by Aneel SALMAN
Three tragic events in Pakistan have prompted the defense and political analysts to question the security situation and credibility of the Pakistan Army. Bomb explosion in Peshawar (09 Oct, 2009), Suicide attack at the World Food Program office (05 Oct, 2009) and the planned attack on Pakistan’s Pentagon (Army Headquarters) (10 Oct, 2009) gives a strong message of future terrorist attacks in Pakistan. The design behind these three events is completely different. The attack in Peshawar market was meant to create fear and panic amongst the general masses, already half dead due to the price hikes, poverty and unemployment. The attack on the WFP offices was a signal to international community that a suicide bomber can reach you despite the strong buffers. The GHQ attack was meant to show the vulnerability of our security forces.
The Swat operation and subsequent death of Taliban Chief Baitullah Mehsud broke the back bone of Talibans and situation within Pakistan border became temporarily calm. Nomination of the new Taliban chief in Pakistan, Hakimullah Mehsud, General McChrystal’s request for more troops in Afghanistan, approval of the Kerry Lugar Bill and political statements regarding military operation in South Waziristan have stirred up the hornet’s nest again in Pakistan.
The new skipper Hakimullah Mehsud is in his late 20s and according to some experts still in “pampers” with no experience and capacity to run such a demanding job. The lad made his public appearance on 04 October which cleared the doubts of him being anything but ready and prepared to take the battle head on. In the interview with five tribal journalists he declared that Taliban will avenge the killing of Baitullah Mehsud by striking back at Pakistan and the US. His message was loud and clear: You target our senior Taliban figures and we will strike back hard, fast and without mercy. It is indeed ironic that no proactive measures were taken to appease this young lion out to prove to his men and followers his leadership mettle.
“Resources will not win this war, but under-resourcing could lose it,” said Gen. Stanley McChrystal. Last month he requested for an additional 30,000- 40,000 in Afghanistan, without which US could lose the war. After a round of National Security meetings, analyzing counter insurgency in Afghanistan and situation in Pakistan, the Washington Post reported on 13 October 2009 that the U.S. military is deploying 13,000 additional troops to Afghanistan. Hamid Karzai also supported the request of additional troops made by General McChrystal. On the other side Vice President Joe Biden, proposes a different approach of counterterrorism strategy “Pakistan First” which focuses on using Special Forces and technology to reduce the number of al Qaeda insurgents on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. According to the Noble Prize Winner For Peace President Obama war in Afghanistan is a “war of necessity” and sending more troops would win the war and bring peace in the region.
Uncle Sam can buy anything with a dollar and has now given the green signal to the generous economic assistance package to Pakistan under its Kerry Lugar Bill. But let us not forget that this is not the first time Pakistan has been offered money: Gen Zia ul Haq in the 70s and 80s used it to create the deadly breed of Taliban against Russians as the good lapdog of the American government; and in the more recent past, Gen Pervaiz Musharraf used more US hand outs to crush the very same Frankenstein created by his predecessor to prove his loyalty to the US of A. It seems increasingly clear now that where military colonization of a land and people fail (as in Iraq), the capitalist imperialist project for American hegemony falls back on the more reliable form of colonization…economic. Bernd Debusmann describes Washington’s dilemma as a Catch-22 situation, “You need to defeat the Taliban to build a state, and you need to build a state to defeat the Taliban. There cannot be security without development or development without security.”
Under the Enhanced Partnership with Pakistan Act of 2009, the Congress approved the Kerry Lugar Bill to triple aid for Pakistan to $1.5 billion a year for the next five years. The offer is lucrative, the only difference is that this time the deal is not with a military dictator, rather with a “democratic leader” albeit one of the most corrupt and vile men in the country Asif Ali Zardari. Unfortunately, for the American Congress and intelligentsia, the Pakistani Army has not been that impressed with the green.
The Government of Pakistan and the military have rarely seen eye to eye on things in this country, especially when the Army is in the barracks and not the benches. Even now there is a power struggle going on between the President and the Commander in Chief, a struggle which has become even more pronounced since this economic aid does not come without its basket of strings and conditionalities. The Bill brings the Pakistan Army under the microscope with its demands for more top brass accountability and audits on military spending, the big red herring. Plus, it is claimed that the money coming in will make the fragile Government strong and empower civil authorities. Gen Kiyani, the Commander in Chief of the Army, is 13 months away from his retirement and there are rumors that President Zardari is looking to replace him. Even though this statement has been refuted officially, but if Zardari even dreams of such an act he needs to recall the Nawaz-Musharraf episode in 1999. At the end of the day, even with so many voices against military dictators, this scribe believes that the people of Pakistan still trust their military leadership and see them as their last resort and saviors if the democratic governments fail to fulfill their promises and start wagging their tails in front of the West.
Let us, however, not get hasty in painting the Army black (or even white) just because it is saying no to a potential diamond mine. If ever before America’s intentions towards Pakistan were double faced and hidden behind billions of dollars, it is now. With this Bill they seem to be playing their infamous game “Divide and Rule” by weakening the strongest institution (Pakistan Army) and experimenting with a corrupt civilian Zardari government.
The international and especially the Indian media had a field day criticizing the security failures and Pakistan Army credibility after the GHQ attack. Very ironic since both the US, UK and Indian media have short term memory losses given how easily they forgot their own security lapses on 9/11, 7/11 and then the Mumbai attacks. If anything, we should now accept the harsh reality that a terrorist attack, especially a suicide attack, can happen any time, any place, be it a market, diplomatic enclave or military headquarters. What is needed is not just intelligent proactive measures as for example in the case of the GHQ lapse where the police had already warned the Army after military uniforms and bomb raw material was found in one of their raids, but also deep soul searching in terms of how much and how little should one country be interfering in the problems and issues of the other. What is needed also is an alive citizenry. Sadly, we in Pakistan have become a sloth loving nation…people like me are content to do our bit by writing down our frustrations in one article or other, but no one is willing to come out on the streets to demand and make real change. I truly wonder what will happen if the people of Pakistan rose up against their corrupt leaders and these fanatical Talibans. Will they not run like hell with tails between their legs? Or maybe I am just being too idealistic.
This series of terrorist attacks has left little options for the Government of Pakistan, but an army offensive against the militants in South Waziristan is an option that needs far more thought and frankly wisdom. South Waziristan, the semi-autonomous tribal belt along Pakistan’s border with Afghanistan, is the main bastion of Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan and almost out of the control of Pakistani government. USA claims that Al-Qaeda and Taliban militants who fled Afghanistan after the 2001 are holed up in the region. Extremism and terrorism have been growing fast in the region in recent years due to its economic underdevelopment. The 10,000 or so Taliban militants are well trained and have rich experience of fighting against the government and the U.S. army. They have building infrastructure in their strongholds for many years and given their tactical isolation would be well prepared for a ground operation. No doubt, the Pakistan army carried out successful operations in Swat and wiped out (so claimed) Talibans from the region. But, going into Waziristan could lead to an all out war for which the people of Pakistan need to be better prepared with spillover effect of terrorist attacks in the urban hubs of Pakistan. As our soldiers head into this “waster land” the Government needs to monitor the movements of local Islamic groups, increase their secret information networks and take proactive counter terrorism measures.
Political gurus fear that the militants would come back after a military operation if the Pakistani government is unsuccessful in establishing its authority in the tribal areas, improve the living standard of the local people and get extremism under control. This will be a long journey for the Government to clear the militants and finally end the war on terror.
Aneel Salman, an academic, based in New York, USA. Research fellow at Center for Public Policy and Governance, Forman Christian University Pakistan. He can be reached at salmaa@rpi.edu
I don’t think these attacks have any more significance so as to shake the army’s confidence. You have to realise GHQ is situated in a very densely populated part of Pindi. It is no more significant as you mentioned the 9/11 or London bombing or Mumbai attacks. If they are anything to measure the credibility of any country’s ability I seriously doubt the credibility of US and Indian forces in particular due to the nature of attacks.
I am sure you would have read by now Obama’s statement about how Bush underestimated the war in Afghanistan. He also points out to a bleak fact that US in Afghanistan is nowhere close to a victory, it is rather standing where it started as right questions were not asked. The control of 73% of Afghanistan by Taliban is another damning evidence. So after 8 years of War in Afghanistan if USA is standing where it was then how long is this war going to continue? Or the fact that USA only attacked Afghanistan with 11000 troops and didn’t pay attention to area where Al-qaeda was present for two months makes me question their priorities. In fact this war is deeply de-stabilizing Pakistan every single day.
Now you can not mix root and cause in this problem. It is very clear. In Pakistan the security situation pre 9/11 was absolutely fine compared to today. So the root of Pakistan’s problems is Afghan war and it is causing the current series of terrorist activities and not the other way around.
If anyone thinks these additional 13000 are going to win you the war they live in Utopia. I thought General McChrystal should have been given the number of troops he demanded. The fact that majority of these guys are trainers and more to do with the training and scientific aspect is no help. It will take time to train Afghans and help establish themselves as a force to be taken seriously when it comes to security.
If US thinks there is still Al-qaeda present in the region then there are two things for it to consider. First it’s drone attacks are no good as it failed to eliminated Al-qaeda and it should stop them immediately. Secondly the incompetency of its troops (which haven’t been questioned until now by the way) as to how they let the Al-qaeda slip through its hands. If one argues that the border is porous then it brings into question their strategy. They should have thought about that in the first place. It means their strategists are useless. Or may be USA have other priorities and motive hidden from you and me. They may well have planned this way so as to let these elements run to Pakistan through border areas to
1. Provide a cover before hand if they fail
2. Accuse Pakistan for is failure or de-stabilize Pakistan
The fact that more troops are being requested is not because USA is going to intensify the war, it is because it is preparing to with-draw. One country that may want to take advantage of this situation is India who have close to 28 (i thought it is 10 but some one recently said it is more than that) consulates and trade centres in Afghanistan.
Leave your response!
You must be logged in to post a comment.