NEW YORK, May 20: Despite calls by some American officials to reduce some of $1 billion US aid to Pakistan, the Bush administration is fearful of cutting off the cash or linking it to performance for fear of further destabilising President Pervez Musharraf who is facing the biggest challenges to his rule since he took power in 1999, the New York Times said on Sunday.

The newspaper said: “The White House would not directly answer the question of why Pakistan is being paid the same very large amount after publicly declaring that it is significantly cutting back on its patrols in the most important border area.

“Gordon Johndroe, a spokesman for Stephen J. Hadley, the national security adviser, emphasised Pakistan’s strategic importance in the region.”

The Pakistan government has cut back patrols in areas where Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters are most active, the NYT article asserts.

So far Pakistan has received more than $5.6 billion under the programme over five years, more than half of the total aid the United States has sent to the country since the Sept 11 attacks, not counting covert funds, the paper reveals.

The monthly payments, called coalition support funds, are not widely advertised. Buried in public budget numbers, the payments are intended to reimburse Pakistan’s military for the cost of the operations.

The Times said that the “American military officials in the region have recommended that the money be tied to Pakistan’s performance in pursuing Al Qaeda and keeping the Taliban from gaining a haven from which to attack the government of Afghanistan.

“But Bush administration officials say no such plan is being considered, despite new evidence that the Pakistani military is often looking the other way when Taliban fighters retreat across the border into Pakistan, ignoring calls from American spotters to intercept them. There is also at least one American report that Pakistani security forces have fired in support of Taliban fighters attacking Afghan posts, the newspaper claims.”

Pakistan’s cooperation is very important in the global war on terror and for operations in Afghanistan, Mr Johndroe told the newspaper. “Our investments in that partnership have paid off over time, from increased information sharing to kills and captures of key terrorist operatives. There is more work to be done, the Pakistanis know that, and we are engaged with the Musharraf government to ramp up the fight.”

The Times said that the Pentagon, in response to inquiries, said on Friday that the payments to Pakistan since October 2001 had averaged $80 million a month. The Congressional Research Service estimated last

year that they accounted for about a fifth of Pakistan’s total military expenditures.

Pakistan’s ambassador to Washington Mahmud Ali Durrani told the newspaper that the agreements were working and that his country’s military activities on the border itself were increasing. He said that Pakistan was being properly reimbursed for fuel, munitions and wear and tear on military equipment.

The Times noted that a study of the roughly $10 billion sent to Pakistan by the United States since 2002, conducted by Craig Cohen and Derek Chollet of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, found that $5.6 billion in reimbursements was in addition to $1.8 billion for security assistance, which mostly finances large weapons systems.

The US has also provided about $1.6 billion for budget support, which Pakistan can use broadly, including for reducing debt.