Read on Twitter
There is a misconception that RW Trump was tough on Pakistan and Islamic Terror and that the liberal Dems will be overly soft on the two. Although the latter isn't very wrong, the former isn't that accurate either.
1/n
1/n
T renewed ties with Pak, regarding the Taliban issue, by elevating Pak's role as a strategic figure in the withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan. This empowered Pak as the key influencer into Afghan politics, and increasing its army's support for Taliban.
2/n
2/n
Which will naturally be used as a weapon against India, while destabilizing the democratically-elected Gov in Afghanistan, by strengthening the Taliban's percolation into the domestic politics, continuing the terror/oppression, which strongly negates India's stance.
3/n
3/n
Because India maintains its stance of recognizing and endorsing the pro-democracy Gov of Afghanistan, and its supporters from women's rights groups. This also intensified by the fact that using Pak as a strategic partner in the Afghan war empowers Pak Army and its influence.
4/n
4/n
This US deal by Trump enhancing Pak's status in the region, is naturally detrimental for India, as the Pak Army is the biggest cheerleader of the Taliban, and thus will now be provided the proto-monopoly to manipulate Afghanistan's domestic politics and fund terror.
5/n
5/n
Secondly, T supplied military sales of USD 125 million to support the F-16 Fighter Jets for the Pak Army.
And praised Pakistan for its "action against terror" in October 2020, after the continuing terrorist attacks in Kashmir, and most importantly Pulwama.
6/n
And praised Pakistan for its "action against terror" in October 2020, after the continuing terrorist attacks in Kashmir, and most importantly Pulwama.
6/n
T has also elevated economic relations with Pak, by increasing trade ties with it, as US is Pak's biggest foreign trader.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2020/10/26/evaluating-the-trump-administrations-pakistan-reset/amp/
7/n
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2020/10/26/evaluating-the-trump-administrations-pakistan-reset/amp/
7/n
Instead of Black-listing Pakistan, praised it for its vigilance against terror.
And even echoed Pakistan's stance of US intervention/mediation on the Kashmir issue, when India has made it clear that it's a bilateral matter.
8/n https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.economictimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/donald-trump-encourages-modi-to-improve-relations-with-pakistan-white-house/amp_articleshow/71290352.cms
And even echoed Pakistan's stance of US intervention/mediation on the Kashmir issue, when India has made it clear that it's a bilateral matter.
8/n https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.economictimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/donald-trump-encourages-modi-to-improve-relations-with-pakistan-white-house/amp_articleshow/71290352.cms
Thirdly, and most importantly, the US funding to Islamic charities and organizations which are directly tied to the Islamic terrorist outfits and terror-sponsoring regimes in South Asia and tha Middle East, tripled during the Trump regime, knowingly.
9/n https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.moneycontrol.com/news/opinion/how-us-funds-reach-the-terror-groups-it-fights-5621491.html/amp
9/n https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.moneycontrol.com/news/opinion/how-us-funds-reach-the-terror-groups-it-fights-5621491.html/amp
Organizations like USAID and FEMA funded approximately $13 million. Islamic Circle of North America, an active Islamist organization, received a whopping $8.3 million under Trump. ICNA subsidiary Helping Hand for Relief and Development is affiliated to Lashkar-e-Taiba.
10/n
10/n
T, like previous presidents, has constantly funded Islamist terror groups and regimes like Pak. What T did to shroud these acts of his was to create a strong optical rhetoric against Islamist terror through jingoistic sloganeering, which Republicans do generally.
11/n
11/n
Why? Because US RW has a Euro-Christian supremacist stance of American greatness vs Islamic terror, so it uses that as a shrewd cover for its nefarious deeds which actually support the very opposite of what they claim to.
12/n
12/n
Dems get more easily stamped as Islamist sympathizers is because their narrative is anti-Islamophobia, which gets misconstrued as Islamism. RW does exactly what the Left-Libs do. The difference in ideological rhetoric shields RW from being labelled Islamist sponsors.
13/n
13/n
In short, T has taken a few decisions to curb Islamism, but has on many other occasions supported the same. And so have the Dems. All have furthered the cause of American Imperialism, for oil, for US global domination through diplomatic/military subjugation.
14/n
14/n
