The US must address Pakistan’s security concerns to leave behind a stable AfPak region.
Despite some ‘ifs’ and ‘buts’ related to US withdrawal expressed by some US officials following President Obama’s speech laying out his new policy on Afghanistan, there is absolutely no doubt that President Obama will begin to wind down the US involvement in Afghanistan by 2011, taking at best a year or so to complete it. “...after eight years... it is my intention to finish the job” he said. With the domestic situation and public opinion not supportive to the Afghan war but his military establishment insisting on a surge, Obama has made a compromise. He agreed to a limited surge and limited time frame for the military and at the same time promised to the American people a withdrawal beginning by 2011, in time for his next presidential bid. The “Surge” and the Exit However, the surge carries the risk of increased violence mainly due to the limited time of 18 months available to the US forces in which to achieve their targets. The fighting that erupts can force Taliban to seek shelter in border areas of Pakistan and also cause refugee influx into Pakistan. This may complicate Pakistan Army’s operations against insurgents on its own side of the border and derail America’s negotiations with Afghan insurgent groups. Unlike Vietnam, President Obama has the opportunity for an orderly withdrawal, which if he succeeds in achieving will be one of the major milestones of his presidency. Although he is conscious that he can neither change the dynamics that drive the Afghan society nor can he remain indefinitely involved in the Afghan imbroglio, yet as president of a super power he finds it difficult to concede that American invasion of Afghanistan (and Iraq) was a mistake. On the contrary, his administration, like its predecessor, continues to hang the blame on Pakistan’s door for terrorism that is the direct offshoot of American policies. How much has Pakistan suffered, and lost, is not counted. Under the present scenario the optimal course for President Obama would be to attach greater urgency to dialogue with the Taliban and other insurgent groups that would enable him to marginalize, dismantle and defeat Al Qaeda, as he likes to put it. Not only would this be in American interest but would enable Afghanistan to achieve peace and begin its journey on the road to recovery after decades of war and destruction. But this is only possible if the Pashtuns get a fair share in the government. Meanwhile under the new strategy General McChrystal would work with Karzai government to improve governance and begin work on infra-structure and developmental schemes. A major effort will be devoted to inducting, training and preparing the Afghan National Army (ANA) and the police force to begin assuming responsibility for law and order, as his troops prepare to leave. For Pakistan this preparatory phase of America’s departure is very important. Afghan government under Karzai has not only been generally unfriendly but has facilitated forces inimical to Pakistan’s security to operate with impunity. The roots of the reign of terror that Pakistan is experiencing today lie in Afghanistan. In his report General McChrystal recognized Pakistan’s concerns at an expanding Indian role in Afghanistan and the tensions this is causing. After eight years of unsuccessful US-NATO military campaign, Obama seems to have also realized the need for policy change and now attaches higher priority to Pakistan’s role in the region. This has prompted him to promise a ‘long term partnership’ to Pakistan. In his speech he said: “we will act with the full recognition that our success in Afghanistan is inextricably linked to our partnership with Pakistan”. Pakistan-Afghansitan Bonds Pakistan’s relations with Afghanistan are as old as history itself. The common geographical and historical links of the two people are marked by age old interaction through invasions, migrations, intermarriages and evolution of language and culture. Pashtuns, a majority in Afghanistan, also inhabit Pakistan’s North Western Frontier Province, Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and other provinces. Pakistan’s role in beating back the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and hosting of millions of Afghan refugees fleeing that war is only a recent occurrence. The Afghan president himself and many others around him were beneficiaries of Pakistan’s hospitality until they were picked up to be the rulers of Kabul. These strong ethnic and cultural bonds cannot simply be wished away by those who aspire to draw a wedge between the two countries. It is natural for Pakistan to react to any negative developments in Afghanistan, whether social, economic, political or even security related, as these will directly impact the stability of Pak-Afghan border region. Can there be another country, globally or regionally, that can lay claim to a greater stake in the stability and progress of Afghanistan other than Pakistan? Bush, Obama and India This basis of Pak-Afghan relations was ignored by Bush administration when it involved outside players in the Afghan equation who were motivated more by selfish interests than the desire to help Afghanistan transform into a peaceful and progressive country. Consequently, the stability of the entire region was put at risk. Bush administration allowed Afghanistan to become a hotbed of intrigues and subversive activities, mainly targeting Pakistan. RAW, Mossad and MI-6, ostensibly with CIA’s nod, initiated subversive activities in FATA, NWFP and Balochistan. Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan and Balochistan Liberation Army were financed, trained, equipped and launched to challenge the writ of Pakistan Government of which there is undeniable evidence. K Subramanyam, an Indian defence analyst, believes that following India’s role in rebuilding and reconstruction in Afghanistan, which has been appreciated by President Obama, he will likely ask India to also build the capacity of Afghan defence forces to allow a ‘responsible transition of US forces out of Afghanistan’. If true, this is a matter of grave concern for Pakistan. As some one aware of the tensions that prevail in South Asia, President Obama needs to be alive to the sensitivities and conflicts of interest that fuel acrimony between India and Pakistan. By affording to India an opportunity to instill anti-Pakistan sentiments in the junior and senior ranks in Afghan defence forces (mostly held by Tajiks and Uzbeks) this will eventually translate into an Afghan army hostile to Pakistan. In addition to rushing in military supplies of all kinds, India is already opening up its military schools to train a large number of ANA cadets and officers. Reportedly no less than 130 generals are also going to be trained. If Obama chooses to ignore Pakistan’s concerns in this regard, this will signal the continuation of Bush policies and it may be advisable for Pakistan to take his assurances about a long term partnership with a pinch of salt. As opposed to creating this cause of tension, President Obama should use his influence to ensure that India backs off from destabilizing Pakistan from the Afghan soil. How can he expect Pakistan to fight the US war on terror and support the US in stabilizing Afghanistan when it is about to retreat, if Pakistan’s own security remains at risk at the hands of India? The U.S.-India-Israel Nexus Pakistan is already gravely concerned at the Indo-Israeli efforts to enhance their ingress in the Afghan society at different levels in order to poison its mindset against Pakistan. They specially focus on the youth, the military and the political leadership. A strong RAW/Mossad nexus is conducting covert operations against sensitive Pakistani targets to convince the world of Pakistan’s vulnerability and inability to secure its strategic assets. Mossad operatives using dual nationality papers to conceal their true identity are reportedly operating in the northern and north-western provinces of Afghanistan that border Uzbekistan and Tajikistan to pursue the Israel’s anti-Pakistan agenda. Apart from espionage and subversion against Pakistan, Israel is utilizing the opportunity to make a quick buck from the war. It invited Afghan military delegation and defence minister in July 2009 and sold ‘SUFA’ armored version jeeps worth one billion USD to counter the Taliban threat of PRG- 29 anti-tank rocket launchers. It also supplied to the US army in Afghanistan Arotech and kibbutz Sasa armored vehicles and an Israeli telecommunication firm Radwin will provide to the British Military wireless broad-based technologies to facilitate troop's communication and monitor the signals communications of Pakistan Army operating near Pak-Afghan border. Israel is also selling to Australian and German forces in Afghanistan Aerial vehicles (UAVs) after having sold some to Canadian and Spanish contingents. Conditions essential to an orderly exit strategy The orderly withdrawal that Obama administration talks about presupposes transfer of power to a government in Kabul that will have a sizeable representation of the Taliban and other insurgent groups, all of them Pashtuns. These Pashtuns, orthodox Muslims of Salafi orientation, will tolerate the involvement of neither the Israelis nor the Indians in Afghanistan’s national affairs. Firstly, they both represent the much disliked American ‘occupation’ and secondly, the Israelis are intensely disliked for their atrocious behavior towards Palestinians. The Israelis are therefore not even digging in for the long haul. After making a profit through arms sale and destabilizing Pakistan, they would be out of Afghanistan once the Americans leave. The Indians will bank for support on the northern tribes, which are in minority and would not be able to provide much leverage. The tribal composition of the ANA would most likely also change after the Americans leave, with Pashtuns rightfully demanding greater share in defence forces. Pakistan’s historic links and abiding relations with the Afghan Pashtuns can come handy and bridge the trust deficit between the Taliban and the US. The US would do well to involve a natural ally – Pakistan, to lend a helping hand in the post withdrawal era. Pakistan has an enduring interest in seeing Afghanistan a stable, secure, economically vibrant and a progressive country, at peace with itself and with its neighbors. Even now when Afghanistan is allowing its territory to be used for subversive activities, Pakistan is feeding the Afghan population at the cost of its own people and meeting most of Afghanistan’s other needs either from its own resources or through Afghan life line of transit trade. India or Israel have never been of such help and never will be in the future.
Despite some ‘ifs’ and ‘buts’ related to US withdrawal expressed by some US officials following President Obama’s speech laying out his new policy on Afghanistan, there is absolutely no doubt that President Obama will begin to wind down the US involvement in Afghanistan by 2011, taking at best a year or so to complete it. “...after eight years... it is my intention to finish the job” he said. With the domestic situation and public opinion not supportive to the Afghan war but his military establishment insisting on a surge, Obama has made a compromise. He agreed to a limited surge and limited time frame for the military and at the same time promised to the American people a withdrawal beginning by 2011, in time for his next presidential bid. The “Surge” and the Exit However, the surge carries the risk of increased violence mainly due to the limited time of 18 months available to the US forces in which to achieve their targets. The fighting that erupts can force Taliban to seek shelter in border areas of Pakistan and also cause refugee influx into Pakistan. This may complicate Pakistan Army’s operations against insurgents on its own side of the border and derail America’s negotiations with Afghan insurgent groups. Unlike Vietnam, President Obama has the opportunity for an orderly withdrawal, which if he succeeds in achieving will be one of the major milestones of his presidency. Although he is conscious that he can neither change the dynamics that drive the Afghan society nor can he remain indefinitely involved in the Afghan imbroglio, yet as president of a super power he finds it difficult to concede that American invasion of Afghanistan (and Iraq) was a mistake. On the contrary, his administration, like its predecessor, continues to hang the blame on Pakistan’s door for terrorism that is the direct offshoot of American policies. How much has Pakistan suffered, and lost, is not counted. Under the present scenario the optimal course for President Obama would be to attach greater urgency to dialogue with the Taliban and other insurgent groups that would enable him to marginalize, dismantle and defeat Al Qaeda, as he likes to put it. Not only would this be in American interest but would enable Afghanistan to achieve peace and begin its journey on the road to recovery after decades of war and destruction. But this is only possible if the Pashtuns get a fair share in the government. Meanwhile under the new strategy General McChrystal would work with Karzai government to improve governance and begin work on infra-structure and developmental schemes. A major effort will be devoted to inducting, training and preparing the Afghan National Army (ANA) and the police force to begin assuming responsibility for law and order, as his troops prepare to leave. For Pakistan this preparatory phase of America’s departure is very important. Afghan government under Karzai has not only been generally unfriendly but has facilitated forces inimical to Pakistan’s security to operate with impunity. The roots of the reign of terror that Pakistan is experiencing today lie in Afghanistan. In his report General McChrystal recognized Pakistan’s concerns at an expanding Indian role in Afghanistan and the tensions this is causing. After eight years of unsuccessful US-NATO military campaign, Obama seems to have also realized the need for policy change and now attaches higher priority to Pakistan’s role in the region. This has prompted him to promise a ‘long term partnership’ to Pakistan. In his speech he said: “we will act with the full recognition that our success in Afghanistan is inextricably linked to our partnership with Pakistan”. Pakistan-Afghansitan Bonds Pakistan’s relations with Afghanistan are as old as history itself. The common geographical and historical links of the two people are marked by age old interaction through invasions, migrations, intermarriages and evolution of language and culture. Pashtuns, a majority in Afghanistan, also inhabit Pakistan’s North Western Frontier Province, Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and other provinces. Pakistan’s role in beating back the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and hosting of millions of Afghan refugees fleeing that war is only a recent occurrence. The Afghan president himself and many others around him were beneficiaries of Pakistan’s hospitality until they were picked up to be the rulers of Kabul. These strong ethnic and cultural bonds cannot simply be wished away by those who aspire to draw a wedge between the two countries. It is natural for Pakistan to react to any negative developments in Afghanistan, whether social, economic, political or even security related, as these will directly impact the stability of Pak-Afghan border region. Can there be another country, globally or regionally, that can lay claim to a greater stake in the stability and progress of Afghanistan other than Pakistan? Bush, Obama and India This basis of Pak-Afghan relations was ignored by Bush administration when it involved outside players in the Afghan equation who were motivated more by selfish interests than the desire to help Afghanistan transform into a peaceful and progressive country. Consequently, the stability of the entire region was put at risk. Bush administration allowed Afghanistan to become a hotbed of intrigues and subversive activities, mainly targeting Pakistan. RAW, Mossad and MI-6, ostensibly with CIA’s nod, initiated subversive activities in FATA, NWFP and Balochistan. Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan and Balochistan Liberation Army were financed, trained, equipped and launched to challenge the writ of Pakistan Government of which there is undeniable evidence. K Subramanyam, an Indian defence analyst, believes that following India’s role in rebuilding and reconstruction in Afghanistan, which has been appreciated by President Obama, he will likely ask India to also build the capacity of Afghan defence forces to allow a ‘responsible transition of US forces out of Afghanistan’. If true, this is a matter of grave concern for Pakistan. As some one aware of the tensions that prevail in South Asia, President Obama needs to be alive to the sensitivities and conflicts of interest that fuel acrimony between India and Pakistan. By affording to India an opportunity to instill anti-Pakistan sentiments in the junior and senior ranks in Afghan defence forces (mostly held by Tajiks and Uzbeks) this will eventually translate into an Afghan army hostile to Pakistan. In addition to rushing in military supplies of all kinds, India is already opening up its military schools to train a large number of ANA cadets and officers. Reportedly no less than 130 generals are also going to be trained. If Obama chooses to ignore Pakistan’s concerns in this regard, this will signal the continuation of Bush policies and it may be advisable for Pakistan to take his assurances about a long term partnership with a pinch of salt. As opposed to creating this cause of tension, President Obama should use his influence to ensure that India backs off from destabilizing Pakistan from the Afghan soil. How can he expect Pakistan to fight the US war on terror and support the US in stabilizing Afghanistan when it is about to retreat, if Pakistan’s own security remains at risk at the hands of India? The U.S.-India-Israel Nexus Pakistan is already gravely concerned at the Indo-Israeli efforts to enhance their ingress in the Afghan society at different levels in order to poison its mindset against Pakistan. They specially focus on the youth, the military and the political leadership. A strong RAW/Mossad nexus is conducting covert operations against sensitive Pakistani targets to convince the world of Pakistan’s vulnerability and inability to secure its strategic assets. Mossad operatives using dual nationality papers to conceal their true identity are reportedly operating in the northern and north-western provinces of Afghanistan that border Uzbekistan and Tajikistan to pursue the Israel’s anti-Pakistan agenda. Apart from espionage and subversion against Pakistan, Israel is utilizing the opportunity to make a quick buck from the war. It invited Afghan military delegation and defence minister in July 2009 and sold ‘SUFA’ armored version jeeps worth one billion USD to counter the Taliban threat of PRG- 29 anti-tank rocket launchers. It also supplied to the US army in Afghanistan Arotech and kibbutz Sasa armored vehicles and an Israeli telecommunication firm Radwin will provide to the British Military wireless broad-based technologies to facilitate troop's communication and monitor the signals communications of Pakistan Army operating near Pak-Afghan border. Israel is also selling to Australian and German forces in Afghanistan Aerial vehicles (UAVs) after having sold some to Canadian and Spanish contingents. Conditions essential to an orderly exit strategy The orderly withdrawal that Obama administration talks about presupposes transfer of power to a government in Kabul that will have a sizeable representation of the Taliban and other insurgent groups, all of them Pashtuns. These Pashtuns, orthodox Muslims of Salafi orientation, will tolerate the involvement of neither the Israelis nor the Indians in Afghanistan’s national affairs. Firstly, they both represent the much disliked American ‘occupation’ and secondly, the Israelis are intensely disliked for their atrocious behavior towards Palestinians. The Israelis are therefore not even digging in for the long haul. After making a profit through arms sale and destabilizing Pakistan, they would be out of Afghanistan once the Americans leave. The Indians will bank for support on the northern tribes, which are in minority and would not be able to provide much leverage. The tribal composition of the ANA would most likely also change after the Americans leave, with Pashtuns rightfully demanding greater share in defence forces. Pakistan’s historic links and abiding relations with the Afghan Pashtuns can come handy and bridge the trust deficit between the Taliban and the US. The US would do well to involve a natural ally – Pakistan, to lend a helping hand in the post withdrawal era. Pakistan has an enduring interest in seeing Afghanistan a stable, secure, economically vibrant and a progressive country, at peace with itself and with its neighbors. Even now when Afghanistan is allowing its territory to be used for subversive activities, Pakistan is feeding the Afghan population at the cost of its own people and meeting most of Afghanistan’s other needs either from its own resources or through Afghan life line of transit trade. India or Israel have never been of such help and never will be in the future.
Comments
Post a Comment