Pakistan: Now or Never?

Perspectives on Pakistan

Dec 29, 2010 12:55 EST

Bajaur bombing highlights conflicting U.S.-Pakistan interests

Photo

Last week’s suicide bombing in Pakistan’s Bajaur region, which killed at least 40 people, had a grim predictability to  it.  The Pakistan Army cleared Pakistani Taliban militants out of their main strongholds in Bajaur, which borders Afghanistan’s Kunar province, after 20 months of intense fighting which ended earlier this year.  But as discussed in this post in October the insurgents’ ability to flee to Kunar — where the U.S. military presence has been thinned out — combined with a failure to provide Bajaur with good governance, suggested the security situation in the region was likely to be deteriorating. The bombing appeared to confirm those fears.

The implications go far beyond Bajaur. The Pakistan Army has resisted U.S. pressure to launch a military offensive against militant strongholds in North Waziristan until it has secured gains made elsewhere.  Pakistani daily The Express Tribune quoted army spokesman Major General Athar Abbas as reiterating that point after the Bajaur bombing and after fighting in the neighbouring Mohmand region. Until areas “cleared” by the military were consolidated, “it is impossible to rush into another campaign,” it quoted him as saying.

The Taliban in Bajaur also had historically close ties with militants who overran the Swat valley and caused worldwide alarm by pushing further into Pakistan’s heartland before they were ousted by the Pakistan Army in 2009.  Any further evidence of the Taliban regaining ground in Bajaur would therefore be a cause for concern that military gains in Swat — itself reeling from this summer’s devastating floods — could also be reversed.

In some aspects — though not all — Pakistan’s problems in tackling militants are a mirror image of those faced by the United States on the other side of the border.  Soldiers can drive militants out of their strongholds, but they can’t stop them melting into the local population or fleeing across the border. And they can’t hold and build on those military gains without civilian back-up to provide people with governance. 

When I visited Bajaur on an army-organised trip in April, the military commander in the main town of Khar — target of last week’s suicide bombing — made two points. First he said the Americans had to “do more” on their side of the border to stop militants fleeing into Afghanistan.  Second he drew a graph showing how security gains made from military operations do not even remain static without governance, but actually dwindle over time – probably rather similar to graphs drawn by U.S. commanders on the other side of the border.

You might think the answer would be to coordinate approaches in both Pakistan and Afghanistan — a much talked about idea that somehow never quite managed to get off the drawing boards in Washington and into the field. If anything military coordination appears to be getting worse. 

The United States, keen to concentrate its forces in areas where they can make a difference, and to protect population centres, has been pulling troops back from remote outposts in Kunar and elsewhere.  Within the context of Afghanistan, that may make sense.  But from Pakistan’s point of view, it leaves its  military exposed. Meanwhile, Pakistan has resisted pressure to launch an operation in North Waziristan, both because it needs to consolidate gains elsewhere, and because it fears a backlash of suicide bombings on its towns and cities. Within the context of Pakistan that may also make sense. But from the U.S. point of view, it leaves its own military exposed. 

COMMENT

@777
i am not the kniow all, see my note to Mortal! God bless you, ask fewer questions and meditate to see solutions. We are all in the same boat and are affected by actions of others.
Let us be kind to those who are still living in 16th century for one or other reason. Try to remember the greek whio said war does not solve anything, but destroys more!
A good year to you!

Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
Oct 10, 2010 18:40 EDT

Pakistan: street rage and sectarian bombings

Photo

One of the more troublesome aspects of the current situation in Pakistan is how subdued – at least relative to the scale of the deaths – are protests against suicide bombings on Pakistani cities. Travelling from Lahore to Islamabad last month, my taxi driver winced in pain when I told him I had a text message saying the city we had just left, his city, had been bombed again. Yet where was the outlet for him to express that pain, or indeed for the many grieving families who had lost relatives?

I was reminded of this reading Nadeem Paracha’s latest piece in Dawn on the outcry over Aafia Siddiqui, the Pakistani neuroscientist  jailed in the United States after being convicted of shooting at U.S. soldiers. She has been claimed as the “daughter of the nation” who must be rescued from an American jail.

“Never have the highly vocal keepers of our women’s sanctity even superficially censured the aggravating antics of monsters like the Taliban and al Qaeda at whose hands thousands of innocent Pakistanis have lost their lives,” writes Paracha. ”None of the many women, children and men who were mercilessly slaughtered by the extremists, it seems, were good enough to also be celebrated as brothers, sisters and children of this nation.”

Saba Imtiaz made a similar point in Foreign Policy last month. “Political parties rarely call for protests after suicide bombings, but the Jamaat-e-Islami called for countrywide protests shortly after Aafia’s sentencing. Breathless condemnations of the sentencing came in almost instantly from political parties,”  Imtiaz wrote.

“The millions displaced by the floods in Pakistan, thousands languishing in jail awaiting trial and the countless women who are victims of honor killings, mistreatment in jails and discrimination will not see anyone rallying for their cause. Not acting swiftly to help them — who should also be dubbed daughters of Pakistan and supported by politicians — is the real injustice.”

Not that those comments are meant to suggest Siddiqui’s case should be ignored altogether. But it does indicate a worrying tendency in the way Pakistani society’s national narratives are constructed.  As discussed here, Manan Ahmed at Chapati Mystery has already written about how the Siddiqui case has tapped into the historical narrative about Mohammad bin Qasim, who first brought Islam to South Asia by conquering Sindh in the 8th century - allegedly after racing to the rescue of a Muslim woman who had been raped. The story of bin Qasim was specifically cited by Faisal Shahzad, the failed Times Square bomber.

“This particular brand of national machismo projected onto a woman’s body is neither new nor unique, yet it is a potent mixture in the oppressive, patriarchal Pakistani middle class. The mullahs can safely rage about the nation’s daughter, and the street urchins can eagerly vow to invade Manhattan,” wrote Ahmed.

COMMENT

@Umair
“Change, positive change will come, slowly, gradually, surely and painfully. It is a price we will ultimately have to pay for a better Pakistan. Still a lot of great people call this country their home and proud of it. ”

Very good to hear this from you that all hope is not lost.

And I think you gave a good answer regarding minority and majority of Pakistan if it was not a mere lip service (I say this because in past u have had flip flop kind of opinions; but if ur answer is honest then accept my humble apology for doubting). As far as US betraying goes I assume you want to say that despite of Pakistan helping US, US is not favouring Pakistan by not putting pressure on India to hand over its side of Kashmir to Pakistan on platter…Am I correct? But what I fail to understand is that isn’t Pakistani majority sick of spending so much on kashmir and not on development? Your governments spend so heavily on defence when all that money could be used for development work inside Pakistan. Is the majority in Pakistan not sick of minority who is killing all non-sunni muslims? Why can’t you people live and let others live peacefully? Why do public not demonstrate on roads even without so called leaders when there is a bomb blast inside Pakistan? Why the hell after all the sins of minority does the majority support it? I am baffled but lets just hope that positive change comes to Pakistan as described by you.

Posted by 777xxx777 | Report as abusive
Oct 30, 2009 06:51 EDT

Bombs and tipping points: Pakistan and Northern Ireland

Photo

When Northern Ireland’s Omagh bomb exploded, killing 29 people, I was in England, by cruel coincidence attending the wedding of a young man who had been badly injured in another attack in the town of Enniskillen more than a decade earlier.

I had just switched my phone on after leaving the church on a glorious, sunny Saturday afternoon when my news editor called. “There’s been a bomb. It sounds bad. We’re trying to get you on a flight.”

Memories of Omagh returned this week when a massive car bomb ripped through a market in the Pakistani city of Peshawar, killing more than 100 people, many of them women and children.

Will the Taliban’s bloody assault on Pakistan’s cities deprive them of popular support and ultimately lead to their defeat?

The BBC’s Urdu service had reported earlier this month that sympathy for the Taliban in Peshawar — where many are deeply hostile to the United States – was waning due to the violence being unleashed on the border city since the Army began its assault on the militants’ South Waziristan stronghold.

Was this a sign the Islamists were overreaching themselves on their war against the Pakistani state, much as they had done in Swat?

Against that, as others have pointed out on this blog, a coherent leadership that might unite a stricken country against its attackers has yet to emerge.

COMMENT

To add,

@Again international politics to understand is way beyond the reach of people like us. Yes there are problems but the reality is no one angel.
- Posted by casper hughes

-True, everyone has blood on their hands but the degree varies. The difference is much like a pickpocket and a serial killer. There has to be a basket of positives.

Posted by rajeev | Report as abusive
Oct 6, 2009 04:29 EDT

Pakistan: Getting Waziristan right this time

Photo

U.S. defence officials, in a ringing vote of confidence, said over the weekend that Pakistan had the forces and equipment to launch a long-awaited ground offensive in South Waziristan. It could mount this assault without seeking more reinforcements, a U.S. official said, according to this Reuters report. Yet Pakistan had cited in recent months shortages of helicopters, armoured vehicles and precision weapons in putting off a Waziristan assault.So what has changed? Has the United States,  desperate to turn around a faltering war in Afghanistan, got ahead of itself in nudging Pakistan toward “the mother-of-all battles”? Some people are asking if the Pakistan Army is really ready to start what must be its bigest test yet since the militants turned on the Pakistani state. If the idea is to go in and linflict casualties on the Taliban in the hope of killing senior leaders, then it will be another punitive strike for which the force levels may well be adequate.But if the Pakistan Army plans to go into the Mehsud strongholds and occupy the region then the numbers are a bit worrying, says Bill Roggio at The Long War Journal.  A Pakistan Army spokesman has said that  two divisions, or up to 28,000 soldiers, are in place to take on an estimated 10,000 hard-core Taliban. But Roggio says Waliur Rehman Mehsud, who heads the Mehsud Taliban forces in Waziristan, (Hakimullah Mehsud who surfaced at the weekend is the overall head of the Pakistani Taliban) is estimated to command anything between 10,000 to 30,000 forces.  If the army were to wage a full-scale counter-insurgency they and the Frontier Corps “would need to throw multiple divisions against a Taliban force of this size,” he argues. And then there is the Haqqani network, as well as a sizeable contingent of Uzbek and other non-Pakistani fighters in the area. They may well join the fight, according to the Dawn newspaper. (more…)

COMMENT

Hallo Mr Siddiqui,
I almost missed you. I have the impression that you are a genuine gentleman and very persistent in your position.I do think differently and therefore our disagreements. What matters for me is facts and not so much the pathology or interpretations:
.PA was defeated in east because of the strategic blunder made by its Commander.He spread his forces throughout the country to suppress its citizens and later was unable to defend the capital against the Indian Force.
. He then followed the text book instructions for surrender of the entire army instead of resisting the invading army. In any case this is now in the military history, A Classic Blunder.
.PA needs to be restructure to become a national army. They do not need to attack its neighbours or civilians to prove their stregnth.
. PA intrusion into Swat is of a criminal nature and should in my view be regarded as war crimes. PA has no business to use air power and artillery destroying houses, hospitals and schools similar to what Israel did in Lebanon and Gaza. Who is going to repair the damage and pay for the costs.
.PA intrusion into the waziri land is illegal and against the agreements made with Brits. and later with successive Pakistan govts.
. PA needs to get out of the Cantonments which the Brits had built to protect their colonial Force and the Families. They have no business residing among the civilian citizens holding an elite status.
Your assertion of few massuds(few Bengalis in Bengal campaign) is misleading, also they do not consider themselves as soldiers of Islam, I watch this phenomina among the PA regarding themselves martyrs, when they loose their lives in combat agaist the Indian Army or their own citizens.
. Pakistan in my view has lost the legitimacy to stay a single unit any more. I do not see any longer a common denominator for Pushtoos or for that matter Baluchis with Punjabis and sindhis to stay within the fedration of Pakistan.
. I mentioned earlier that the Massuds are the fiercest wariors among the waziris.Unfortunately the cable network does not show their performance against the PA because of the military blackout, but we do get the chance to watch how a single sniper pinns down the entire platoon of marines for several hours until the helecopter appears in the sky and the sniper leaves. Sir, You must have seen on the TV that PA is no longer in a position to defend their own Headquarte. A classic scenario, who would you blame now if the Indian parachute regiment lands in the Pakistan capital like they did in the east, and leave the PA intact currently operating in border areas? Have a nice day.

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
Aug 30, 2009 05:15 EDT

Pakistani Taliban’s new chief:more ambitious, more ruthless?

Photo

The first big suicide bombing in Pakistan this week since the slaying of Taliban chief Baitullah Mehsud in a U.S.-missile strike had a particularly nasty edge to it.

The attack in Torkham, a post on the main route for moving supplies to NATO and American forces in Afghanistan, took place just before dusk, as a group of tribal police officers prepared to break the Ramadan fast on the lawn outside their barracks.

Because the attacker, who by most accounts appeared to be a teenager, offered food, he was welcomed to join the gathering, in accordance with local traditions during the fasting month, the New York Times reported, citing one of the police officers who was there at the time.

So the attacker walked in and detonated his explosives among the policemen, killing 22 people.

A militant group affiliated with the Taliban claimed responsibility for the bombing, which came two days after the Taliban confirmed Baitullah’s death, after weeks of denials, and announced the appointment of one-time aide Hakimullah Mehsud, as his successor.

The question being asked is whether this is the face of a more ruthless and vicious Taliban under Hakimullah,  who, by all accounts, appears to be a young, battle-hardened ambitious leader.

COMMENT

The killing of Taliban militants, especially their leaders, is the best and most effective tool the U.S. has and we need to keep up the attacks. New information and improved technology will make them even more effective. Those who claim that the drone attacks are useless because another leader always pops up to take the old one’s place are missing the point. By killing the leaders as they pop up, the experience and quality of the leadership declines while many qualified leaders do not take the job because they see it is a death sentence. The infighting and search for moles after a leader is killed can create more disgruntled militants that can be recruited as informants, while the shuffling of responsibilities and personnel present opportunities for new informants to infiltrate and those already in place to move up. There are a lot of Pakistani civilians who have had relatives killed by the Taliban and Al-Qaeda and want revenge, so moles are always a problem for them.We should not get discouraged when militant leaders are replaced. That is just the militant’s response to another defeat in a long-running battle. In the long run the killing of Taliban and Al-Qaeda leaders can only be to our benefit. I am sure there are a lot of people, besides me, including the Pakistan military, who do high-fives every time a militant leader is killed, whether it be by a drone or a bullet.

Posted by Patrick | Report as abusive
  •