Peter Visclosky: “I would emphasize the chairman's very first point, and the reason there is not a discrete figure within the legislation…”

“I would emphasize the chairman's very first point, and the reason there is not a discrete figure within the legislation is we continue to await that request in the overseas contingency operation fund from the administration. I will simply add a couple of comments to the points the chairman raised. One, if the funds were prohibited, I believe it would also affect our ability to withdraw from Afghanistan since we traversed through Pakistan's ground lines of communications to transport our equipment back home. I also think the withdrawal of U.S. assistance would likely polarize Pakistan and exacerbate significant pro- and anti-American rifts within their military and their government generally, and in addition to counterterrorism activity, the fact that Pakistan's nuclear weapons capability provides, I believe, an ample reason for the U.S. to continue to be positively engaged. I would not disagree with the gentleman that this is a very difficult relationship. There are significant problems with Pakistan--all the more reason to continue to be engaged. I also rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment, and I appreciate the chairman yielding.”