Geopolitical Diary: Implications of Overt U.S. Operations in Pakistan (Stratfor)

 

 

June 17, 2008 | 0123 GMT

 

Speaking at a joint press conference with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown on Monday, U.S. President George W. Bush expressed support for Afghan President Hamid Karzai's June 15 remarks that Kabul would send forces into Pakistan to prevent the Taliban from using the South Asian country as a launchpad for attacks in Afghanistan. Karzai, who spoke after a major jailbreak in Kandahar in which hundreds of Taliban fighters escaped, specifically mentioned the Waziristan-based Pakistani Taliban chief Baitullah Mehsud and Maulana Fazlullah, the jihadist leader in the district of Swat in the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP). Pakistani authorities have been negotiating peace agreements with these two jihadist leaders.

It is no coincidence that Bush's and Karzai's statements come just days after a U.S. airstrike against a paramilitary outpost in Pakistan that killed 11 Pakistani soldiers. Afghan forces alone clearly lack the ability to conduct cross-border operations in Pakistan, regardless of Karzai's wishes; Afghanistan can barely secure its own capital. U.S. forces — most likely operating outside the aegis of NATO's International Security Assistance Force — probably would carry out any such move.

Afghanistan and Pakistan are undergoing a shift Stratfor mentioned in May in which the United States is no longer relying on Pakistan to rein in Islamist militants on its side of the border, but is imposing a situation in which it will become the norm for U.S.-led coalition forces to conduct operations openly inside Pakistan. While U.S. special operations forces and CIA teams have been operating covertly in Pakistan essentially since the beginning of the U.S.-jihadist war, this operational tempo appears to have increased to the point that it is poised to become overt. From the U.S. point of view, Pakistan's new civil-military leadership is failing to respond to the jihadist threat aggressively, and there is growing U.S. mistrust of the South Asian country's military and intelligence apparatus.

This perception could help explain the U.S. position that the airstrike on (what Pakistan maintains is) a well-established Pakistani outpost was justified. While U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates called for a joint inquiry into the incident, U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen maintained that U.S. forces took action against hostile forces and that the operation was carried out in keeping with operational protocol. It is no secret that Pakistan's Frontier Corps, whose outpost was hit, is viewed as sympathetic to the Taliban and its allies. This apparently led the United States to take matters into its own hands.

Though it is very difficult to describe the nature of U.S. operations on Pakistani soil, Karzai's comments offer some insight. By threatening not just Mehsud but also Fazlullah, Karzai was hinting that such operations might not be limited to the Federally Administered Tribal Areas but could extend to the NWFP. This leaves the Pakistanis in a very difficult position.

Islamabad could pre-empt the U.S. move by giving Washington exactly what it wants and engaging in a massive action against the militants and their sympathizers within the Pakistani security establishment. Given Pakistan's performance thus far, this is probably not likely, however. But the inability to make such a move is contributing to the growing international perception of Pakistan as a dysfunctional state, and only pushes the United States further toward taking unilateral action.

Routine U.S. raids on Pakistani soil could lead to clashes not only with militants but also with local tribesmen and others who might not support the Taliban. This very well could create a major uprising in Pakistan, with a strong nationalist reaction from a population that already harbors highly anti-American sentiments. Worse, such raids could create fissures and possibly even fractures with the Pakistani army. This would be especially true if Pakistani troops end up clashing with U.S. forces — something certainly not impossible, considering the deteriorating situation in Pakistan.

Rifts within its army would greatly destabilize the Pakistani state. The military is the only robust institution in Pakistan, and is the cornerstone of whatever stability remains in the South Asian country. But the recent turn of events means Islamabad must choose between confrontation with the United States and confrontation with the jihadists.

 

 

© Copyright 2008 Strategic Forecasting Inc. All rights reserved

Zardari Outwits Opponents with a Masterstroke by Zamir Sheikh, The Nation

By Zamir Sheikh: Chaudhry Aitzaz Ahsan, the estranged senior PPP leader and vanguard of Pakistan's Lawyers Movement for the lost cause of restoration of judiciary has failed to see the master stroke played by his party Co-Chairperson Asif Ali Zardari, who, emerged as a master tactician at the end of the lawyers march to Islamabad.

The much trumpeted long march became a show of the right wing politicians and political parties led by Jamaat-e-Islami Chief Qazi Hussain Ahmed and his sidekick Imran Khan, who tried to hijack the entire judicial movement and turned it into an anti PPP, anti Parliament drive after boycotting February 18 elections.

Zardari played his cards well when he gave free hand to his coalition partner Mian Nawaz Sharif and the lawyers to take out the long march and even offered them food and other necessary facilities when the huge crowd of lawyers supported by political activists converged a short distance from the front of the Parliament building.

His party's decision to increase the numbers of Supreme Court judges to 29 in the now under debate finance bill was an intelligent move that almost pricked the bubble of agitation policies of his opponent who are bent upon tarnishing his democratic credentials. He has already released the salaries for the sacked judges to show his sincerity to the cause of reinstating the judged but through a constitutional package.

PPP Co-Chairman's non- resistance attitude to the march took away the wind out of the political sail of the APDM who was expecting road blocks and road bumps to the marchers from the government side which would have given bad name to the PPP led government at Islamabad.

The brinkmanship politics of APDM which is aimed at forcing fresh election at the earliest was stymied by the master stroke of Zardari.

The major stake holder of APDM, Nawaz Sharif is aware that the PPP without Benazir Bhutto would be like a sacrificial lamb before his lion that is why he is in a hurry to cash all the advantages and bring the situation to such a pass that there is no alternate except going back to the people for a new mandate.

Born again politician, Zardari with a political acumen not seen before in this country, is aware of the difficulties that he and his party would face if they are thrown again into the election arena without delivering any thing.

Analysts, who are closely monitoring the day-to-day political scenario, are of the view that time is of essence for Zardari and there is no better option for him to buy time then to extend the crucial issue of restoration of judiciary.

He and his partners have intelligently and wisely played their cards in the judicial movement by introducing the judicial reformation bill in the parliament. This will buy him more than enough time and at the same time exacerbate the worries of Nawaz Sharif and his other political opponents who in desperation would make decisions that will further expose them. Analysts had rightly expressed their fear that the lawyers movement may land in the hands of extremist elements and the entire cause would be defeated and may become a tool in the hands of those elements who are fighting in the Northern areas of the country.

This fear was reflected in the speech of former ISI Chief delivered by the thorough bred, Jihadi, Lt Gen (R) Hamid Gul, who set aside the cause of the lawyers and loudly spoke about starting a jihad. He openly said that the nation is ready to wage a jihad against the foreign forces.

His public declaration may have shocked the supporters of the lawyers' movement because it is not a political campaign.

The presence of a number of retired generals, who while in uniform trampled over the constitution, human rights and democratic forces under their boots in the past, were now with the lawyers supporting their campaign wearing the cloak of civil society.

However, for those who had seen and experienced history over the last 60 years was difficult to swallow the idea of former generals supporting a democratic cause.

It is like the wolf of Little Red Riding Hood story in which the carnivorous animal sleeping in the bed camouflaging himself as a Granny waiting for his kill.

Pakistan Fury at Deadly US Strike, BBC

Details of the clashes that sparked the apparent air strike remain unclear

Pakistan's Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani has condemned an air strike by Afghanistan-based US forces that Islamabad says killed 11 of its troops.

The incident took place inside Pakistan, near the border with Afghanistan.

The US military confirmed it had used artillery and air strikes after coming under fire from "anti-Afghan" forces.

The incident comes as relations between the US and Pakistan militaries have been hit by mounting tensions.

The soldiers' deaths occurred overnight at a border post in the mountainous Gora Prai region in Mohmand, one of Pakistan's tribal areas, across the border from Afghanistan's Kunar province.

Eight Taleban militants were also killed in the clashes, a Taleban spokesman said.

'Cowardly act'

If the 11 deaths are confirmed, it would be the worst incident of its kind since US and Nato-led forces began fighting militants in Afghanistan in 2001.

Prime Minister Gilani condemned the deaths, telling parliament: "We will take a stand for the sake of this country's sovereignty, for the sake of its dignity and self-respect".

"We do not allow our territory to be used. We completely condemn this, and will take it up through the foreign office."

Pakistan's military called it a "completely unprovoked and cowardly act".

Pakistan-US relations hit a low Meeting feared Pakistani militant

The US military said in a statement that coalition troops had come under fire from "anti-Afghan forces" in a wooded area near the Pakistan border.

The statement said artillery and air strikes had been co-ordinated with Pakistan, but that the incident was being investigated.

A spokesman for a pro-Taleban militant group in Pakistan said it had launched an attack on US and Afghan army troops trying to set up a border control post.

"We launched an attack on them from several sides and caused serious harm - and then the US and Nato forces began a series of air strikes," said the spokesman, Maulvi Umar.

Lawless border

There is increasing anger in Pakistan at US strikes on its territory which have killed more than 50 people this year, says the BBC's Barbara Plett in Islamabad.

Both US forces and Nato-led coalition forces are operating in Afghanistan, with Nato focused mainly on peacekeeping and reconstruction and the US troops working more directly to combat militant activity.

Advertisement

Funerals have been held for the 11 soldiers who died

Taleban fighters have a strong presence in the border areas of the tribal districts and local administrators have little power there, although security forces keep a presence on the border.

There is rising frustration among the Afghans and foreign troops at Pakistani efforts to negotiate peace deals with pro-Taleban militants on its side of the border.

Afghan and US-led forces accuse Islamabad of not doing enough to deny Taleban militants a hiding place in Pakistan's tribal areas and to stop them from infiltrating the border into Afghanistan.

They are worried that the Pakistan government's recent peace talks with the militants there will only give the Taleban more room for manoeuvre.

Pakistan denies the accusations, saying it has lost about 1,000 soldiers fighting militants in the tribal border areas.

"The Lawyers' Crusade" from New York Times

"
Ahsan is almost recklessly outspoken about P.P.P. leaders, even though
they are his own political patrons. He speaks admiringly of Benazir
Bhutto's courage and steadfastness but also points out with disdain
that she viewed herself as the P.P.P.'s "life chairperson." And he
does not bother to conceal his dim view of Zardari. In the car, as we
drove back through the night to Lahore, I asked him how many of the
allegations of corruption he believed were justified. "Most of them,"
Ahsan said, after a moment's reflection. "The type of expenses that
she had and he has are not from sources of income that can be lawfully
explained and accounted for."