Tuesday, March 07, 2006
Afganistan and Pakistan: reading the news carefully
When you read the news, try to figure out what is really going on. Most wire service news articles, and even more nuanced pieces in top newspapers, only hint at something much deeper. Experts, of course, know what lurks beneath, but for we amateurs half the fun is in divining the real story.
Today's news features a small, unremarkable story about a diplomatic row between Afghanistan and Pakistan, both putative allies of the West in the war on al Qaeda and its affiliates. Here's the heart of the matter:
Pakistan has its own complaints:
The question is, why would Pakistan -- which supposedly combs its "tribal areas" for terrorists every chance it gets -- be angry that Hamid Karzai turned over his list of bad guys operating from Paki caves? One would think that it would be helpful.
The official explanation is that Pakistan did not appreciate that the Afghans apparently leaked the list to the media, because it implied that "Kabul did not trust Islamabad to act on it."
Of course Afghanistan doesn't trust Pakistan to act on it. But that does not explain why Hamid Karzai would deliberately bait Pervez Musharraf, who runs a much more powerful country on Karzai's eastern frontier.
Commentary
So, what is really going on? We cannot know for sure, but each version involves Hamid Karzai putting some heat on Pervez Musharraf in advance of George Bush's visit to the region last week.
Pakistan, as virtually all political blog readers know, is an internally conflicted ally of the United States in the war on Islamic jihad. It had previously supported the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, but mostly to secure its western border so that it could concentrate on the Kashmir conflict and India. Al Qaeda sympathizers, other Islamists and perhaps even al Qaeda infiltrators are thought to be rife in its intelligence agency and military. Yes, Pakistan quite emphatically switched sides after September 11, and, yes, it has rolled up hundreds of known bad guys. But it has failed to bring in the Big Three (Bin Laden, Zawahiri, and Mullah Omar).
In all likelihood Pervez Musharraf would love to arrest the Big Three, but he can't make his system function adequately to reach that end. There are probably too many people on the inside who will tip the bad guys off to any impending operation against them, either for money or for love. They get a few foot soldiers to allay suspicion -- every operation can't be a failure without heads rolling -- but golly, they just keep missing Zawahiri.
All of this dilly-dallying is making everybody from Hamid Karzai to George W. Bush quite impatient. The United States, for its part, has been cozying up to India, not just last week but for virtually the entire duration of the Bush presidency. Our relationship with India is important for many reasons, but coercion of Pakistan is high on the list. Whenever Pakistan's commitment flags, we inch closer to Delhi, and then Pakistan rounds up more of the usual suspects to bring us back again.
Against that backdrop, right before George Bush visited the region Hamid Karzai handed Musharraf a list of known bad guys allegedly living in Pakistan and leaked that fact to the media. Karzai evidently thought it propitious to humiliate Pervez Musharraf. No wonder the general is pissed.
So, did Karzai think up this idea all on his own, or did somebody put him up to it?
Karzai may have wanted a ready-made excuse to serve to President Bush, who was undoubtedly going to ask for a progress report. One must, after all, cover one's own rear end. Maybe.
Or, maybe, the United States put Karzai up to it. This would serve two purposes, both defense and offense. First, Bush would have a pre-made set of "facts" at his disposal lest the leadership in Islamabad chose to complain too loudly about American incursions into Pakistan's western borderlands. Second, Bush would have specific new reasons for pressuring the Musharraf government into taking greater efforts against the jihadis in the tribal lands, or for turning the other way the next time a Hellfire missile sky-hoses a bad guy.
So, is today's spat between Kabul and Islamabad for real, or is Musharraf really complaining to the United States?
Comments are more than welcome.
Today's news features a small, unremarkable story about a diplomatic row between Afghanistan and Pakistan, both putative allies of the West in the war on al Qaeda and its affiliates. Here's the heart of the matter:
A rift between Afghanistan and Pakistan deepened Tuesday as Afghan President Hamid Karzai's office said intelligence about Taliban and al-Qaida fugitives allegedly hiding in Pakistan was "very strong and accurate."
Karzai's spokesman Karim Rahimi said his government will present Islamabad with further intelligence about the militants' whereabouts and that it was "hopeful that measures will be taken" against them.
Relations between Pakistan and Afghanistan — key allies of Washington in its war on terror — have deteriorated sharply since Karzai gave Pakistan President Gen. Pervez Musharraf last month a list of Taliban and al-Qaida fugitives he said were hiding in Pakistan.
Pakistan has its own complaints:
In another sign of the increasing tensions, Pakistani Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam urged Afghanistan — and U.S.-led coalition forces — to do more to stop militants from sneaking across the porous Pakistan-Afghanistan border into its tribal regions.
She said Pakistan had deployed some 80,000 troops along the rugged frontier and that Afghan and coalition forces should "equally contribute in stopping militants."
The question is, why would Pakistan -- which supposedly combs its "tribal areas" for terrorists every chance it gets -- be angry that Hamid Karzai turned over his list of bad guys operating from Paki caves? One would think that it would be helpful.
The official explanation is that Pakistan did not appreciate that the Afghans apparently leaked the list to the media, because it implied that "Kabul did not trust Islamabad to act on it."
"The bad-mouthing against Pakistan is a deliberate, articulated conspiracy," Musharraf was quoted as saying Monday by the state-run news agency, Associated Press of Pakistan.
Of course Afghanistan doesn't trust Pakistan to act on it. But that does not explain why Hamid Karzai would deliberately bait Pervez Musharraf, who runs a much more powerful country on Karzai's eastern frontier.
Commentary
So, what is really going on? We cannot know for sure, but each version involves Hamid Karzai putting some heat on Pervez Musharraf in advance of George Bush's visit to the region last week.
Pakistan, as virtually all political blog readers know, is an internally conflicted ally of the United States in the war on Islamic jihad. It had previously supported the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, but mostly to secure its western border so that it could concentrate on the Kashmir conflict and India. Al Qaeda sympathizers, other Islamists and perhaps even al Qaeda infiltrators are thought to be rife in its intelligence agency and military. Yes, Pakistan quite emphatically switched sides after September 11, and, yes, it has rolled up hundreds of known bad guys. But it has failed to bring in the Big Three (Bin Laden, Zawahiri, and Mullah Omar).
In all likelihood Pervez Musharraf would love to arrest the Big Three, but he can't make his system function adequately to reach that end. There are probably too many people on the inside who will tip the bad guys off to any impending operation against them, either for money or for love. They get a few foot soldiers to allay suspicion -- every operation can't be a failure without heads rolling -- but golly, they just keep missing Zawahiri.
All of this dilly-dallying is making everybody from Hamid Karzai to George W. Bush quite impatient. The United States, for its part, has been cozying up to India, not just last week but for virtually the entire duration of the Bush presidency. Our relationship with India is important for many reasons, but coercion of Pakistan is high on the list. Whenever Pakistan's commitment flags, we inch closer to Delhi, and then Pakistan rounds up more of the usual suspects to bring us back again.
Against that backdrop, right before George Bush visited the region Hamid Karzai handed Musharraf a list of known bad guys allegedly living in Pakistan and leaked that fact to the media. Karzai evidently thought it propitious to humiliate Pervez Musharraf. No wonder the general is pissed.
So, did Karzai think up this idea all on his own, or did somebody put him up to it?
Karzai may have wanted a ready-made excuse to serve to President Bush, who was undoubtedly going to ask for a progress report. One must, after all, cover one's own rear end. Maybe.
Or, maybe, the United States put Karzai up to it. This would serve two purposes, both defense and offense. First, Bush would have a pre-made set of "facts" at his disposal lest the leadership in Islamabad chose to complain too loudly about American incursions into Pakistan's western borderlands. Second, Bush would have specific new reasons for pressuring the Musharraf government into taking greater efforts against the jihadis in the tribal lands, or for turning the other way the next time a Hellfire missile sky-hoses a bad guy.
So, is today's spat between Kabul and Islamabad for real, or is Musharraf really complaining to the United States?
Comments are more than welcome.
1 Comments:
By 
Dymphna, at
Tue Mar 07, 12:25:00 PM:
Sirius sir-- for whatever reason, I hadn't put India into the mix...I mean officially.
But, boy, their intelligence material is so far ahead of the curve that they're indispensable to us. If they were overtly involved, though, think of the internal mayhem they'd have to quell.
