Pakistan
Find a Conversation
| Fri, 07-09-2004 - 12:36pm |
Here's an excerpt from the article:
"THE NEW REPUBLIC has learned that Pakistani security officials have been told they must produce HVTs by the election. According to one source in Pakistan's powerful Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), "The Pakistani government is really desperate and wants to flush out bin Laden and his associates after the latest pressures from the U.S. administration to deliver before the U.S. elections." Introducing target dates for Al Qaeda captures is a new twist in U.S.-Pakistani counterterrorism relations--according to a recently departed intelligence official, "no timetable" were discussed in 2002 or 2003--but the November election is apparently bringing a new deadline pressure to the hunt. Another official, this one from the Pakistani Interior Ministry, which is responsible for internal security, explains, "The Musharraf government has a history of rescuing the Bush administration. They now want Musharraf to bail them out when they are facing hard times in the coming elections." (These sources insisted on remaining anonymous. Under Pakistan's Official Secrets Act, an official leaking information to the press can be imprisoned for up to ten years.)
A third source, an official who works under ISI's director, Lieutenant General Ehsan ul-Haq, informed TNR that the Pakistanis "have been told at every level that apprehension or killing of HVTs before election is absolute must." What's more, this source claims that Bush administration officials have told their Pakistani counterparts they have a date in mind for announcing this achievement: "The last ten days of July deadline has been given repeatedly by visitors to Islamabad and during meetings in Washington." Says McCormack: "I'm aware of no such comment." But according to this ISI official, a White House aide told ul-Haq last spring that "it would be best if the arrest or killing of HVT were announced on twenty-six, twenty-seven, or twenty-eight July"--the first three days of the Democratic National Convention in Boston."
http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040719&s=aaj071904
It is obvious to Pakastani's that Bush has the pressure on for political reasons. However, it is also important to notice the ambitions of the Pakistani chief. F-16 fighters to use against India.
Also today a NYT editorial informs:
Pakistan's military dictator, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, has done such a good job of repackaging himself as a vital American ally against radical Islamic terrorism that it is easy to forget how alarming Washington rightly found so many of General Musharraf's policies not very long ago. He crushed Pakistani democracy, was, at the least, recklessly indifferent to safeguards against the proliferation of nuclear weapons and supported the Taliban and the terrorist groups active in Indian-ruled areas of Kashmir.
General Musharraf publicly broke with the Taliban almost three years ago, but there has been inadequate progress on many of the other issues, and Pakistan has recently appeared to be backsliding on the Taliban.
Many of the biggest dangers America faces over the next few decades are present in General Musharraf's Pakistan, starting with the way arbitrary dictatorships like his have become dangerous pressure cookers of discontent across the Muslim world. Ever since he seized power in a 1999 coup, General Musharraf has promised an early return to electoral democracy. Almost five years later, he still shows no inclination to share or yield power eventually, and he still derives his authority solely from control of the Army. Leading civilian politicians remain banned. Even the powerless prime minister named to add a veneer of electoral legitimacy to military rule was fired last month for proving insufficiently docile.
The spread of nuclear weapons to a lengthening list of erratic and belligerent countries rightly terrifies Americans. Now we know that the man who helped develop nuclear weapons for Pakistan, Abdul Qadeer Khan, was the international godfather of rogue nuclear programs, helping countries like Iran, Libya and North Korea acquire nuclear bomb technology and materials. Earlier this year, under strong American pressure, Pakistan questioned and then pardoned Dr. Khan. This questioning yielded important clues about several countries' secret nuclear efforts. But there is no way of knowing for sure how high Dr. Khan's protection went and whether his nuclear arms bazaar is now truly closed.
Pakistan's relationship to radical Islamic terrorism remains dangerously ambiguous. Historically, military leaders, including General Musharraf, openly used the Taliban and terrorist groups in Kashmir to advance Pakistan's strategic objectives. That is now supposed to have stopped. After the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in the United States, General Musharraf broke ties with the Taliban government and let Washington use bases on Pakistani soil to support the invasion of Afghanistan. Recently, he sent Pakistan's Army into the tribal territories bordering Afghanistan, in a not tremendously successful effort to hunt down Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters. But General Musharraf still lets Taliban leaders operate and recruit elsewhere on that border.
This year, General Musharraf promised to end the infiltration of insurgents from Pakistani territory into the Indian-ruled part of Kashmir. He seems to be keeping his word, but he has not taken on the groups that train and arm these militants.
General Musharraf is not an apocalyptic zealot like Osama bin Laden, an erratic recluse like North Korea's leader, Kim Jong Il, or a public vilifier of America, like Iran's ruling clerics. But neither is he a convinced or convincing ally in the struggle against radical Islamic terrorism, nuclear weapons proliferation and destructive dictatorship.

Turncoats and terror in Pakistan's tribal areas
KARACHI - An alliance of six religious parties, the Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal (MMA), won unprecedented election victories just under two years ago in the Pakistani tribal areas, as well as in North West Frontier Province and Balochistan, contesting on a pro-Taliban platform.
However, when the Pakistani army, under US pressure, began (unsuccessful) operations in the South Waziristan tribal area this year to root out foreign and Afghan resistance elements sheltering there, the MMA opted for a mediatory role.
And now, with a further large operation likely to begin soon, the MMA has gone a step further by completely backing the government's efforts.
Because of the sensitive nature of the army's presence in the tribal areas, where it is widely despised, and also that the army was given a bloody nose last time out, Islamabad has clamped down on news from the area.
However, Asia Times Online contacts in South Waziristan confirm that fresh skirmishes - the third this year - have already begun, once again under US pressure, and the Pakistani army has taken up positions for a big offensive. Militants, meanwhile, disregarding the MMA, have also dug in. According to the contacts, the latest bout of fighting began on Tuesday near Wana, the main town in South Waziristan. An army spokesperson confirmed heavy attacks on army positions, but said they had been repulsed, and made no mention of casualty figures, although they are believed to have been heavy on both sides.
The MMA leadership recently met with newly installed Pakistani Prime Minister Chaudhary Shujaat Hussain, at which time the director general of internal security of the Inter-Services Intelligence, Major-General Shafi Zaki, gave a briefing on the presence of foreign fighters in the country and the inevitability of a new operation in the tribal areas. The MMA expressed complete harmony with the government, and agreed that foreigners should surrender to the authorities and get themselves registered if they wanted to remain.
This is all well and good in the rarefied confines of the corridors of power in Islamabad, but the ground realities in the rugged mountains of the tribal areas are a different matter.
Call of the mountains
Foreign fighters and local Wazir tribals have established themselves in a belt stretching from North Waziristan to South Waziristan and into the remote Shawal area in Afghanistan, a veritable no-man's land that now serves as the base for the Afghan resistance movement.
President General Pervez Musharraf is right, therefore, to say that the Pakistani tribal areas have become a base camp for the Taliban and al-Qaeda, "from where they have spun a web of terror from Kabul to Karachi".
When the Taliban and al-Qaeda retreated from Afghanistan in late 2001 in the face of the US-led assault on the country, without much of a fight, the move surprised many people. Strategic experts then argued that the Taliban withdrawal was a prelude to a guerrilla war, up to the point that they could start an organized war against US-led forces in Afghanistan.
The present situation in the Pakistan-Afghanistan tribal area bears testimony to this theory - and the war has only just begun, in North and South Waziristan, and parts of Afghanistan, where the Taliban have taken control of many districts around Zabul and Kandahar, with the US-sponsored Afghan administration unable to take them back. Even the US base in Kandahar came under attack recently, and according to a spokesperson of the Afghan government, several US soldiers lost their lives.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/FG10Df04.html
"Is Bush's re-election worth a war between Pakistan and India?"
Total disaster.
Is it worth a civil war in Pakistan?
Definitely NOT!
Are we upholding our values by associating so closely with another dictator?
There's a pattern here.... Chile, Salvador, Nicaragua, Iraq.......
"An army spokesperson confirmed heavy attacks on army positions, but said they had been repulsed, and made no mention of casualty figures, although they are believed to have been heavy on both sides."
This pretty much confirms my first post. That this area is a remote, harsh hiding place, a no mans land. Tribes have shifting alliances.
(Remember the
What would happen now if he let go of the reins & held elections? Not much chance of this. However, a government similar to the Taliban may take advantage of a civil war.
<>
If we had done this right after we entered Afghanistan I would agree with you. But since 2001 the HVTs have, established relations with the tribal chiefs, and are more entrenched.
The Taliban are increasing their presence in Afghanistan; we have only been able to protect citizens in Kabul. So we haven't protected Afghanistan, and have pushed Pakistan toward civil. As they said in the article: "it may have been a good idea in 2002, 2003, but in 2004 it is a political maneuver.
There was never a question that this is a "no man's land". I have read some interesting descriptions, like you get over a mountain only to see another and another and another just like it. It sounds like a perfect place to hide.
I have been thinking, what will we gain by the capture of OBL. It may give the US a few moments of revengeful satisfaction, but terrorism will continue. It is almost as if GWB had his chance in 2001, but didn't use of the opportunity wisely. Just like he had a brief window of time to set Iraq on a road to democracy, but he frittered it away.
I wouldnot be surprised if they get OBL out. Some people say they may already have him but just waiting for the right opportunity. I don't know. But I will not be surprised about Bush admin pressuring Pakistan about HVT. Since fridays news we know they even pressured CIA to give wrong analysis regarding WMD. Now all the blame is put on CIA. Do you remember Richard clarke saying he along with 3 or 4 people were told to find connection between 9/11 and Iraq? Didn't we know there were no WMD? There were CIA reports telling about no WMD. I remember reading about it on washington posts. I am really angry about all this, but this post is going to be buried like all which shows real concerns about future. People are more interested in talking about Edwards not being Kerry first choice.
Sonali
That is a possibility. What worries me is that Pakistan will get some F-16s. What do you think they will do with them?
There is no doubt in my mind that the administration will have an "October Surprise" this fall. I can only hope that it is something planned, not something that results from their failed policies.
C
C