U.S. Slams Pakistani Effort Against Militants
WASHINGTONA new White House assessment steps up criticism of Pakistan's campaign against militants, stating bluntly that its government and military have been unwilling to take action against Al Qaeda and like-minded terrorists.
The aggressive language of the reportwhich also criticizes the leadership of President Asif Ali Zardaricould further strain difficult relations with a key ally and undercut support in Congress for providing billions of dollars in aid to Islamabad.
The report, viewed by The Wall Street Journal, also raises questions about the U.S.-led coalition's progress battling the Taliban and improving governance in Afghanistan two months before the White House will review its war strategy.
The administration and Pentagon have until now tried to keep their harshest criticisms of Pakistan private to avoid a public rift, but the report shows growing U.S. frustration, officials said.
"The report reflects that there are real challenges we have with Pakistan," said an Obama administration official.
Officials at all levels are in talks with Pakistan to address these issues, the official added.
President Barack Obama, in a letter to Congress accompanying the report,
said he doesn't see the need for any adjustments in Afghanistan-Pakistan strategy "at this time."
While administration officials have publicly played down the need for adjustments in strategy, they have made some changes, including a recently stepped-up campaign of strikes in Pakistan by Central Intelligence Agency drones against militants whom the U.S. sees Islamabad as unable or unwilling to attack.
Pakistani officials have said they don't lack the will and that they have generally stepped up their efforts in response to U.S. requests, getting too little credit for it. But they say their army is already stretched thina problem exacerbated when soldiers were diverted to respond this summer to the worst flooding in the country's history.
"The Pakistan military continued to avoid military engagements that would put it in direct conflict with Afghan Taliban or al Qaeda forces in North Waziristan," the White House concludes, referring to the Pakistani tribal region that U.S. officials say is being used as a staging ground for attacks on troops in Afghanistan, as well as to plot attacks on targets in Europe.
U.S. officials say they are
increasingly frustrated by Pakistan's decision not to send large numbers of ground forces into North Waziristan. "This is as much a political choice as it is a reflection of an under-resourced military prioritizing its targets," the unclassified, 27-page report finds.
In the neighboring tribal region of South Waziristan, "Pakistani military operations advanced slowly" because they haven't been able to stabilize areas after they clear them of militants, the White House found.
There, "the military largely stayed close to the roads and did not engage against those [Pakistani Taliban] militants who returned after fleeing into North Waziristan."
While the Pakistani military has dedicated 140,000 forces to the tribal areas, "the Pakistan military was nonetheless constrained to disrupting and displacing extremists groups without making lasting gains against the insurgency."
The report, issued by the National Security Council in response to a congressional requirement for regular progress updates, reflects the input of numerous agencies, including the State Department, Pentagon and intelligence agencies.
Questions about aid to Pakistan have been growing in Congress in recent months, and congressional aides said the downbeat assessment could fuel lawmakers' qualms and calls for putting more conditions on U.S. funding.
U.S.-Pakistan tensions are already high. The limited U.S. military presence in Pakistan, restricted to training and advising the country's security forces, is particularly sensitive.
A series of cross-border raids by North Atlantic Treaty Organization helicopter gunships from Afghanistan, including one that killed several Pakistani border guards who fired their weapons to wave off a coalition helicopter, have inflamed anti-American sentiment and prompted Islamabad to shut a key crossing used to deliver supplies to the U.S.-led coalition.
On Wednesday, Pakistani police told the Associated Press that gunmen torched eight tankers carrying fuel to NATO forces in Afghanistan. It was at least the third strike on a NATO fuel convoy in the last week.
The report doesn't limit its criticism to the military efforts. It says Pakistan's civilian leadership faces "broad-based" challenges that "have the potential to impact the stability of the government."
Massive floods and tensions between political parties have compounded problems facing President Zardari, it says.
The government's clumsy response to the flooding has greatly undermined the already shaky public support for Mr. Zardari, the report says.
"President Zardari's decision to travel to Europe despite the floods
exacerbated inter-party tensions, civil-military relations, and damaged his image in the domestic and international media," the report says, noting that local polls shows that the public considers the civilian government's response to be slow and inadequate.
Even before the flooding, Mr. Zardari faced "broad lack of political support," the White House says, in addition to a fragile economy and difficult relations with the military.
The report notes the wide gap in public esteem for civilian and military institutions.
Confidence in the civilian government has fallen from 38% at the end of 2009 to 31% in mid-2010, while confidence in the military has grown from 75% to 82% during the same time period.
Lack of will has also hampered Pakistan's budget management, the report concludes. While the Pakistani government has worked closely with the U.S. Embassy to improve the use of U.S. aid, "a lack of political will on budget implementation and overall donor assistance continues to be a major challenge."
On Afghanistan, the report reflects
how initial optimism at the beginning of 2010 about the campaign in Helmand province has eroded. In February, the U.S. military staged a large air assault to retake the city of Marjah from insurgents, promising to quickly reestablish Afghan government control.
But the report acknowledges that the progress in Helmand, like the rest of Afghanistan, is uneven. "Projected gains have yet to manifest themselves fully in Helmand Province," the report said. "The campaign was broadly on track, but faces a resilient enemy that continued to exploit governance and security gaps in a number of areas."
Difficulty in safely travelling around the country, the report said, has prevented gains in improving governance or the economy. Among the districts the military considers "key terrain" in Afghanistan, only a few showed improved security, the report said.
White House Report Faults Pakistan's Antimilitant Campaign - WSJ.com
