Pakistan: the next two weeks critical?

April 30, 2009

The Pakistan Army is fighting to regain control of the Buner valley to stop a Taliban advance deeper into the heartland, a battle that could determine the course of action the United States adopts in the near future.

Two weeks is what U.S. Central Command chief General David Petraeus is giving the Pakistani establishment to destroy the Taliban in Buner, some 60 miles from Islamabad, and begin to reverse the tide in the rest of the northwest region, according to Fox News.

It quoted Petraeus as saying that the Pakistanis had “run out of excuses” and were finally serious about combating the threat from the Taliban and al Qaeda. But because of a history of offensives that were not carried to their conclusion and even ended up in a reversal of positions, the U.S.military had suspended judgment. It would wait to see concrete action by the government to finish off the Taliban who remained in control of parts of Buner.

U.S. President Barack Obama was a bit more positive, although he made clear at his news conference in Washington that he remained “gravely concerned” about Pakistan.

Obama said the Pakistani military had begun to realise the biggest threat to the country’s stability came from militants operating within, not old rival India. “On the military side, you’re starting to see some recognition just in the last few days that the obsession with India as the mortal threat to Pakistan has been misguided, and that their biggest threat right now comes internally,” Obama told a news conference in Washington.

Has there been a shift? If it has, it could certainly be of far-reaching consequence. The New York Times reported earlier this week that Pakistan had moved 6,000 troops from the eastern border with India to fight militants on its western flank along the border with Afghanistan.  These were troops that had been deployed in the east after tensions rose following the attacks in Mumbai in November which New Delhi blamed on Pakistani-based guerrillas.

Moving six thousand troops from an army of hundreds of thousands is hardly a tectonic shift in posture that remains India-focused, but at least it is a start, said  Fareed Zakaria on CNN.

And these are not just voices from abroad, which are clearly beginning to border on the hystrerical. Pakistan’s Dawn says the army shouldn’t stop at Buner, or Lower Dir, another area that it won back last weekend. It must go into the Swat region which it said was the “epicentre of militancy” and where the militants have shown little willingness to stick to a peace deal even after the administration agreed to their demand for sharia law.

 

[Reuters photos: Generals Petraeus and Kayani; refugees from Buner]

Comments

it’s all part of the “cold civil war”… right now the factions are trying to figure out who’s gonna come out on top…

what they’re trying to decide is: is this america, or israeli america?

…the dice are loaded in favor of the israeli americans, but the only chance of preserving america lies in preparing ourselves for peak oil by spending the trillions now being wasted on these wars and bailouts of looters …spending that money instead on transitioning to a sustainable way of life.

of course, the looters see peak oil coming, so they’ve got to loot while the looting’s good, and they are another faction in the cold civil war.

.

one other little thing here: china recently overtook the US as the prime depositor of co2 into the atmosphere… which might have something to do with india’s alliance with israeli america and israeli america’s goal of depriving china of energy.

very slim chance of doing any good, but india’s apparently made its choice of alliances, and india will have to live with that choice.

hitch your wagon to a falling star. wonderful.

Posted by wadosy | Report as abusive
 

i have to say that i hope obama talks sense into everybody, tells the truth about peak oil and global warming and the threat they pose, and rallies the world to support the most efficient transition to a post-oil world while controlling global warming.

all this would take global cooperation on a massive scale.

meanwhile, america and obama, judging from recent events, still seem to be under firm israeli control, and the word “cooperation” seems to be unknown to neocons.

hope for the best, sure, but dont be too surprised if the whole thing degenerates into a global samson option.

Posted by wadosy | Report as abusive
 

wadosy

And how about 26/11 Mumbai attack—who is involved?

Posted by rajeev | Report as abusive
 

wadosy

Is there any chance that the fact on the ground, the Taliban and islamic religious fudamentalists and any supportive wing in the Pakistan establishment, will allow these beheaders flog their way into Islamabad to establish a nuclear Sharia state? It is critical since these guys, unlike invisible A-Q, are real and a danger for anyone to see even with head buried in the sand.

Posted by rajeev | Report as abusive
 

if you dont trust the official investigation of the mumbai attack, or for that matter, the attack on the indian parliament in 2001, i guess you’ll have to do the same as me: hope that somehow, someday, somebody you trust will reopen the investigation.

until then, you’ll just have to compile a list of suspects despite your inability to investigate…

you compile that list of suspects by asking: who had the most motive, means, and opportunity to carry out the attacks, who has demonstrated the character necessary to commit the attacks, and who has a prior history of similar attacks?

who benefited from the attacks?

.

if radical muslims gain control of nuclear weapons, will they be entitled to use those weapons in a fashion similar to israel… i.e., threatening to use them to blow up as many of their neighbors as possible as they go under?

Posted by wadosy | Report as abusive
 

what about the christian fundamentalists who are inadvertant allies of the israeli radicals and muslim fundamentalists?

do muslim fundamentalists yearn for armageddon? do they intend to attain “nuclear primacy” by threatening nuke first strikes against russia and china?

…and those radical christians would like nothing better than to see a nuke holocaust touched off in the middle east.

you think we ought to start bombing american bible thumpers who might someday gain control of american nukes?

maybe we should bomb tel aviv, seeing as how jewish fundamentalists —judging them by their samson option— already seem to have control of israeli nukes….

*shrugs*

Posted by wadosy | Report as abusive
 

there also exists the remote possibility that the fundamentalist muslims might not be quite so aggressive if we quit blowing up their weddings.

…but since israeli america is so persistent in bombing muslim weddings, we have to assume that israeli america is getting exactly the results they want from those bombings: more radical muslim actions that will justify escalation of the wars.

this is not rocket science.

Posted by wadosy | Report as abusive
 

@there also exists the remote possibility that the fundamentalist muslims might not be quite so aggressive if we quit blowing up their weddings.
this is not rocket science.
-Wadosy.

–Can you take off that box from your head in which you have stuck yourself and walking left and right with anti-Isreal Mantra. No one understand Hebrew here. It is hard for the best conspiracy theory expert in this region to weave a theory that links this violence with Isreal. 26/11 Mumbai had nothing to do with Isreal. Absolutely nothing. This and such other attacks are a state-opertated terrorism. A self-admitted proxy war against India by Pakistan and religion is just a vehicle to achieve that goal.
Now that;s not a rocket science. le me know if it is.

Posted by rajeev | Report as abusive
 

do muslim fundamentalists yearn for armageddon? do they intend to attain “nuclear primacy” by threatening nuke first strikes against russia and china?
-Wadosy

–Do you India and Pakistan’s Nuclear doctrine?

Posted by rajeev | Report as abusive
 

Do you know India and Pakistan’s Nuclear doctrine?
- Posted by rajeev

Posted by rajeev | Report as abusive
 

did i say israel had anything to do with the mumbai attack?

no.

Posted by wadosy | Report as abusive
 

Wadosy:
were we not talking about Mumabi? Dude break the rule and address the post to someone to avoid consfusion. So were you talking to yourself.

Posted by rajeev | Report as abusive
 

Undeniably believe that which you stated. Your favorite justification seemed to be on the web the easiest thing to be aware of. I say to you, I certainly get irked while people think about worries that they plainly don’t know about. You managed to hit the nail upon the top and also defined out the whole thing without having side-effects , people could take a signal. Will likely be back to get more. Thanks

 

Post Your Comment

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
  •