Rifts emerge over tackling the Taliban

[t-birds]

By Ahmed Rashid on the growing rift between the US and Pakistan over fighting the Taliban.

There are serious differences emerging between the US and the various power centres in Pakistan which could adversely affect the entire region.

At stake are the upcoming Afghan elections, the US offensive in Helmand province in Afghanistan, curbing the Taliban in Pakistan and a potential worsening in Islamabad's relations with both Kabul and Delhi.

The differences emerge as the US, Britain, France and Nato stake an enormous amount of political prestige on rapidly improving the security situation in Afghanistan and receiving more co-operation from Pakistan on combating the Taliban in both countries.

When Pakistani and Indian leaders met in Egypt on 16 July, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani handed over an intelligence dossier to his Indian counterpart Manmohan Singh outlining India's alleged role in destabilising Pakistan from Afghanistan.

"The Pakistani government appears to be quietly going along with the military's view of the region"

This included funding and training Baloch militants for the separatist insurgency in Balochistan province and providing support for the Pakistani Taliban, in particular its leader Baitullah Mehsud.

The Pakistani dossier was almost certainly a retaliatory move following US and Nato allegations that Pakistan's military continues to provide sanctuary to the top leadership of the Afghan Taliban including Mullah Mohammed Omar.

Mr Gilani [L] handed over a dossier to Mr Singh

Adm Michael Mullen, Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, said on 23 July that al-Qaeda's leadership is also in Pakistan.

Meanwhile India accuses Pakistan of continuing to harbour extremist groups in Punjab province including Lashkar-e-Taiba, which is accused of carrying out the Mumbai attacks of last year.

The dossier has worsened the long running tit-for-tat accusations between India and Pakistan and expanded their differences to now involve the US and Nato. That in turn puts at risk the entire security of the region.

The dossier is also a sign of the growing ascendancy of the military in Pakistan over the civilian government in the making of foreign and national security policy.

Military's view

In the past President Asif Ali Zardari has taken a pragmatic, conciliatory line towards both India and Afghanistan saying Pakistan has no enmity with them. He has also pledged to clamp down on all "terrorists" regardless of their origins.

However now the government appears to be quietly going along with the military's view of the region.

Western diplomats say that the Pakistani dossier was followed up by a series of hard-hitting briefings by the military and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) for selected foreign journalists and diplomats, blaming the Americans for refusing to curtail the so-called Indian subversion of Pakistan through Afghanistan.

The ISI also denied there were Afghan Taliban on Pakistani soil and instead accused the joint US-British offensive in Helmand province of worsening the security situation for Pakistan because fleeing Taliban will escape into Balochistan.

Western diplomats have responded by reminding the Pakistanis that ever since their defeat in Afghanistan in 2001, the Taliban have been given sanctuary in Balochistan.

Pakistan has accused India of supporting Baloch insurgents

The military is also insisting that the US stop bombing Pakistan's tribal areas with drone-fired missiles and instead share the technology and intelligence with Pakistan.

The military has become even more incensed after US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton discussed supplies of nuclear reactors and new fighter jets to India during her trip there in late July.

These tensions could have the most impact in Afghanistan where presidential elections take place on 20 August with no sign of a Taliban let-up in their bid to disrupt the polls.

The US offensive in Helmand province is meeting stiff resistance and if the fighting continues there is little chance of the Afghan public coming out in large numbers to vote in the southern provinces.

A high number of US and British soldiers have been killed in the first three weeks of July.

Uncertain
In 2004 before the first presidential elections, former President George W Bush successfully exerted pressure on President Pervez Musharraf and the ISI to reign in the Taliban for two months so that elections could take place peacefully.

The army is accused of fighting only militants who threaten the government

US attempts to register a similar deal now have been denied by Pakistan, who insist that there are no Afghan Taliban in Pakistan.

It is also uncertain if the Pakistanis have the same kind of influence with the Taliban as they did in 2004.

Meanwhile India has made it clear to the US that it will not resume normal relations with Islamabad until there is a clamp down against Lashkar-e-Taiba and other Punjab-based militant groups.

Only the civilian government is in favour of such a clamp-down.

Meanwhile after driving the Pakistani Taliban out of the Swat valley but failing to kill any of the Taliban commanders, the army is under pressure from the government, the public and the US to go after the Taliban leadership in the tribal areas.

So far it has declined, citing tensions with India and the need to keep the bulk of its army on the Indian border.

Western diplomats say Pakistan is choosing to fight only those Taliban who threaten the government, but refusing to act against those groups who are fighting in Afghanistan.

The rising differences between the US, Europe and India on one side and Pakistan on the other is cause for growing concern as Islamic extremism shows no signs of abating in the region.

Ahmed Rashid is the author, most recently of Descent into Chaos: How the war against Islamic extremism is being lost in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Central Asia.

 

[fatman17]

I think in a way this is good for us , because we have to make sure our interests are addressed first and foremost. the army needs to stabilize the malakand valley before moving on to other things like the land offensive in n/s waziristan and chasing any taliban escaping the us/nato troops in helmand province adjoining balochistan province. there is now substantial proof of indian involvement in the unrest in that province. this stems from past history of tit-for-tat. india helped create BD - pakistan bled india kashmir insurgency - now india wants to pay-back in balochistan. on top of all this is the ****** situation. certainly very complicated.

 

[IceCold]

Only if the government can take on a more aggresive approach rather then going quietly as suggest by the article, it can help achieve Pakistan's interest first.
Yesterday there was a news that UK has ended up the operation after a successfull talks with the talibans. This means that they are doing the exact same, they accuse us of doing all the time and yet they continue to mount pressure on Pakistan to do more. Seriously this WOT has become a joke(not that it wasnt before) and we Pakistan will have to adopt a tougher stance on this one, not to forget even aids are being made conditional. We have already suffered enough loss, time is now upon us to say a final good bye to the US and its WOT.

 

[S-2]

"...time is now upon us to say a final good bye to the US and its WOT."

Concur...

 

[Bill Longley]

US is in picture what India and afghans are doing and it has closed its eyes. we who have sacrificed more then whole NATO and US are being blackmailed for the blunders committed by them. Its Real Politiks so play as it is needed

 

[S-2]

"...US is in picture what India and afghans are doing and it has closed its eyes."

To $1.1B in delivered Indian aid to Afghanistan?

And Pakistan?

Your problems are of your own making. You make an exceedingly bad neighbor for most with your duplicitous employment of proxy forces in all directions and for a terribly long time.

Those malevolent souls have infected your internal tribal society and rendered many of your brave soldiers dead at the hands of their own citizens. What a tragic turn of events!

Blowback and you're reaping what you've sown.

Forty nations and myriad NGOs abound in Afghanistan. No noise of surreptitious Indian operations from any of these nations or organizations.

It doesn't make sense. The risks to the immense goodwill accrued by the Indians in Afghanistan far outweighs the anticipated gains from such conduct regardless of Pakistan's long history of exactly such.

 

[fatman17]

To $1.1B in delivered Indian aid to Afghanistan?

And Pakistan?

4m tons of wheat allowed to be smuggled to the "brotherly muslim" country for the last 20 years so that they dont starve to death!

2-3m refugees "kept alive" in camps in the NWFP for the last 20 years as these "pathans" seemingly dont want / or reluctantly going back to afghanistan. given the refugee camps were not first class treatment but definately better than whats on the other side.

helped "purge" their country of the communists and reaping the "rewards" of this hospitality!

compare that to the 1.1 bill US indian aid used mostly to build a "strategic" road to be used for trans-shipment of indian goods (malevolent indeed)

 

[Spring Onion]

US is conducting talks with Taliban in Afghanistan and asking us to fight them. wow

why should we keep US intrests above our own in the first place.

If US is seriouse in eleminating Taliban why she is holding talks with them?

 

[S-2]

"4m tons of wheat allowed to be smuggled to the "brotherly muslim" country..."

"Smuggled"?

Why? So as not to miss out on profits lining the pockets of whom, exactly?

Why not as transparent and above-board aid, assuming this might even be verified? Indian aid, btw, is entirely transparent. The road surface, alone, acts as proof. "Smuggled" wheat with weapons and ammo buried within perhaps?

"2-3m refugees "kept alive" in camps in the NWFP for the last 20 years as these "pathans" seemingly dont want / or reluctantly going back to afghanistan."

"kept alive" is about right and with U.N. aid. I doubt you've spent a rupee that hasn't been directed at their military capability. It's been important to Pakistan that you confuse and pervert the identities of these pashtu afghans on your lands while building their dependancy on the goodwill of the GoP. These camps serve as the recruiting base for the armies of your "good" taliban. Were you to wish it otherwise, they'd have been long gone from your lands.

"helped "purge" their country of the communists and reaping the "rewards" of this hospitality!"

It's good that you participated in your own defense, no? Perhaps you should have more clearly imagined the consequences of your own duplicity in entertaining such guests on your lands after the war's conclusion. You didn't have to do so but chose, following the war, to retain your "influence".

So you have.

Most left the islamists behind. Only KSA, UAE, and yourselves saw fit to maintain relations with the horrific evil which emerged in it's aftermath. Nor did you, in that time nor now, ever attempt to create an inclusive policy that embraced all living in a multi-ethnic society.

Your mistake and you now reap the well-justified whirlwind for such in the enmity of Afghans and their government as well as an insurgency now on your own lands.

"...compare that to the 1.1 bill US indian aid used mostly to build a "strategic" road to be used for trans-shipment of indian goods (malevolent indeed)"

Oh? Roads are a bad thing in Afghanistan? Who are you to make that decision on the transparent aid of others and how it's employed? Linking Afghanistan to a deep-water port on the Iranian coast is very useful to everybody, including the pashtus of southern Afghanistan, but you.

Maybe you should try delivering real aid that's transparent to all and not "smuggled" to the profit of "whomever" in your government.

 

[dabong1]

"4m tons of wheat allowed to be smuggled to the "brotherly muslim" country..."

"Smuggled"?

Why? So as not to miss out on profits lining the pockets of whom, exactly?

Why not as transparent and above-board aid, assuming this might even be verified? Indian aid, btw, is entirely transparent. The road surface, alone, acts as proof. "Smuggled" wheat with weapons and ammo buried within perhaps?

Well it had be smuggled otherwise the afghans would have not been able to afford it.....With the help of pakistan the average afghan was abel to feed to feed his family becauce of "tax free" or "smuggled" wheat from pakistani.

 

[S-2]

"Well it had be smuggled otherwise the afghans would have not been able to afford it"

I see. I'm sorry but I imagined that these bags of wheat could be provided by your consulates and embassy with a great, big "GIFT FROM THE PEOPLE OF PAKISTAN" printed on the bags.

Of course, "GIFT" would mean "free", wouldn't it?

 

[dabong1]

"Well it had be smuggled otherwise the afghans would have not been able to afford it"

I see. I'm sorry but I imagined that these bags of wheat could be provided by your consulates and embassy with a great, big "GIFT FROM THE PEOPLE OF PAKISTAN" printed on the bags.

I would rather the weapons we supply the taliban have that on.."GIFT FROM THE PEOPLE OF PAKISTAN"

Of course, "GIFT" would mean "free", wouldn't it?

Yes it would if you where giving something away for free.....why dont we call it "aid".

 

[jeypore]

I would rather the weapons we supply the taliban have that on.."GIFT FROM THE PEOPLE OF PAKISTAN"

Yes it would if you where giving something away for free.....why dont we call it "aid".

That is excatly why US should stop Aid to Pakistan!!!!

 

[IceCold]

That is excatly why US should stop Aid to Pakistan!!!!

Such thoughtful insight. I am sure Obama administration could use a word or two of your advice.

 

[SQ8]

S-2
(The following is pretty off topic but I felt Id rather just put it down, you probably have heard this a 100 times before but Id have a go at it too. )
The only conclusion to all of the events would be the isolation of Pakistan from the world, and an increasing resentment of our nuclear capability due to an overwhelming fear of takeover by militant elements.
But lets borrow a word out of the last dictators dictionary.."root causes".
The fact that American foreign policy has been inherently flawed and IS directly responsible for the current situation does not seem to reach many Americans. Supporting dictators who only think on the military level and do not understand political and social ramifications of their actions will result in such medusa's being created for the world.Afghanistan has been influenced by India in the past and this is based on the common ground of territorial disputes. Pakistan on the other hand being run by Generals most of the time even when there has been a civilian government thinks to defend itself only in military terms. On a purely military level, for the time period, the Idea of having a proxy force to stir trouble in your neighbors land is not completely irrational. proxy forces have the greatest advantage that their actions can be disavowed. But their social and political impact is disastrous as is being felt now.
Like orphans these proxy elements tend to look for foster parents and in this case they found one in Al-Qaeda. The rest is history. Now however, the orphans are mostly dead and their unruly offspring which are completely out of control unlike the parents are creating havoc all over. However, these orphans were the children of Pakistan and Afghanistan, in the end they still considered themselves a part of their country and could be pacified. The new generation is twisted beyond hope. They do not swear allegiance to anyone but their corrupted vision of Islam and a barbaric backward nation they wish to establish...but you already know that. And, unlike their predecessors, their brand of extremism is contagious and cancerous. And will eventually lead to American troops and air strikes on Pakistani soil at some point possibly to try and secure nuclear assets to keep them from falling into the wrong hands in the world's perception.
But.. aren't there saner elements, in Pakistan??
There are, and they held the capacity to pacify these extremists if they had been approached before. Instead of supporting dictators from the very start. had democracy been supported. America might have been proud of having raised a true functioning moderate Muslim democracy. But the mistakes of the past lie not only with America, Pakistani leaders themselves have been afraid to confront anyone who claims to be a propagator of Islam.. strictly speaking it has been and still is taboo to question a bearded one on Islam..no matter how much anyone might object to my observation; Thou shalt not raise thy voice against the Mullahs. This approach irks the US government and people.. rightly so, since the rights these mullah's advertise are completely opposite to the rights offered and available to US citizens. More over the Mullah's despise the US not just because of any personal opinion but also because it's traditional to so. Since the British Annexation of India the Mullah's predecessors have always been anti West. They target the most powerful western powers as a vent for their frustration at their weakness and their inability to be anything like their glorious past.
Coming to the support of dictators, whenever the US abandoned a dictator it not only abandoned the ruler but the people, Nobody likes being shoved away for no fault of theirs, And the United states has usually abandoned Pakistan at the most crucial times even through many a times the situation was of Pakistan's(read Dictator) own doing and the US was 3 out of 5 times right in letting Pakistan take the heat, the people now see the US as untrustworthy.
And the Pakistani people have every right to be angry, since the love/hate relationship had more to do with the governments in Pakistan than the people themselves.
The American people have every right to be angry, to them they bludgeoned billions of dollars into a country to see it standing right where they left it. The blame rests with governments of America & Pakistan past and the people of both nations. Each not holding their government more accountable for foreign policy until it starts generating body bags. The Pakistani people are still mostly uneducated masses with herd like behavior. mix that with a passion for anything that sounds like Islam. And you have all the right mix for a hodgepodge of extremism and militancy and generally barbaric behavior.

So.. what do we do with the Taliban.. not much, I only see two outcomes,
1. Democracy succeeds and the present government delivers and rolls back the policies set by the Dictators and the military establishment(not going that way currently), Things will get much worse but then start improving. Extremism will eventually be defeated. Although its legacy will continue to haunt Pakistan for many years.
2. Bloody revolution. The people will crack under corruption, injustice, lawlessness, lack of basic amenities. There will be blood on the streets and the situation will be much worse than Iran 1979. Some parts of Pakistan will disintegrate and reintegrate after a central authority reestablished itself. There might not be a hard line Islamic State the likes of the Taliban emirate but rather a conformist state much like as it was in the last Nawaz Sharif Government. But with a greater role for the Mullah.

Anyway.. Ive shed enough trash intellect here and run circles around the topic. This is what happens when you are sitting in front of a monitor trying to replicate a MIL std software radio...
Cheers