DIVERGENCES - Spearhead Analysis

Spearhead Analysis

DIVERGENCES


Yesterdays New York Times has a story that hints at divergences between the US and Pakistan in the war on terror in Afghanistan. Unnamed Pakistani intelligence officials are reported as having said that Pakistan had concerns that the US operational surge in Afghanistan could raise the pressures on Pakistan—particularly in the Baluchistan area where the troop strength was nowhere near what it was in FATA. They are also quoted as saying that perceptions differed over the threat from India and therefore Pakistan could not move troops from the east to the west. Pakistan has often indicated that the subversive activity in Baluchistan is from Afghanistan and that India is involved because it wants to create leverage in Kashmir. Lately Indians have been saying that activity in Kashmir is picking up again.

The US thinks that a body called the ‘Quetta Shura’ runs the Taliban operations in Afghanistan from Baluchistan and this ‘shura’ is tolerated by Pakistan as it poses no threat to Pakistan unlike the local Taliban in FATA and Swat. The US Secretary of State said in India that the ‘perpetrators of 9/11 were in Pakistan’. This was countered officially in Pakistan by a Foreign Office spokesman who said that they were in Afghanistan. The perception in Pakistan is that the US operations in Southern Afghanistan are not achieving success and now that sanctuaries in FATA cannot be blamed for the lack of success because of Pakistan military operations the US is talking of the ‘shura’ in Baluchistan. Over the last two weeks casualties have been high in Afghanistan and four aircraft have been lost raising the specter of ground to air weapons in Taliban hands. If true this could increase the scale of operations significantly.

Implicit in these perceptions is the idea that Pakistan is carrying out counter insurgency operations in FATA and Swat areas because the local or ‘Pakistani’ Taliban had challenged the writ of the state but it is not doing anything against the Taliban fighting US/NATO in Afghanistan and in fact tolerates their presence. There is even the unspoken thought that Pakistani intelligence is in contact with the Taliban commanders operating in Afghanistan---this ‘contact’ is never fully explained because Pakistani intelligence is the best bet for influencing the Taliban to negotiate if that ever became an option. Pakistan understands that the insurgency in its FATA area springs from Southern Afghanistan and is supported by the Taliban/Al Qaeda there---it is therefore unlikely that Pakistan would be so moronic as to fight the Afghan supported insurgents in one sector and support people behind them in another sector. It does make sense however, that Pakistan would keep all options open to bring the insurgency to an end---something that can happen only with an end to the violence in Afghanistan.

There is a fringe in Pakistan that believes that the entire situation in FATA, Swat and Baluchistan is being manipulated by the US to involve Pakistan’s military fully on the entire border with Afghanistan because that suits US, Indian and Afghan government interests. Yet another thought is the fear of violence marring the Presidential elections in Afghanistan and that this is behind the pressure on Pakistan to ‘do more’. A failed election would signal overall failure in Afghanistan.
It is vitally important that the US and Pakistan have a bilateral discussion to remove the doubts, concerns and fears on both sides. The US strategy in Afghanistan and Pakistan was discussed before it began to be implemented. Pakistan has been and continues to be cooperative. Pakistan is making enormous sacrifices while fighting the insurgency in FATA. If these efforts remain unappreciated and in fact if Pakistan begins to be doubted then a reappraisal of exactly how much Pakistan should be doing would be warranted. There should never be a feeling in Pakistan that Washington and Delhi putting their heads together translates into targeting Pakistan. The need of the hour is not Af-Pak’, whatever that means, but US- Pakistan and US- Afghanistan and US-India---three separate tracks with convergence only where it is possible and required. There is enormous appreciation for US support of Pakistan---this opportunity should not be lost. Impatience with Pakistan should not drive US policy---it should lead to serious thinking on how Pakistan can be supported to act urgently in its own interest and how the capability to do so can be built up.
www.spearheadresearch.org