Strategy to combat terrorism

What *is *the strategy? Is it something new? Will it actually work?

Any ideas what strategy, from the perspective of the law enforcement agencies? Share your concepts.

http://dawn.com/2007/07/21/top10.htm
Strategy to combat terrorism approved
By Ihtasham ul Haque

ISLAMABAD, July 20: A meeting presided over by President Pervez Musharraf on Friday approved ‘an all-encompassing strategy’ to combat terrorism, extremism and growing militancy in the country, particularly in the NWFP and tribal areas.

Sources said the meeting decided to provide ‘necessary financial and security support’ to NWFP Chief Minister Akram Durrani to restore law and order in the province.

NWFP Governor Ali Muhammad Jan Aurakzai, who briefed the participants of the meeting on the tense situation in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (Fata), had asked for support, the sources said.

Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz, Interior Minister Aftab Ahmad Khan Sherpao, Information Minister Mohammad Ali Durrani, Vice-Chief of Army Staff Gen Ahsan Salim Hayat and other officials concerned attended the meeting.

It took into account the fallout of the military operation against Lal Masjid and Jamia Hafsa and its increasing effects in the NWFP and tribal areas.

“The meeting discussed all aspects of the current wave of violence and terrorism and took a number of important decisions to improve the law and order situation across Pakistan,” the President’s Media Advisor Rashid Qurashi told Dawn.

He said that NWFP chief minister gave a detailed briefing about the security situation in his province and sought necessary support to combat extremism and terrorism.

“The president agreed with various suggestions made by the chief minister and decided to extend him all the support of the centre”, he said. He confirmed that an all-encompassing strategy had been approved to deal with terrorism and militancy.

He said the meeting expressed hope that the chief minister and his government would ensure peaceful co-existence of all the people in the province so that the law and order situation could be improved.

Mr Qurashi said the meeting had decided to associate religious parties, ulema and mushaikh and the Wafaqul Madaras to assist the government in combating terrorism and eliminating religious extremism.

The president and the prime minister condemned the recent terrorist attacks and suicide bombings. They expressed their firm resolve to combat extremism, terrorism and militancy in all its forms and manifestations.

Sources said the president told the meeting that the writ of the government would have to be established by chasing terrorists and militants and that the government would not bow before their demands.

The president said there had been major improvement in the economy during the past seven years and if terrorist activities continued, it would hurt the investment climate. He said that without the support of the people, it would be difficult for the government to hunt down terrorists and militants, who, according to him, were all out to destroy peace in the country.

The meeting, the sources said, was also briefed about Tuesday’s suicide bombing in Islamabad.

Re: Strategy to combat terrorism

My strategy:

  1. Musharraf should call a Corps Commander conference and push for unanimous consent on a permanent abandoning of using jihadis, Talibans etc. for policy purposes. Any dissenting commander should be asked to retire.

  2. DG ISI, MI etc. should be asked to clean up their respective agencies of jihadi sympathisers.

  3. All top jihadi and taliban leaders should be selectively assassinated

  4. Govt should implement Madrassa Reform Ordnance of 2002. For real.

  5. Invest massively in schools to reduce incentive for children to go to madrassas

Re: Strategy to combat terrorism

What would happen to the strategic depth plans when america / west leaves afghanistan or some other scenario where the northern alliance wants to take pakistan on? I wished Pakistan had supported traditional sunnis in afghanistan like mujaddi but then it is pathans and deobandi / wahabis have been deep rooted into pakistan since we allowed unchecked saudi interference in our country.

Re: Strategy to combat terrorism

Strategic Depth strategy has turned Pakistan into a hole for terrorists. It has done more harm than good. Afghanistan will have to play ball with us because of trade if they want to get out of the stone age. A good strategy would be to cultivate business and trade figures. Just look at how China has turned former enemies in Southeast Asia and even South Korea. However, the low IQ ISI mentality can only think of using Kalashnikovs and grenades. That needs to change.

Re: Strategy to combat terrorism

The problem might be that the Central Asians due to be ruled by Russians and there cities made stalinabad {:D) are more civilized than afghans. Pakistan relatively has been nice to afghans [accept refugees etc] while afghanistan was the only country in the UN to cast vote against Pakistan in 1947 and has always supported terrorist organizations [pashtun / balochi "nationalist"] and now BLA which overshadows any good relationships. Afghanistan, no matter what moin ul ateeq might think, has always been a barbaric country and only fed itself by looting india and persian.

Re: Strategy to combat terrorism

These are all good points :k: Point#5 is extremely important.

Re: Strategy to combat terrorism

Draw them into ambushes by organizing fake convoys. Have helicopter gunships in the air observing everything and when they see the taliban moving in, attack them.

Re: Strategy to combat terrorism

First of all, Pakistan doesn't have that many gunships to begin with. Lets say even if we are able to convince the US to give us loads of old Hueys, I don't see it happening due to fear of repurcussion and the embedding of deobandi-wahabis in all our institutions especially since the eighties.

Re: Strategy to combat terrorism

Why Hueys? We have enough Cobras do the job. Sure, more would be even better, but the current number (40?) is adequate for what I said.

Re: Strategy to combat terrorism

^^ Well Cobras are a varient of Hueys and better armed but I don't think the army will move their whole fleet to waziristan when there is afghan / american? sponsored terrorism in balochistan as well. There is also fear of ground shot down as the pathan-baloch areas are heavily armed with AAA and shoulder fired missiles *.

I think Pakistan should push for more Cobras than hueys as we are likely not going to get apaches ever. The best option would have been if we had more hinds in our army than 1 or 2 that defected. These bad boys really could take a beating being able to withstand small fire. It is no wonder they were called a beast in the air.*

Re: Strategy to combat terrorism

^Why are Americans not selling Apaches?!?!?

Re: Strategy to combat terrorism

bhai saab, if you r a mahajjir, its because ur ancestors were converted from hinduism by these Afghans.. Most of the Indian muslims were converted from lower-caste hindus to muslims by Afghans who kicked brahmin's a$$e$. Afghans are true soldiers and have helped Pakistan a lot. They never looted India- on the contrary I think Hindus treated the invading Afghans poorly..

Re: Strategy to combat terrorism

Maybe because it is not part of "aid" [costs $$$ to buy] and they could be wary of Pakistan passing on the technology to China, which is very behind in helo making capability. This is not to say that the capability of anything given to Pakistan is not watered down like the sabres and starfighters we had in 65 and 71 that didn't have the real A2G capability that US planes had.. :p This is why you see poor PAF pilots going on strafing runs [not very successful except that pathankot raid in 65] in india.

Re: Strategy to combat terrorism

Yes, I remember these Ruskie "beasts" in Afghanistan - they fell like flies at the hands of the local rag-tag Afghani militias. What was it.. 300? 350? ..the number of hinds that got shot down.

Gunships shouldn't be used in this scenario. They are easy targets for manpads, SA missiles, stingers, etc. And there is no shortage of these weapons in that area.

Re: Strategy to combat terrorism

Which is why mujahideen called it "hell in the air" right? :D

300-350 is nothing [that includes all types of choppers] if you compare it to vietnam where thousands of US choppers and jets being brought down over the course of the war. It was after the stingers that russian air supremacy really got challenged in afghanistan.

PS Did you know that it was the hinds that attacked the mujahideen / "terrorists" back in the eighties in those camps inside Pakistan??? I never knew until I read about it and they even showed it on history channel where they CIA guy joked that so many mules got "martyred" and CIA had the biggest toyota dealership in asia lol..

Re: Strategy to combat terrorism

Well you don't expect them to call it a blessing in the air, now do u?

Why would I compare it to Vietnam?

Re: Strategy to combat terrorism

Why not? Who do you think the Viet Cong were honestly?

Don’t talk about subjects that you have no knowledge about.. :smilestar:

:halo:

Re: Strategy to combat terrorism

We need to train parts of our army in counter-insurgency tactics.

Re: Strategy to combat terrorism

Here is an interesting article… It makes a point at the end that im surprised I hadnt even thought of…

How to salvage a doomed deal

By Ismail Khan

PESHAWAR: The so-called North Waziristan agreement has unravelled. It did not require a crystal ball gazer to foretell how far such a hastily done deal would go. However, it did take the government 10 months to recognise that the tribal militants had failed to honour their side of the agreement.

Not surprisingly then, the government now finds itself in a bigger jam than before it rushed into a pact with the radicals in September 2006. However, a public acknowledgement of the fact that the vehemently defended deal has all but collapsed is still awaited.

Quietly and before Washington began reverberating with the National Intelligence Estimate’s claim that Al Qaeda has rebuilt a ‘safe-haven’ in Pakistan, Islamabad had already begun sending more troops into North Waziristan. Clearly, Washington had shared its concerns with Pakistan and it was not for nothing that the military returned to populate check-posts abandoned following the much-trumpeted agreement.

Another surprise came when NWFP Governor Lt-Gen Ali Mohammad Jan Aurakzai was making final efforts to salvage the precious deal just as President Bush came on radio to state: “President Musharraf recognises the agreement has not been successful or well-enforced and is taking active steps to correct it.”

While the American threat to use direct force in the turbulent tribal region serves as the proverbial sword of Damocles, Pakistan’s policymakers, mired in the predicament that is Waziristan, seem to have hit a dead-end in their pursuit for a way out. Notwithstanding the noise from our foreign office on the prospects of American military intervention, it is known that it would not be the first time that Washington will do so. It has carried out strikes in our tribal backyard before. While Pakistan acknowledged some, it remained noncommittal about others to avoid embarrassment at home.

The strikes in December 2005 to kill Hamz Rabia, a key Al Qaeda operational lieutenant, followed by another deadly air strike in Bajaur’s Damadola in January 2006 are some of the known cases of direct American action in the country’s tribal borderlands. However, this does reinforce the fact that responsibility is the price of sovereignty and puts the onus squarely on Pakistan to take control of its tribal belt. The fact that it took Pakistan 10 months to realise that something was seriously amiss with the North Waziristan agreement and that it was without a back-up plan if things fell through, is at best worrying.

As is evident now, the agreement stands flawed on several counts. To begin with, it was misleading to call it a North Waziristan agreement as militants in Waziristan’s regional headquarters, Miramshah, had signed it. Therefore, it was the Miramshah agreement. The extremists in the town have no control over the militant groups in neighbouring Mirali sub-district – the area called a ‘safe-haven’ by the Americans - and despite several attempts, Miramshah tribesmen have failed to win them over. Secondly, the whole nation was led to believe that the September 5 agreement was struck with the Utmanzai tribe. It is now on record that, days after it was signed, the administration coughed up huge sums of money to procure signatures and thumb impressions to cement the eyewash. Had the agreement been with the tribe, the government would not have to send the so-called grand tribal jirga to wait it out in Miramshah.

Instead of the tribe being summoned to explain why it had abandoned the terms of the agreement, the establishment sent the jirga that met emissaries of the tribal militants and not the militant leaders themselves. Ironically, militant leader Hafiz Gul Bahadar, who negotiated with the government, is a Madakhel by tribe and not an Utmanzai.

Why did the government rush into this agreement without doing its homework? The fact is that it appears to have been duped by the JUI-F, which had influence over Hafiz Gul Bahadar and was instrumental in brokering the deal. In the process, the party not only established itself more firmly on tribal terrain but it also managed to position itself as a power-wielder as far as the NWFP and its tribal backwaters are concerned.

However, the true undoing of the North Waziristan agreement is the lack of institutional thinking. As the architect of the agreement and President Musharraf’s pointsman for Fata, General Aurakzai played his cards a tad too close to his chest, leaving all other key stakeholders in the region virtually out in the cold regarding the process. In addition, there was much consternation among power brokers over what seemed at the time to be total capitulation to the militants with terms such as the release of militants, return of weapons, and removal of check posts and payment of compensation.

The problem now is that the situation in Miramshah has worsened to an unusual extent. In a letter to the government, that sounded more like a lamentation, a political agent stated that the khasadars (tribal police) had abandoned their duty without seeking his permission. All those appointed for 599 posts of the levies force had renounced their responsibilities and officers of the line departments had left their offices at the mercy of watchmen. Little wonder then that a line department office and a check-post are blown up every day. Junior tribal officers and moharrirs (clerks) have not reported for work and tribal elders remain too scared to meet the political administration for fear of reprisal attacks from militants. The result, wrote the beleaguered political agent, was that he had to rely on Tochi Scouts to staff the area.

The situation is indeed alarming. The army has sent in thousands of more troops and there is rising anxiety among the people. Security officials believe that much of the American intelligence on the region has come from debriefings of Abu Nasir al-Qahtani, the Saudi Al Qaeda operative who fled the Bagram detention centre in Afghanistan in July 2005. Recaptured in November 2006, he had taken refuge in North Waziristan. Another source, said to be Abdul Hadi Al-Iraqi, a senior Al Qaeda hand believed to have been in the region until captured in December 2006. This, coupled with the American human intelligence network run from across the border and electronic surveillance, say security officials, has provided the Americans with enough material to put more pressure on Pakistan.

Clearly, there are fewer options now. Some senior analysts and bureaucrats point out that although negotiations may still be an alternative, the government cannot afford to go out on a limb to seek a renegotiated agreement from a weaker position. They maintain that history has never sided with the weak and that dictum is truer in the tribal society than anywhere else - where losers have few sympathisers and hordes flock to winners.

Pakistan’s alliance in the war on terror with the US lacks broader political mandate. The parliament is about to complete its term but it has yet to debate an issue of such a great national import.

The multimillion-dollar question before policymakers is how will the government redeem its lost authority and bring itself to a position of strength to negotiate a better agreement. Some officials say that force is an obvious last resort and that the government should try and impose an economic blockade, starting with placing effective restrictions on diesel and petrol to render militants immobile, followed by a crackdown on other items.

According to these officials, the government may consider withdrawing services to those who do not recognise state authority. “This may sound cruel but it is a better option than carrying out full military action that will cause collateral damage and create a bigger mess than we are in now,” said one analyst with experience in political administration.

As one former political agent remarked, “people often think that the stick and the carrot are two different things. They seldom realise that it is the withdrawal of the carrot that becomes the stick to punish people.”

http://www.dawn.com/2007/07/29/top10.htm

Re: Strategy to combat terrorism

It doesn’t matter who the Viet Cong were. What matters is the number of gunships shot down. 300 - 350 is a **** load.. it doesn’t matter if its comparable to Vietnam or not.