takes an opportunity to invites you to join in the journal Upcoming Issue for fast growing research community. Your innovation expose globally by publishing it with our ONCOLOGY CASE REPORTS JOURNAL.” Manuscript Submission Request, By Email of May 14, 2023 at 03:47 am

“We hereby heartily congratulate you for the publication of your following paper:The CON−H…+NH2 Blue-Shifting H-Bond Stabilizing Effect on Z Secondary Amides and Cyclic System Conformational Rearrangement through an Alkylamine-Chain Migration Pathwayin Journal of Chemistry, Volume 2022, Article ID 1707245. With the same research paper you can get double benefit and it will enrich your resume.” Selected as Book Chapter, Book name: NOVEL ASPECTS ON CHEMISTRY AND BIOCHEMISTRY, Book Publisher, By Email of April 14, 2023 at 11:42 pm

“We were wondering if you would be interested in being a part of our editorial board. By joining our editorial board you will be given opportunities to network and collaborate with people within your field. Would you be interested in joining the editorial board? Let me know your preferences and shall be in touch right away.” FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY – Editors London Office, UK, By Email of April 18, 2023 at 11:32 am, Final Reminder of May, 2023 at 04:37 pm

“The journal welcomes the submission of original manuscripts that meet the general criteria of significance and scientific excellence. Based on your record of contributions in this field, we would like to invite you to submit an article for the upcoming issue in the fields of Cancer Science and Clinical Oncology. Open Access Publishing is essential to reach a wider audience and it is a key metric to increase citations.” SAJ CANCER SCIENCE, By Email of April 14, 2023 at 10:12 am

Very Good Feedback on the Scientific Level (what the feedback givers are saying to help readers know which news to trust)

https://href.li/?https://www.flickr.com/people/jjspychala/

0 notes

iitroorkee · 2 years ago

Text

Congratulations to Prof. M. Sankar, Department of Chemistry for receiving the bronze medal from the Chemical Research Society of India (CRSI) for the year 2023. The bronze medal is given to young researchers who contributed to their field since 2000. In this regard, the bronze medal was presented to him at the 30th CRSI National Symposium in Chemistry (NSC) which was held at JNU, New Delhi in recognition of his contribution to 'the synthesis of novel π-extended porphyrins and their applications in sensing, solar cells, nonlinear optics, and catalysis'.

0 notes

klbmsw · 5 years ago

Text

“Trump’s calls with foreign leaders have long worried aides, leaving some ‘genuinely horrified’

By Carol D. Leonnig, Shane Harris and Josh Dawsey October 4, 2019 at 7:19 PM EDT nytimes.com

“In one of his first calls with a head of state, President Trump fawned over Russian President Vladimir Putin, telling the man who ordered interference in America’s 2016 election that he was a great leader and apologizing profusely for not calling him sooner.”

He pledged to Saudi officials in another call that he would help the monarchy enter the elite Group of Seven, an alliance of the world’s leading democratic economies.”

“He promised the president of Peru that he would deliver to his country a C-130 military cargo plane overnight, a logistical nightmare that set off a herculean scramble in the West Wing and Pentagon.”

“And in a later call with Putin, Trump asked the former KGB officer for his guidance in forging a friendship with North Korea’s Kim Jong Un — a fellow authoritarian hostile to the United States.”

“Starting long before revelations about Trump’s interactions with Ukraine’s president rocked Washington, Trump’s phone calls with foreign leaders were an anxiety-ridden set of events for his aides and members of the administration, according to former and current officials. They worried that Trump would make promises he shouldn’t keep, endorse policies the United States long opposed, commit a diplomatic blunder that jeopardized a critical alliance or simply pressure a counterpart for a personal favor.”

“There was a constant undercurrent in the Trump administration of [senior staff] who were genuinely horrified by the things they saw that were happening on these calls,” said one former White House official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the private conversations. “Phone calls that were embarrassing, huge mistakes he made, months and months of work that were upended by one impulsive tweet.”

“But Trump’s July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky went beyond whether the leader of the free world had committed a faux pas, and into grave concerns, he had engaged in a possible crime or impeachable offense. The release last week of a whistleblower complaint alleging Trump pressured Ukraine to investigate his political rivals as well as the release of a rough transcript of the July call led to House Democrats launching an impeachment inquiry against Trump.”

“The Ukraine controversy has put a renewed focus on Trump’s unorthodox way of interacting with fellow world leaders in diplomatic calls. Critics, including some former administration officials, contend that Trump’s behavior on calls with foreign leaders has at times created unneeded tensions with allies and sent troubling signals to adversaries or authoritarians that the United States supports or at least does not care about human rights or their aggressive behavior elsewhere in the world.”

“Joel Willett, a former intelligence officer who worked at the National Security Council from 2014 to 2015, said he was concerned both by the descriptions of a president winging it, and the realization that the president’s behavior disturbs and frightens career civil servants.”

“What a burden it must be to be stuck between your position of trust in the White House and another obligation you may feel to the American people to say something,” he said. The White House did not respond to a request for comment Thursday or Friday.”

“Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), a Trump ally, said the president speaks his mind and diverges from other presidents who follow protocol. Graham said he saw nothing distressing in the president’s July 25 call with Zelensky and said he expected it to be worse, partially given his own experience with Trump on the phone.”

“If you take half of my phone calls with him, it wouldn’t read as cleanly and nicely,” he said, adding that the president sounded like a “normal person.”

“This story is based on interviews with 12 former or current officials with knowledge of the president’s foreign calls. These officials had direct involvement in the calls, were briefed on them or read the transcripts afterward. All spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the president’s private conversations with world leaders.”

“The first call Trump made that set off alarm bells came less than two weeks after his inauguration. On Jan. 28, Trump called Putin for what should have been a routine formality: accepting a foreign leader’s congratulations. Former White House officials described Trump as “obsequious” and “fawning,” but said he also rambled off into different topics without any clear point, while Putin appeared to stick to formal talking points for a first official exchange.”

“He was like, ‘Oh my gosh, my people didn’t tell me you wanted to talk to me,’ ” said one person with direct knowledge of the call.”

“Trump has been consistently cozy with authoritarian leaders, sparking anxiety among aides about the solicitous tones he struck with Chinese President Xi Jinping, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Putin.”

“We couldn’t figure out early on why he was being so nice to Russia,” one former senior administration official said. H.R. McMaster, the president’s then-national security adviser, launched an internal campaign to get Trump to be more skeptical of the Russians. Officials expressed surprise in both of his early Putin calls at why he was so friendly.”

“In another call, in April 2017, Trump told Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, who had overseen a brutal campaign that has resulted in the extrajudicial killings of thousands of suspected drug dealers, that he was doing an “unbelievable job on the drug problem.”

“Trump’s personal goals seeped into calls. He pestered Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe for help in recommending him for a Nobel Prize, according to an official familiar with the call. “People who could do things for him — he was nice too,” said one former security official. “Leaders with trade deficits, strong female leaders, members of NATO — those tended to go badly.”

“Aides bristled at the dismissive way he sometimes addressed longtime U.S. allies, especially women. In a summer 2018 call with Prime Minister Theresa May, Trump harangued the British leader about her country’s contribution to NATO. He then disputed her intelligence community’s conclusion that Putin’s government had orchestrated the attempted murder and poisoning of a former Russian spy on British soil.”

“Trump was totally bought into the idea there was credible doubt about the poisoning,” said one person briefed on the call. “A solid 10 minutes of the conversation is spent with May saying it’s highly likely and him saying he’s not sure.”

“Trump would sometimes make commitments to foreign leaders that flew in the face of U.S. policy and international agreements, as when he told a Saudi royal that he would support their country’s entry into the G-7.”

“The G-7 is supposed to be the allies with whom we share the most common values and the deepest commitment to upholding the rules-based order,” the former official said.”

“Russia was kicked out of the group in 2014 for violating international law when it invaded Ukraine and annexed Crimea. Trump has publicly advocated for Russia to be allowed back in. Saudi Arabia, which oppresses women and has a record of human rights abuses, wasn’t a fit candidate for membership, the former official said.”

“Saudi Arabia was not admitted to the group. Calls with foreign leaders have often been highly orchestrated events in past administrations.”

“When I was at the White House, there was a very deliberative process of the president absorbing information from people who had deep substantive knowledge of the countries and relationships with these leaders. Preparation for these calls was taken very seriously,” Willett said. “It appears to be freestyle and ad-libbed now.”

“Trump has rejected much of the protocol and preparation associated with foreign calls, even as his national security team tried to establish goals for each conversation.”

“Instead, Trump often sought to use calls as a way to befriend whoever he was talking to, one current senior administration official said, defending the president. “So he might say something that sounds terrible to the outside, but in his mind, he’s trying to build a relationship with that person and sees flattery as the way to do it.”

“The president resisted long briefings before calls or reading in preparation, several former officials said. McMaster, who preferred providing the president with the information he could use to make decisions, resigned himself to giving Trump small notecards with bulleted highlights and talking points.”

“You had two to three minutes max,” said one former senior administration official. “And then he was still usually going to say whatever he wanted to say.”

“As a result, staff fretted that Trump came across ill-informed in some calls, and even oafish. In a conversation with China’s Xi, Trump repeated numerous times how much he liked a kind of chocolate cake, one former official said. The president publicly described the dessert the two had in April 2017 when Trump and Xi met at the president’s Mar-a-Lago resort as “the most beautiful piece of chocolate cake you have ever seen.”

“Trump preferred to make calls from the residence, which frustrated some NSC staff and West Wing aides who wanted to be on hand to give the president real-time advice. If he held the call in the Oval Office, aides would gather around the desk and pass him notes to try to keep the calls on point. On a few occasions, then-Chief of Staff John F. Kelly muted the call to try to get the president back on track, two officials said.”

“Tim O’Brien, a Trump biographer, and critic, said the calls fit Trump’s style as a business leader. “When he had to get on calls with investors on a publicly-traded company, they had to worry that he would break securities laws and lie about the company’s profits,” O’Brien said. “When he would go and meet with regulators with the casino control commission, his lawyers were always worried under oath, in a public setting, that he would say something that would be legally damaging.”

“Though calls with foreign leaders are routinely planned in advance, Trump a few times called Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and French President Emmanuel Macron unannounced as if they were friends, a former administration official said.”

“After some early summaries of Trump calls with the leaders of Mexico and Australia leaked to the press in 2017, the White House tightened restrictions on who could access the transcripts and kept better track of who had custody of copies. For example, Vice President Pence still received a courtesy copy of any foreign-leader call, but his staff now had to sign off when they transported it to his office and also sign off when they returned or destroyed the document.”

“Some former officials said that over time staff became used to the oddity of some calls even if they still found them troubling.”

“People had gotten really numb to him blurting out something he shouldn’t have,” one former national security staffer remarked.”

“But officials who had served in the White House through the end of 2018 were still shocked by the whistleblower complaint about the effort to “lockdown” records of Trump’s July 25 call. The complaint said White House officials ordered the transcript moved into a highly secure computer system, known as NICE, which is normally reserved only for information about the most sensitive code-word-level intelligence programs.”

“Unheard of,” said one former official who handled foreign calls. “That just blew me away.”

nytimes.com

Breaking News, World News & Multimedia

The New York Times: Find breaking news, multimedia, reviews & opinion…

16 notes · View notes

bountyofbeads · 5 years ago

Text

Impeachment Testimony: Read a Statement from the White House Ukraine Expert

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/10/29/us/politics/vindman-statement-impeachment.html

Read Alexander Vindman’s Statement on Trump and Ukraine

BY The New York Times | Published October 29, 2019 | New York Times | Posted October 29, 2019 |

Lt. Col. Alexander S. Vindman of the Army, the top Ukraine expert on the National Security Council, plans to tell impeachment investigators that he twice reported concerns about President Trump’s dealings with Ukraine, according to a draft statement obtained by The New York Times.

Opening Statement of Lieutenant Colonel Alexander S. Vindman

Before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, and the House Committee on Oversight and Reform

October 29, 2019

Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, thank you for the opportunity to address the Committees concerning the activities relating to Ukraine and my role in the events under investigation.

BACKGROUND

I have dedicated my entire professional life to the United States of America. For more than two decades, it has been my honor to serve as an officer in the United States Army. As an infantry officer, I served multiple overseas tours, including South Korea and Germany, and a deployment to Iraq for combat operations. In Iraq, I was wounded in an IED attack and awarded a Purple Heart.

Since 2008, I have been a Foreign Area Officer specializing in Eurasia. In this role, I have served in the United States' embassies in Kiev, Ukraine and Moscow, Russia. In Washington, D.C., I was a politico-military affairs officer for Russia for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs where I authored the principle strategy for managing competition with Russia. In July 2018, I was asked to serve at the National Security Council.

The privilege of serving my country is not only rooted in my military service, but also in my personal history. I sit here, as a Lieutenant Colonel in the United States Army, an immigrant. My family fled the Soviet Union when I was three and a half years old. Upon arriving in New York City in 1979, my father worked multiple jobs to support us, all the while learning English at night. He stressed to us the importance of fully integrating into our adopted country. For many years, life was quite difficult. In spite of our challenging beginnings, my family worked to build its own American dream. I have a deep appreciation for American values and ideals and the power of freedom. I am a patriot, and it is my sacred duty and honor to advance and defend OUR country, irrespective of party or politics.

For over twenty years as an active duty United States military officer and diplomat, I have served this country in a nonpartisan manner, and have done so with the utmost respect and professionalism for both Republican and Democratic administrations.

INTRODUCTION

Before recounting my recollection of various events under investigation, I want to clarify a few issues. I am appearing today voluntarily pursuant to a subpoena and will answer all questions to the best of my recollection.

I want the Committees to know I am not the whistleblower who brought this issue to the CIA and the Committees’ attention. I do not know who the whistleblower is and I would not feel comfortable to speculate as to the identity of the whistleblower.

Also, as I will detail herein, I did convey certain concerns internally to National Security officials in accordance with my decades of experience and training, sense of duty, and obligation to operate within the chain of command. As an active duty military officer, the command structure is extremely important to me. On many occasions I have been told I should express my views and share my concerns with my chain of command and proper authorities. I believe that any good military officer should and would do the same, thus providing his or her best advice to leadership.

Furthermore, in performing my coordination role as a Director on the National Security Council, I provided readouts of relevant meetings and communications to a very small group of properly cleared national security counterparts with a relevant need-to-know.

MY SERVICE ON THE NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL

When I joined the White House’s National Security Council (“NSC”), I reported to Dr. Fiona Hill, who in turn reported to John Bolton, the National Security Advisor. My role at the NSC includes developing, coordinating, and executing plans and policies to manage the full range of diplomatic, informational, military, and

economic national security issues for the countries in my portfolio, which includes Ukraine.

In my position, I coordinate with a superb cohort of inter-agency partners. I regularly prepare internal memoranda, talking points, and other materials for the National Security Advisor and senior staff.

Most of my interactions relate to national security issues and are therefore especially sensitive. I would urge the Committees to carefully balance the need for information against the impact that disclosure would have on our foreign policy and national security.

I have never had direct contact or communications with the President.

THE GEOPOLITICAL IMPORTANCE OF UKRAINE

Since 2008, Russia has manifested an overtly aggressive foreign policy, leveraging military power and employing hybrid warfare to achieve its objectives of regional hegemony and global influence. Absent a deterrent to dissuade Russia from such aggression, there is an increased risk of further confrontations with the West. In this situation, a strong and independent Ukraine is critical to U.S. national security interests because Ukraine is a frontline state and a bulwark against Russian aggression.

In spite of being under assault from Russia for more than five years, Ukraine has taken major steps towards integrating with the West. The U.S. government policy community’s view is that the election of President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and the promise of reforms to eliminate corruption will lock in Ukraine’s Western-leaning trajectory, and allow Ukraine to realize its dream of a vibrant democracy and economic prosperity.

Given this perspective and my commitment to advancing our government's strategic interests, I will now recount several events that occurred.

RELEVANT EVENTS

When I joined the NSC in July 2018, I began implementing the administration’s policy on Ukraine. In the Spring of 2019, I became aware of outside influencers promoting a false narrative of Ukraine inconsistent with the consensus views of the interagency. This narrative was harmful to U.S. government policy. While my interagency colleagues and I were becoming increasingly optimistic on Ukraine’s prospects, this alternative narrative undermined U.S. government efforts to expand cooperation with Ukraine.

April 21, 2019: PRESIDENT TRUMP CALLS UKRAINE PRESIDENT ZELENSKYY

On April 21, 2019, Volodymyr Zelenskyy was elected President of Ukraine in a landslide victory. President Zelenskyy was seen as a unifying figure within the country. He was the first candidate to win a majority in every region of the country breaking the claims that Ukraine would be subject to a perpetual divide between the Ukrainian- and Russian-speaking populations. President Zelenskyy ran on a platform of unity, reform, and anti-corruption which resonated with the entire country.

In support of U.S. policy objectives to support Ukrainian sovereignty, President Trump called President Zelenskyy on April 21, 2019. I was one of several staff and officers who listened to the call. The call was positive and President Trump expressed his desire to work with President Zelenskyy and extended an invitation to visit the White House.

May 21, 2019: INAUGURATION DELEGATION GOES TO UKRAINE

On May 21, 2019 I was directed by Ambassador Bolton and Dr. Hill to join the delegation attending President Zelenkskyy’s inauguration. When the delegation returned, they provided a debriefing to President Trump and explained their positive assessment of President Zelenskyy and his team. I did not participate in the debriefing.

OLEKSANDR DANYLYUK VISIT - July 10, 2019

On July 10, 2019, Oleksandr Danylyuk, the Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council for Ukraine, visited Washington, D.C. for a meeting with National Security Advisor Bolton. Ambassadors Volker and Sondland also attended along with Energy Secretary Rick Perry.

The meeting proceeded well until the Ukrainians broached the subject of a meeting between the two presidents. The Ukrainians saw this meeting as critically important in order to solidify the support of their most important international partner. Amb. Sondland started to speak about delivering the specific investigations in order to secure the meeting with the President, at which time Ambassador Bolton cut the meeting short.

Following this meeting, there was a scheduled debriefing during which Amb. Sondland emphasized the importance that Ukraine deliver the investigations into the 2016 election, the Bidens, and Burisma. I stated to Amb. Sondland that his statements were inappropriate, that the request to investigate Biden and his son had nothing to do with national security, and that such investigations were not something the NSC was going to get involved in or push. Dr. Hill then entered the room and asserted to Amb. Sondland that his statements were inappropriate.

Following the debriefing meeting, I reported my concerns to the NSCs lead counsel. Dr. Hill also reported the incident to the NSC’s lead counsel.

ELECTION CALL – July 25, 2019

On July 21, 2019 President Zelenskyy’s party won Parliamentary elections in a landslide victory. The NSC proposed that President Trump call President Zelenskyy to congratulate him.

On July 25, 2019, the call occurred. I listened in on the call in the Situation Room with colleagues from the NSC and the office of the Vice President. As the transcript is in the public record, we are all aware of what was said.

I was concerned by the call. I did not think it was proper to demand that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen, and I was worried about the implications for...

.... the U.S. government’s support of Ukraine. I realized that if Ukraine pursued an investigation into the Bidens and Burisma, it would likely be interpreted as a partisan play which would undoubtedly result in Ukraine losing the bipartisan support it has thus far maintained. This would all undermine U.S. national security. Following the call, I again reported my concerns to NSC’s lead counsel.

CONCLUSION

The United States and Ukraine are and must remain strategic partners, working together to realize the shared vision of a stable, prosperous, and democratic Ukraine that is integrated into the Euro-Atlantic community. Our partnership is rooted in the idea that free citizens should be able to exercise their democratic rights, choose their own destiny, and live in peace.

It has been a great honor to serve the American people and a privilege to work in the White House and on the National Security Council. I hope to continue to serve and advance America’s national security interests.

Thank you again for your consideration, and now I would be happy to answer your questions.

Produced by Josh Williams and Tiff Fehr.

1 note · View note

xtruss · 3 years ago

Text

Imran Khan Kicks Off Nation-Wide Rallies for Early Elections While “Buyer of Corrupt Politicians and Conspirator United States” Congratulates Shehbaz Sharif (A Corrupt Who is Out of Jail on Bail and Now PM of Pakistan, Have Money Laundering Charges and So Many Corruption Cases in National Accountability Bureau, NAB)

— Ekaterina Blinova | Sputnik International | April 15, 2022

Tensions are continuing to simmer after the ouster of former Prime Minister Imran Khan. Earlier this week, over 100 lawmakers from Khan's Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) party resigned from the National Assembly before the scheduled voting for the new PM, according to Dawn, the oldest English-language newspaper in Pakistan.

"Imran Khan is a very strong leader, popular and can ignite agitation," says Dr Rasul Bakhsh Rais, professor of political science at the Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, LUMS, Lahore. "He called for a protest [last] Sunday evening on Twitter and we saw really big demonstrations in every city of Pakistan. He and his party members have resigned from the National Assembly and that means he will be doing politics in the streets."

Last Sunday, large demonstrations were held in Karachi, Peshawar, Malakand, Multan, Khanewal, Khyber, Jhang, Quetta, Okara, Islamabad, Lahore and Abbottabad, according to Dawn. The newspaper adds that protests also took place in Bajaur, Lower Dir, Shangla, Kohistan, Mansehra, Swat, Gujrat, Faisalabad, Nowshera, Dera Ghazi Khan and Mandi Bahauddin.

On 13 April, Imran Khan, the PTI chairman, held a massive gathering at Peshawar’s Ring Road marking the start of the PTI's rallies aimed at holding early elections.

"We will continue to hold rallies and protests across Pakistan until the new elections are announced," stated Khan, as quoted by Pakistan's Samaa TV broadcaster. "Today, our nation is at a decisive point and we have to decide whether we want slavery or freedom from it."

Imran Khan has dubbed the cabinet of new Pakistani PM Shehbaz Sharif an "imported government," insisting that his ouster from power through a no-confidence vote was orchestrated by the US. The former prime minister has repeatedly cited a "foreign threat letter" allegedly blackmailing Islamabad into removing Khan from power. According to the PTI chairman, the US and its NATO allies were up in arms about his independent foreign policy and unwillingness to join anti-Russian sanctions over Moscow's special operation in Ukraine.

"In reaction to the US Conspiracy, a National Security Committee (NSC) was set up to inquire about the threat letter," says Dar. "The NSC has declared that the foreign conspiracy to oust Imran Khan is evident and it cannot be declared as a false narrative to counter the opposition movement. The special cabinet meeting within the framework of NSC was also held and its minutes of the meeting were also on the record. In both of these platforms it has been declared that members of the opposition are part of the regime change movement in Pakistan backed by the United States."

During the Peshawar rally, Khan accused Sharif of cracking down on Pakistani social media volunteers who oppose the National Assembly no-confidence vote. The PTI leader also said that the incumbent premier is "facing Rs40 billion ($220 million) in corruption charges."

According to Daily Pakistan, the next PTI rally will take place at Jinnah’s Mausoleum in Karachi on 16 April. On 24 April, Khan's party is due to hold a massive gathering in the country’s second-largest metropolis, Lahore.

Khan and his party have shown their strength through nation-wide rallies, according to Zafar Iqbal Yousafzai, author of The Troubled Triangle: US-Pakistan Relations under the Taliban’s Shadow. According to him, Khan and his fellow party members' resignations were largely aimed at forcing the new authorities to hold early general elections. "Indeed Imran Khan is a strong political figure who enjoys popular support," Yousafzai stresses.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken gives a joint press conference with German Foreign Minister at the German Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Berlin on January 20, 2022 in Berlin. © Alrx Brandon

Will Sharif Shift to a Pro-US Political Course?

Meanwhile, the Biden administration on 13 April extended congratulations to the new prime minister of Pakistan. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken stated that "Pakistan has been an important partner on wide-ranging mutual interests for nearly 75 years and we value our relationship," adding that Washington is looking forward "to continuing [US-Pakistan] long-standing cooperation".

"The United States views a strong, prosperous, and democratic Pakistan as essential for the interests of both our countries," Blinken said.

Earlier, on 12 April, the Pentagon signalled that it is seeking a "healthy" military-to-military relationship with the Pakistani armed forces. When asked about Imran Khan's accusations of Washington's interference in Pakistan's domestic affairs and backing a soft coup d'etat, Pentagon spokesperson John Kirby refused to comment on the matter.

Earlier, new Pakistani premier Sharif stressed in his inaugural speech that Islamabad will seek to improve relations with Washington.

"The political change in Pakistan, removal of Imran Khan in power is being seen by many as a consequence of foreign influence," says Rais. "The powerful state institutions and the dominant section of the ruling elites in Pakistan sees greater interests of Pakistan served with close relations with the US. There is no doubt there will be a pro-US tilt in his policies."

After Khan's Departure, US Could Grab Control of Pakistan's Foreign Policy, Political Scientist Says

However, one must take into account that US-Pakistan relations have not been smooth for the last couple of years due to a number of issues including the US failure in Afghanistan, Pakistan’s close relations with Russia and China, according to Yousafzai.

"Former Prime Minister Imran Khan was vocal and he used to openly criticise the West and the United States which was an unpleasant move for Washington," says the author. "Though Imran Khan’s relations were good with president Trump yet the relations under President Biden did not continue with the previous pace."

"Prime Minister Imran Khan replied in a public statement: 'What do [the EU] think of us? Are we your slaves ... that whatever you say, we will do?'" the academic says, adding that Pakistan abstained from voting as the UN General Assembly overwhelmingly reprimanded Russia over the special operation.

Tens of Thousands of Imran Khan Supporters Take to Streets in Pakistan After Weekend Ouster

According to Yousafzai, "the US relations with the world are not based on statements but on interests". The author believes that Washington’s relations with Islamabad cannot be as close as China-Pakistan relations. He explains that while China and Pakistan are strategic partners, the US largely sees India as its strategic ally in Asia "which irks Pakistan and further pushes it towards China and Russia."

"There is a huge trust-deficit between Washington and Islamabad at the moment," Yousafzai emphasises.

0 notes

colorgamesblog · 3 years ago

Text