See-saw of Pak-Afghan battle
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Daily Times, Pakistan
Monday, June 01, 2009
Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani on Saturday expressed concern over the US decision to send additional troops to Afghanistan. He thought it would complicate the situation “because the inflow of militants into Pakistan’s border areas would increase”. He says he has already talked about it to the US and British governments. According to him, Pakistan wanted deployment of [its own] troops on the Afghan border to stop infiltration of militants into Pakistan; and what was needed was more intelligence-sharing and coordination between the Pakistan army and the NATO forces.
The prime minister also referred to the foreign militants already on Pakistani soil — Uzbeks, Chechens, Arabs and Afghans — while promising that information about the “involvement of foreign elements” would be shared with the nation “at some appropriate time”. However, the presence of foreign fighters has also been confirmed by the Pakistan Army spokesperson during the daily briefings on the ongoing operation. There is also the issue of India’s involvement in destabilising Pakistan. This needs more proof than is currently available, though it must be said that getting evidence which can actually stick in a court of law is nearly impossible, such being the nature of the issue.
Mr Gilani’s objection to the American troop surge may also be based on analyses within the United States that oppose sending in more troops. The fear that this could push Taliban fighters into Pakistan cannot be dismissed because the last time coalition forces put the heat on Taliban-Al Qaeda fighters, they chose to cross over into Pakistan to escape annihilation. The strategy, therefore, needs to take this into consideration. Right now Pakistan is grappling with those extremist cadres that routinely attack its interests. The degree of difficulty in handling what is already on the ground is perhaps one reason why Mr Gilani has expressed the fear of more such elements entering Pakistan and overstretching Pakistan’s capacity to deal with the problem.
The paradox is clearly there. NATO-US commanders in Afghanistan think that the Taliban infiltrate into Afghanistan from Pakistan’s tribal areas. From the latest statement of our prime minister, it is clear that Pakistan too thinks that “foreign” and Afghan terrorists enter Pakistan from Afghanistan despite the deployment of Pakistani troops along the border. Pakistan thinks that if more American troops are deployed on the Afghan side, more rather than fewer militants will be pushed into Pakistan. The Americans on the other hand think that if Pakistani troops take on the Taliban in the tribal areas, fewer rather than more terrorists would be pushed into Afghanistan. The fact is that movement from west to east and east to west cannot be seen as mutually exclusive. There is movement on both sides because of the nature of the conflict, the ethnic and religious motivations involved and the terrain itself.
The idea of a “pincers” strategy against the militants is not to the liking of Pakistan. The strategy that NATO-US forces and the Pakistan Army attack the militants from two sides and finish them off by blocking their escape routes is not very appealing when you take into account the scale of the task being faced by the Pakistan Army. South Waziristan is the base of the Taliban, their leader Baitullah Mehsud now unquestionably the most powerful warlord in both Afghanistan and Pakistan. He has his “branchline” groups in all the agencies of FATA and the Malakand region, with jihadi collaborators in the NWFP, Sindh, Punjab and Balochistan. He has fighters and funds at his disposal unmatched by any other warlord. Fighting him will be a major operation. If he begins to get more fighters from Afghanistan, that would only add to Pakistan’s problems. Pakistan could be persuaded to pull out elements from the eastern side but that may not be possible until the US could convince India to thin its military presence on its western front.
President Barack Obama may be thinking of an exit strategy but he also plans to more than double the number of US forces in Afghanistan to 68,000 troops by the end of 2009, up from about 32,000 in 2008. Pakistani strategists think that only 200,000 to 300,000 American troops will deliver Afghanistan; anything short of that will make a mess of the war, pushing more Taliban fighters and refugees into Pakistan. Therefore Pakistan is in there for the long haul. It wants to tackle the menace of the Taliban piecemeal, relying on the public opinion in its favour, without being faced with more Taliban militants from across the Durand Line. *
Source
Monday, June 01, 2009
Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani on Saturday expressed concern over the US decision to send additional troops to Afghanistan. He thought it would complicate the situation “because the inflow of militants into Pakistan’s border areas would increase”. He says he has already talked about it to the US and British governments. According to him, Pakistan wanted deployment of [its own] troops on the Afghan border to stop infiltration of militants into Pakistan; and what was needed was more intelligence-sharing and coordination between the Pakistan army and the NATO forces.
The prime minister also referred to the foreign militants already on Pakistani soil — Uzbeks, Chechens, Arabs and Afghans — while promising that information about the “involvement of foreign elements” would be shared with the nation “at some appropriate time”. However, the presence of foreign fighters has also been confirmed by the Pakistan Army spokesperson during the daily briefings on the ongoing operation. There is also the issue of India’s involvement in destabilising Pakistan. This needs more proof than is currently available, though it must be said that getting evidence which can actually stick in a court of law is nearly impossible, such being the nature of the issue.
Mr Gilani’s objection to the American troop surge may also be based on analyses within the United States that oppose sending in more troops. The fear that this could push Taliban fighters into Pakistan cannot be dismissed because the last time coalition forces put the heat on Taliban-Al Qaeda fighters, they chose to cross over into Pakistan to escape annihilation. The strategy, therefore, needs to take this into consideration. Right now Pakistan is grappling with those extremist cadres that routinely attack its interests. The degree of difficulty in handling what is already on the ground is perhaps one reason why Mr Gilani has expressed the fear of more such elements entering Pakistan and overstretching Pakistan’s capacity to deal with the problem.
The paradox is clearly there. NATO-US commanders in Afghanistan think that the Taliban infiltrate into Afghanistan from Pakistan’s tribal areas. From the latest statement of our prime minister, it is clear that Pakistan too thinks that “foreign” and Afghan terrorists enter Pakistan from Afghanistan despite the deployment of Pakistani troops along the border. Pakistan thinks that if more American troops are deployed on the Afghan side, more rather than fewer militants will be pushed into Pakistan. The Americans on the other hand think that if Pakistani troops take on the Taliban in the tribal areas, fewer rather than more terrorists would be pushed into Afghanistan. The fact is that movement from west to east and east to west cannot be seen as mutually exclusive. There is movement on both sides because of the nature of the conflict, the ethnic and religious motivations involved and the terrain itself.
The idea of a “pincers” strategy against the militants is not to the liking of Pakistan. The strategy that NATO-US forces and the Pakistan Army attack the militants from two sides and finish them off by blocking their escape routes is not very appealing when you take into account the scale of the task being faced by the Pakistan Army. South Waziristan is the base of the Taliban, their leader Baitullah Mehsud now unquestionably the most powerful warlord in both Afghanistan and Pakistan. He has his “branchline” groups in all the agencies of FATA and the Malakand region, with jihadi collaborators in the NWFP, Sindh, Punjab and Balochistan. He has fighters and funds at his disposal unmatched by any other warlord. Fighting him will be a major operation. If he begins to get more fighters from Afghanistan, that would only add to Pakistan’s problems. Pakistan could be persuaded to pull out elements from the eastern side but that may not be possible until the US could convince India to thin its military presence on its western front.
President Barack Obama may be thinking of an exit strategy but he also plans to more than double the number of US forces in Afghanistan to 68,000 troops by the end of 2009, up from about 32,000 in 2008. Pakistani strategists think that only 200,000 to 300,000 American troops will deliver Afghanistan; anything short of that will make a mess of the war, pushing more Taliban fighters and refugees into Pakistan. Therefore Pakistan is in there for the long haul. It wants to tackle the menace of the Taliban piecemeal, relying on the public opinion in its favour, without being faced with more Taliban militants from across the Durand Line. *
Source
Labels: Al Qaeda, America, Extremism, India, Militancy, NATO, Pak-Afghan Battle, Taliban, Terrorism
posted @ 9:54 AM,
0 Comments:
Post a Comment