Bush to send tough message to Pakistan

Society Military and Strategic Issues
1

Looks like some arm twisting is happening to get Musharraf to do the right thing. Hopefully, it will work. Losing military aid would make the generals think twice on their approval of Taliban and Al Qaeda activity in Pakistan.

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2007\02\27\story_27-2-2007_pg1_1

Bush to send tough message to Pakistan

  • Pakistan could lose military aid if it doesn’t do more against Qaeda
  • Rice concerned Qaeda staging comeback in tribal areas

WASHINGTON: US President George W Bush has decided to send an unusually tough message to President Gen Pervez Musharraf warning that the new Democratic-led Congress could cut aid to Pakistan unless it does more to crack down on Al Qaeda operatives, The New York Times reported on Sunday.

The decision came after the White House concluded that Gen Musharraf was not living up to commitments he made to Bush in September to combat militant groups, the newspaper said, citing senior administration officials.

US intelligence officials have concluded that terrorist infrastructure is being rebuilt in Pakistan’s tribal areas, and that while Pakistan has attacked some camps, its overall effort has flagged, The Times reported.

“He’s made a number of assurances over the past few months, but the bottom line is that what they are doing now is not working,” one senior administration official said. “The message we’re sending to him now is that the only thing that matters is results.” “We think the Pakistani aid is at risk in Congress,” said the official.

The House of Representatives recently adopted a bill requiring Bush to certify Pakistan is making “all possible efforts” to prevent the Taliban from operating in areas under its sovereign control as a condition of continued US military aid.

US officials say that for now, the White House has ruled out unilateral strikes against training camps in North Waziristan, The Times said, because such strikes would undermine the stability of Gen Musharraf’s government.

“The Pakistanis remain committed to doing everything possible to fight Al Qaeda, but having said that, we also know that there’s a lot more that needs to be done,” presidential spokesman Tony Snow said on Monday

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said on Sunday the administration was concerned that Al Qaeda was attempting to stage a comeback in the Pak-Afghan border area.

“We have to be vigilant, and that’s why we are working with the Pakistanis, we are working with the Afghans, we’re working worldwide in our intelligence network to continue to degrade this institution, this organisation worldwide and on the Afghan border,” she said.

Rice, asked whether Gen Musharraf was constrained in how tough he could be with the Taliban in Pakistan, said, “I’m certainly aware that there are political issues in Pakistan. To not say that would be not to face reality.” agencies

2

Re: Bush to send tough message to Pakistan

He has been sending tough messages since 9/11.

3

Re: Bush to send tough message to Pakistan

And what about this, it is far more alarming than ever before. Though Pakistan’s spoke’s person has denied any such deal but what the neucons are planning is a real threat to Pakistan’s security.

US senators call for direct strike inside Pakistan: Pressure tactics may trigger Musharraf’s ouster: ambassador

By Anwar Iqbal
WASHINGTON, March 2: Members of the US Senate have urged the Bush administration to launch military strikes at alleged Al Qaeda targets inside Pakistan, prompting the Pakistani envoy in Washington to warn that such an attitude could bring down the present set-up in Islamabad.
Senior Pentagon officials added fuel to the fire by claiming that their troops have already targeted Taliban and Al Qaeda sites inside Pakistan and that they have an agreement that allows them to do so.
Senator Carl Levin, Democratic chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said the panel would press the Defence and State departments to consider taking military action against alleged Al Qaeda camps inside Pakistan if they learn that attacks inside Afghanistan have been planned at these sites.
“It’s a critically important point, and I think we’ve got to insist, on this issue, that we be given a clear answer,” Mr Levin said.
Lt-Gen Douglas Lute, chief operations officer for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, however, told the committee US soldiers could target terrorist sites inside Pakistan if there’s an imminent threat.
“We have all the authorities we need to pursue, either with (artillery) fire or on the ground, across the border,” he said.
“If just across the border, inside Pakistan, we have surveillance systems that detect a Taliban party setting up a rocket system which is obviously pointed west, into Afghanistan, we do not have to wait for the rockets to be fired. They have demonstrated hostile intent and we can engage them,” Lt-Gen Lute said.
Retired US Marine Gen. James Jones, former top Nato operational commander in Afghanistan, also told the panel that forces under the US command called Operation Enduring Freedom have a legal right to strike across the border.
“That mission, everybody agrees, could be done,” he said.
Lt-Gen Lute, however, clarified that they would have to seek the Pakistan government’s permission to go after a munitions factory further inside the Pakistani border.
Pakistan remained the target throughout the debate, with both Democrat and Republican senators claiming that the country is either unwilling or unable to prevent the Taliban and Al Qaeda insurgents from establishing camps inside the tribal zone.
Republican Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama said that if international laws allowed US invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, the same laws could be applied to take actions against Al Qaeda and Taliban sanctuaries inside Pakistan.
Democratic Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana said that the Pakistani leaders “need to contemplate which is harder for them – acting to do something about this, or us acting to do something about this."
Senior US defence officials present at the hearing did little to stop the tirade against Pakistan, a country the administration describes as a close ally in the war against terror.
Instead, they complained that the North Waziristan deal has led to an increase in cross-border attacks, and joined the lawmakers in urging Pakistan to do more to address the problem.
Under Secretary of Defence for Policy Eric Edelman said the agreement led to “an almost immediate and steady increase” in cross-border infiltration and attacks.
"We’ve expressed, over a period of time, directly to President Musharraf and to others our scepticism and reservations about the agreement,” he said.
Mr Edelman indicated that recent visits to Islamabad by Vice-President Dick Cheney and Defence Secretary Robert Gates were also aimed at persuading Pakistan to do more.
“There’s no question that that sanctuary exists, and that it’s a major asset for the Taliban,” said Lt-Gen Lute.
The only person who spoke for Pakistan was the committee’s former chairman, now senior Republican Party member John Warner.
“I think under the leadership of Musharraf, they’re doing the best they can, but the realities are there’s fragility in the political system in Pakistan,” he explained.
Senator Warner said the situation would be much worse for the United States and its allies if Islamists came to power in Pakistan.
In an interview to a Western news agency, Pakistan’s envoy in Washington, Mahmud Ali Durrani, also warned that such pressure tactics could destabilise Pakistan and may even bring down President Musharraf.
Asked if it might trigger President Musharraf’s ouster, he replied: “I don’t know. Possibly it could bring him down. It could destabilise the whole country. It could cause mega problems there. That is possible.”
“What I’m worried about today more than anything else is this unhinging of the cooperative relationship… In this very critical field of (cooperation on) counter-terrorist operations, there seems to be a problem. We need to fix it,” Ambassador Durrani told Reuters.
The hostility against Pakistan is so strong that even the capture of senior Taliban leader Mullah Obaidullah did not help reduce the criticism.
Some media outlets pointed out that Pakistan only captures a major terrorist leader when there’s pressure, which justifies Washington’s current policy of continuing its pressure on Islamabad.
http://dawn.com.pk/2007/03/03/top1.htm

4

Re: Bush to send tough message to Pakistan

What exactly is the govt supposed to do? Arrest people? Send in the Army? None of this seems practical.

CHEATER
5

Re: Bush to send tough message to Pakistan

Patriot,

Sending troops to FATA again is a non-starter. However, if our agencies have more Taliban bunnies in stock like the Obaidullah guy, then we should hand them over before Cheney comes back and puts pressure again. These Taliban mullahs also harm the social fabric of Pakistan. If JUI or Maulan Fazl compains, we should put their fat tinds in jail as well.

However, no more "operations" in FATA. That is a loser for Pakistan.

6

Re: Bush to send tough message to Pakistan

Pakistan is increasingly recommending to countries with soldiers in Afghanistan that prolongued fighting will not accomplish anything. It is particularly saying that Al-Qaeda should not be confused with the Taliban and that the two are separate entities. To fight terrorism you need to fight Al-Qaeda, but not the neccesarily the Taliban. Pakistan believes that its deals in the FATA are limiting Al-Qaeda activity, although it is resulting in Taliban gaining control.

Pakistan's view is that Al-Qaeda can be defeated militarily, but the Taliban cannot. Essentially, given the way that western armies freely use munitions, they are inflicting too many civilian casualties. In other words, the more they try and fight the Taliban, the more they do nothing but increase support for the Taliban.

Every time a village is accidentally bombed by the Americans, the inhabitants want revenge - blood for blood. Siding with the Afghan government won't help them get revenge, so who do they go to?

Every time a village is bombed, the neighbouring villages are driving into the arms of the Taliban.

Every time people see jjumpy jittery American, british or Canadian soldiers accidentally fire at an unarmed vehicle that failed to act as desired at a checkpoint, the eyewitnesses are driven into the arms of the Taliban

Every time a farmer goes into debt to buy poppy seeds to grow opium to sell and buy food for his family, and the Afghan government and occupying forces come and burn his illegal crops and leave him with no way of repaying his debt, they drive him and people who know him into the arms of the Taliban.

The chance to win was lost long ago. When soldiers would rather shoot to kill than risk their own life, such as when a man on a bike keeps coming towards a checkpoint, it really turns the people against you.

7

Re: Bush to send tough message to Pakistan

Richard Wolffe of Newsweek claism that Benazir Bhutto calls religous party uprising against Mush a sham. She is presenting herself as an alternative to Mush. Mush probably is no longer needed by the Bush-ites.

8

Re: Bush to send tough message to Pakistan

It's a damn shame that Pakistan doesn't control FATA. No better time then now. Make a tough decision, send in troops and cavalry and make sure that the lawless tribal areas join the 21st. century!

9

Re: Bush to send tough message to Pakistan

In the long term that may be true. In the short term, Pakisatn is under tremendous pressure to show results. What now? Pakistan doesn't have much say in what DC policy makers want.

It's about time Pakistan get FATA under control. Tribals have had their fun for past 60 years and they should join the 21st. century now. Enoug is enough. Also these FATA borders could make law-enforcement hell for Pakistan should Tellytubbies decide to make trouble in Pakistan.

10

Re: Bush to send tough message to Pakistan

I diasagree. We have no legal authority to do that at all, the tribals agreed to join Pakistan under the condition that they get to maintain their autonomy. No "ifs", no "buts." We have no more right to say that we should get them under control and that they'd had their fun for the past 60 years as, say, Britain has to say the same about us.

Personally, I think that Pakistan should separate from the FATA. Whether it becomes independent or becomes annexed by Afghanistan, having such a region where legally Pakistan is not allowed to have full authority represents an anomaly that today places Pakistan in a very uncomforable position.

They should be granted independence by Pakistan and allowed to choose between remaining independent, joining Afghanistan, or joining Pakistan as a fully integrated part of the NWFP.

11

Re: Bush to send tough message to Pakistan

Maddie

hey FATA is fairly soverign now, so I guess people of Pakistan should nt have a problem if US operates in that zone right?

Pakistan should just need to make sure that when the ill thought out operations by NATO take place inside the tribal areas that the militant roaches dont get into Pakistan's non FATA territory.

Tell US that our arrangement with FATA is that they control their own destiny, so US can talk to FATA, convince them or bomb them.

12

Re: Bush to send tough message to Pakistan

Autonomy doesn't mean porous borders that allow Tellytubbies to maim and kill Pakistanis or use the area as a staging ground for cross border skirmishes.

Whatever legal contract pakisatn has/had with these tribals needs to be re-worked. Give them gambling rights etc if they have to but seal the border with or without their help.

If Pakistan needs to turn this land into a no-man's land, they should do it by any means necessary. Giving them freedom to join Karzai's team could lead to entire NWFP and Baluchistan going to the other side. Sorry, no go. They are all Pakisatnis now, no special priviledges for them and better start acting like the stewards of the border, soon.

Most Beautiful Man
Most Beautiful Man
13

Re: Bush to send tough message to Pakistan

Pakistan inherited the British deal with the tribals, which basically makes Pakistan legally responsible for the defence of the FATA and allows Pakistan to represent the FATA's inhibitants on the international stage.

Clearly, this is a raw deal for us. Allowing the US to attack the FATA is just as wrong as allowing the US to attack Lahore, Peshawar, Karachi or Quetta since we are as obligated to defend the FATA as elsewhere.

However, granting the FATA full independence will free us from this burden and allow the inhabitants to finally be able to deal fully for themselves with the consequences of their actions. They should not expect Pakistan to protect them for ever no matter what they do!

14

Re: Bush to send tough message to Pakistan

Successful Insurencies need three things. Safe havens, popular support and capable leadership. US is focusing on items 1 and 3. Given the ease with which our guys handed over Taliban #3, my bet is that they have a handle on where #1,2,4,5,6 etc are around. If we get rid of them, US pressure would ease up. Without veteran leadership, insurgencies would fizzle out. I hope Musharraf can convince ISI that taking panga with Americans is not going to pay. We need to figure out other ways to keep Afghanistan cordial to Pakistan. Talibans are a lost cause.

15

Re: Bush to send tough message to Pakistan

We have no right to dictate new terms to them. There is no way that balochistan or the NWFP would shift sides, that is just as Afghan dream. Nationalists always afre poorly in all elections in those provinces.

Even the overwhelming majority of the FATA want to be part of Pakistan rather than Afghanistan; despite the extraodinary number of weapons in the FATA there's never been a concerted effort to secede to Afghanistan or even try and be independent.

However, the FATA wants to be an autonomous part of Pakistan, which is not int he best interests of Pakistan. We must cut them off and let them be independent, and let them negotiate their own future.

16

Re: Bush to send tough message to Pakistan

No, I don't think there is any need to cut them off maddy. I wonder what successive Pakistani governments have been doing over the years. Someone could have brought them in the fold of the main stream pakistani politcs and I bet that would have made their absorption within the mainland much easier. Allowing them to secede would only encourage other's to demand the same for themselves.

17

Re: Bush to send tough message to Pakistan

The problem is as much ISI as it is FATA. To ignore that aspect of it is going to make us come up with "solutions" that don't really work.

Quetta is also a big base of Taliban, who should we blame for that? Many terrorists have been found in other cities of Pakistan, can we let them declare independence as well?

18

Re: Bush to send tough message to Pakistan

ooh you only depends upon BBC and CNN for information and consider them to be true no matter how much they are wrong

i would suggest you to visit Quetta and try to find out the taliban
just wearing a IMAMA ie pagri doesn't make anyone taliban

what bbc and cnn were showing that people in Quetta are wearing the imama so they are also taliban because taliban also used to wear imama

this is the biggest lame excuse by the CNN and BBC

19

Re: Bush to send tough message to Pakistan

^ Good point. Tens of thousands of people move across Pak-Afghan border everyday.

Washington's way is not the only way to fight extremism and terrorism. A look on the recent history of the Middle East will tell us that it is actually no way to fight terror. If Musharraf thinks that he is on the right track, he should not give in to the foreign 'experts' and indigenous black-mailers. Pakistan must try to maintain good relations with Washington, but it doesn't have to be at the cost of Pakistan's national interests. Standing up to Washington doesn't cost any leader much good-will these days.

So far as sanctions are concerned, it's not the first time Pakistan is facing this threat.