Attacking Pakistan

[dabong1]

Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Ahmed Quraishi

Now the Mayor of Kabul wants to invade Pakistan. Six years of Pakistani appeasement in the face of gradual loss of our legitimate security interests in the region have come down to this: the weakest leader in modern Afghan history warns Islamabad he will not only invade Pakistan but will also "rescue" the Pakistani Pashtun population--a thinly veiled threat to claim our northwestern regions as part of Afghanistan.

Hamid Karzai should not be blamed for making statements that far exceed his status as a weak ruler propped up by warlords and a foreign power, and whose authority hardly surpasses the city where he is bunkered.

Islamabad's real problem lies not with him. It's with Washington, whose military sided last week with Mr Karzai's rag-tag army in a border dispute where it used massive aerial power to pound a Pakistani border post and kill eleven of our soldiers. This disproportionate use of power was so senseless it could only be a deliberate hostile act against Pakistan. The explanation given by Dr Condoleezza Rice to our foreign minister – whom she tried to convince this was a case of friendly-fire – has no buyers in Pakistan.

If a war is being imposed on Pakistan – and all indications are that this is the case – then Islamabad should retaliate. To regain respect, Pakistani military should henceforth hold the government in Kabul and the Afghan military directly responsible for any act of aggression emanating from Afghan soil. In last week's case, Pakistani military should have launched a retaliatory strike targeting the nearby Afghan army posts. The prime minister could have sanctioned the attack after seeking, and receiving, parliament's consent on urgent basis, even after the operation.

A Pakistani counterstrike would have tested and exposed the intentions of the American-led NATO troops. A subsequent attack on Pakistan would have confirmed this was no misunderstanding. The Americans have been saber-rattling for months now and the June 10 attack fitted a pattern of US official statements, media leaks, and cross-border violations.

In every sense of the word, an undeclared war is being waged against Pakistan from the Afghan soil since 2004. Islamabad is in possession of plenty of real and circumstantial evidence to this effect. The purpose of this war is to set off ethnic and religious wars inside Pakistan to weaken the country and precipitate its disintegration. In the past four years, separatist activity in the entire Pakistani region next to Afghanistan jumped from nil to levels not seen since the 1980s, when the Soviets used Afghan soil for the same purpose.

Afghanistan has a political problem that the US and its puppet regime in Kabul have been unable to resolve for the past seven years. This failure is destabilizing Pakistan, not the other way around. The Pakistani foreign minister should have used the Afghan donor conference in Paris last week to make it clear that Islamabad – and NATO for that matter – cannot be held responsible for Washington and Kabul's inability to end the Afghan civil conflict.

It's also time to turn the tables. Pakistan should issue a list of demands to the regime in Kabul. The list should ask for a halt in all cross-border terrorism originating from Afghan soil into Pakistan. This includes the closure of training camps for terrorists who are sent into our provinces of Balochistan and NWFP and the expulsion of all terrorist elements recruited from Pakistan and sheltered at safe houses provided by the Afghan government. Failure to meet these legitimate demands should result in punitive measures; including restricting both Afghanistan's overland trade and US fuel supplies through Pakistani land and airspace.

Washington has been double-crossing Pakistan from the moment Islamabad joined America's war on terror. In the seven years since 9/11, Washington has deliberately ignored Pakistan's legitimate security needs and concerns in Afghanistan on every count. Under American watch, rabidly anti-Pakistan warlords and exiled elements with Indian connections going back to the days of the Soviets have been encouraged to wield influence in Kabul. The narcotic trade has been allowed to recover from near-total eradication under the previous regime, giving a boost to organized crime affecting both Pakistan and Iran.

Pakistani officials have long been suspecting that some Indian and Afghan elements operating in Afghanistan have an interest in inciting a confrontation between Pakistan and the United States. But it is also true that Washington has accorded little importance, by design or by coincidence, to the legitimate security and strategic interests of its Pakistani ally.

We should win together in Afghanistan. Washington's victory should not become a Pakistani loss.

Attacking Pakistan

 

[blain2]

Excellent article!

 

[Energon]

 

[blain2]

I don't think that the concerns are that much out of place to deserve the pun. There is palpable anger on the Pakistani street about the perceived high-handedness in this operation and the Afghan instigation.

Although not everyone in Pakistan may agree with some of the reactions the author states, the overall gist is very much in line with what a Pakistani nationalist is feeling today.

 

[dabong1]

Although not everyone in Pakistan may agree with some of the reactions the author states, the overall gist is very much in line with what a Pakistani nationalist is feeling today.

I agree,but we need to be more pro active when it comes to threats being thrown at us.
A missile strike by pakistan on a terrorist training camp in afghanistan would be a good move.

 

[Interceptor]

I agree,but we need to be more pro active when it comes to threats being thrown at us.
A missile strike by pakistan on a terrorist training camp in afghanistan would be a good move.

That would retaliate an attack on Pakistani soil, and that is not in the interest of Pakistan let Coalition and US fight there war and when required the GoP will join them looking at what is in interest Pakistan.

 

[maqsad]

I agree,but we need to be more pro active when it comes to threats being thrown at us.
A missile strike by pakistan on a terrorist training camp in afghanistan would be a good move.

I like that idea too. Blowing up a few compounds within Afghanistan would also give pakistan a big boost in public relations around the world because this is the best way to express that there are terrorists in Afghanistan which cause Pakistan harm and nobody is doing a thing about it. I don't know why there is no media campaign pointing the fingers at Afghanistan and NATO? Why is Pakistan sitting back and being demonized and labled the hotbed of terrorism when neighbours are sending terrorists inside pakistan?

 

[amna]

can pakistan risk an open confrontation with NATO forces? especially without the PAF called in, we dont stand a remote chance against predator drones and precision guided bombs. our army's track record on the western frontier is horrible of late..

 

[maqsad]

Firing a missile into a training camp identified by ISI as harboring hostiles is not an open confrontation with NATO. Pakistan can start out by saying that NATO is not doing enough to hunt down anti-pakistan terrorists in Afghanistan. Then make a worldwide statement that if any intelligence is recieved by ISI that militants across the border are planning something then their camps will be destroyed. What's the worst that can happen if this statement is made? NATO is already accusing Pakistan of supporting terrorism so why not accuse them of doing the same? I realize this has the risk of escalating the battle of words but we all know pretty well that the escalation is already occuring and we know very well who is behind the escalation. So I just view this little gambit as a possible way of de-escalating the conflict. Note the word gambit. It's time to get a backbone, sometimes that does help in diplomacy even when you are the underdog.

 

[amna]

how realistic is it for Pak to find a training camp in Afghanistan that the NATO with its countless eyes in the sky have not yet found?

Assuming we do find such a target, and lob a nice fat missile, what prevents NATO idiots acting on opium-smoking afghan intelligence from doing the same back on a much larger scale? It is no secret that the FATA areas and Swat are beyond our army's control, and NATO would love to rock these places up good.

Backbone is good, but Pakistan has put itself in a very hard situation being sub-servient to the US-led forces for the past half a decade.

 

[maqsad]

NATO is already terrorizing FATA and the main harm done to pakistan by this harassment is loss of face or ego-wounds, casualties are there but the main insult and damage is psycholical. A big crater blast in Afghanistan would be the perfect antidote and make a lot of people feel better. Retaliation by NATO would kill a few people in the west, probably innocents too but as long as this did not trigger a land invasion then it is not such a bad idea at all.

The problem is that a lot of people in West Pakistan are angry at GoP for being impotent and too diplomatic, so in that respect it would be a very good PR move by GoP to appear to have backbone, after all it is not good to have people thinking your government is a bunch of submissive cowards.

If that is too crazy then another way to make people feel better is to start sending professional SSG commandos into Afghanistan across the border in raids with the mission of kidnapping troublesome Afghans, bringing them back over the border and announcing an incursion had resulted in the capture of micreants that NATO was doing nothing about. This would have very little risk in terms of bombing and it will add a very strange and annoying twist to the war of words where Pakistan will become known for raiding into Afghanistan, rambo style, to get rid of pests that NATO does nothing about. At least that should help tremendously in propaganda circles.

 

[Flintlock]

LOL...what's the dosage? Any side effects?


Getting bak to the topic, I can completely understand that Pakistanis are livid about this.
If Americans attacked a post on Indian soil, for whatever reasons, we would have rioting all over the country.

However, when taken in the context of this very, very difficult war which can be compared to nothing but "*** Extermination", I think it becomes easier to understand.

The US gains nothing, nada, zilch by waging "Undeclared war" and alienating the Pakistani establishment and populace.
Its in the interest of US to keep Pakistanis as happy as possible to continue the cooperation in WOT.

The "attack" was nothing but a blunder on the part of the US, and possibly even the Pakistani troops, who might have misinformed the americans about their position, or not informed them at all.
It simply means that there needs to be better cooperation between the two sides.

There is nothing, IMO, any more sinister going on. So I suggest Mr. Ahmed Quraishi take a good dose of Haldol and retire for a week.

 

[ddrbdgzy]

it is very silly for afghanistan to threat pakistan

 

[maqsad]

At this point I wonder if even Bush thinks Karzai is a raving lunatic?

Oh yeah never mind the fact that his own countrymen are randomly shot dead or blown up by NATO forces, he has to wory about Pakistan? Possibly he is doing this to look like less of an impotent clown to his own people. Well to be honest I think Bush probably knew what Karzai was going to say, puppets never yap that much without the puppetmasters knowing about it before or even planning it.

 

[blain2]

Firing a missile into a training camp identified by ISI as harboring hostiles is not an open confrontation with NATO. Pakistan can start out by saying that NATO is not doing enough to hunt down anti-pakistan terrorists in Afghanistan. Then make a worldwide statement that if any intelligence is recieved by ISI that militants across the border are planning something then their camps will be destroyed. What's the worst that can happen if this statement is made? NATO is already accusing Pakistan of supporting terrorism so why not accuse them of doing the same? I realize this has the risk of escalating the battle of words but we all know pretty well that the escalation is already occuring and we know very well who is behind the escalation. So I just view this little gambit as a possible way of de-escalating the conflict. Note the word gambit. It's time to get a backbone, sometimes that does help in diplomacy even when you are the underdog.

The only way for Pakistan to do something "militarily" would be to hit Afghan forces stationed near the border. Although that may give some satisfaction, the bigger problem will continue. Hitting ANA would do Pakistan no good. Doing so would generate more sympathy for the Afghans and critique for Pakistan. Although I do think that if something of a similar nature occurs again, then Pakistan should hit back locally and remind Karzai and team about this being a two way street (I.E. Pakistan would not quietly sit back and receive all the time).

Going across the border is not an option for Pakistan, however hitting Afghans from within Pakistani territory is possible. Not saying that this sort of thing should happen, I just hope the other side does not do a repeat of this incident. The side affects of another strike would be that Pakistan will seriously throttle cooperation in more than one way. That would not be good for anyone.