A deeper look into the question, why Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence has been demonized. By Shahid R. Siddiqi
15.08.2010 A deeper look into the question, why Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence has been demonized. By Shahid R. Siddiqi
Washington – in need of another enemy?
(gm) – In a recent report published by SmashingLists.com in their assessment of 10 Best Intelligence Agencies In The World, a website that rates products, services and organisations, Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence Agency, (or ISI) has ranked number one among the world’s top ten intelligence agencies. The rankings of other nine agencies in ascending order are: (2) Mossad – Israel, (3) MI6 – UK, (4) CIA – USA, (5) MSS – China, (6) BND – Germany, (7) FSB – Russia, (8) DGSE – France, (9) RAW – India and (10) ASIS – Australia.
The site admits that by their very nature intelligence agencies being secretive and hence difficult to assess. However, it defines the size, role, scope and achievements of each agency, which apparently served as the yardstick. Perhaps the first of its kind, this is an assessment nevertheless.
The website acknowledges that ISI enjoys the lengthiest track record of success: “… the best known Intelligence so far on the scale of records is ISI”. It says: “Its success in achieving its goal without leading to a full scale invasion of Pakistan by the Soviets is a feat unmatched by any other through out the intelligence world. KGB, the best of its time, failed to counter ISI and protect Soviet interests in Central Asia.” It concludes: “The most striking thing is that it is the least funded Intelligence agency out of the top 10 and still the strongest.”
Of this conclusion there is no doubt. Brilliant performance of ISI in masterminding the Afghan resistance and repulsing Soviet invasion in the 1980s brought about the dismantling of Soviet Union that enabled the US to become the sole super power and unified Germany. This feat was acknowledged by the German intelligence chief who gifted a piece of the Berlin Wall to his Pakistani counterpart, General Hamid Gul, with a plaque saying: ‘To the one who struck the first blow’. The American administration and CIA openly acclaimed ISI.
ISI faced off top intelligence agencies to avert strikes on Pakistan’s nukes and continues to guard the arsenal to this day. It foiled Indian attempts to attain ultimate supremacy in the South Asian theatre by putting it on the defensive. It served as a valuable instrument through which national security has been ensured over the years.
In the world of intelligence, agencies regularly collaborate and clash, depending upon their national interests of the time. This happened in case of ISI too. Having enjoyed good relations with CIA and Washington in the 1980s, it stood condemned in American eyes when in Afghanistan differences arose between the American and Pakistani positions due to variance of threat perception and divergent security interests in the region after the American invasion.
Demands placed by the Americans on the Pakistan army and ISI created complexities for Pakistan. The Americans could neither change the geography of the region nor the history of their abandonment of friends and allies. Their war on terror had drawn Pakistan into a complex spiral of political and tribal wrangling in Afghanistan that could undermine its security interests, if the American diktat was followed. An intense tug of war for geo-political domination between India, Iran, Russia, Pakistan and America was a real possibility after American departure, the outcome of which would determine the future security outlook for Pakistan. A perpetually hostile Afghanistan to its west would seriously undermine Pakistan’s military doctrine which is based on mainly facing Indian threat in the east.
Meanwhile, taking advantage of the hospitality of Karzai regime and its hostility towards Pakistan and with Americans turning a blind eye, RAW and some other intelligence agencies converged in Afghanistan to set up elaborate espionage network to advance their agendas, one of which was to denuclearize Pakistan through destabilisation. In collusion with Mossad, RAW began supporting Tehrik-e-Taliban-e-Pakistan causing death and destruction inside Pakistan.
India, and by implication RAW, had a history of sabotaging South Asian countries to extend Indian hegemony. The insurgency it incited and supported in Sri Lanka caused the diabolic fighting between Tamil Tigers and the military that cost thousands of innocent lives. After the creation of Bangladesh, RAW fingerprints were beginning to appear in Balochistan and Sindh. It was actively supporting insurgency in Balochistan that ISI exposed by presenting strong physical evidence of funding, training and arming of misguided Baloch elements, including the fugitive grandson of Akbar Bugti, whom the Indo-Afghan nexus provided safe havens and who continues to enjoys a cozy relationship with RAW. It was fanning anti-state sentiments in Sindh. All of this to weaken Pakistan and enable India to keep illegal control of Kashmir and usurp Pakistan’s share of water from the rivers that flow from Kashmir into Pakistan.
Americans showed little concern. To overcome these multiple threats and geopolitical odds, Pakistan’s professional and hard hitting military, the mainstay of the country’s defence, was ably supported by ISI. ISI did precisely what other agencies would have done when faced with a similar crisis situation. It engaged in effective intelligence gathering and counter-intelligence and aggressively preempted enemy designs, using all the means at its disposal that did not please the Americans, Indians, the Israelis or the Brits. And it did this quite successfully. Quite naturally ISI became the punching bag.
Did ISI do the right thing? Yes, it absolutely did. Pakistan’s was, is still, facing an existential threat and had they allowed the conspiracies to succeed, the military and the ISI would have been considered ex post facto accomplices in Pakistan’s loss of sovereignty.
If ISI is seen as their nemesis by those whose anti-Pakistan agenda it has foiled, it is not surprising. Their ire is amply reflected by the vilification campaign notably by the US, India, Britain and Afghanistan. ISI is accused of being a state within a state, an agency whose policies are made ‘outside’ the political institutions and an entity out of control. Using these arguments, the Americans forced the weak Zardari government to neutralize it by moving it under civilian control, which did make an unsuccessful attempt.
There always is a problem with powers that act in imperialistic fashion. They believe that pursuit of their imperialist designs takes precedence over national interests of weaker nations and have little tolerance for dissenters. America also behaves as one such imperial power. As long as ISI played a role congruent to American interests against Soviet Union, it remained its darling, but when it refused to compromise on Pakistan’s security interests, its primary role, it was demonized.
Washington has blamed ISI for maintaining contacts with Taliban, demanding that it be purged of Taliban sympathizers. After similar outlandish allegations were found to be part of the raw, unverified and even fabricated field reports leaked recently and splashed in the western media, the US joined the chorus about ISI being in cahoots with Taliban and even held it responsible for its setback in the war. Washington was merely attempting to keep ahead of a tide of US opinion hostile towards Pakistan and deflect the intensifying criticism at home for a losing war.
This American attitude is ridiculous. Firstly, ISI is a military organisation operating under strict organisational control and discipline where officers are rotated in the normal course. It functions according to a defined mandate unlike some agencies elsewhere, including CIA which is a government on its own. More ever it is, like the Pakistan government and its military, committed to eliminating religious extremism.
Secondly, if the American troops are incapable of overcoming rag tag Taliban bands and if the perceived complicity of ISI with Taliban can be instrumental in changing the course of Afghan war, then it is a sad day for America as a super power and NATO as the top military alliance.
Thirdly, in the world of intelligence it is common for contacts to be kept even with the enemy at all times. CIA keeps contacts within Russia and other hostile countries. Israel, the great American ally, spies on America itself. Why then should America expect an exception to be made in case of ISI? Why should contacts that ISI developed with the mujahedeen and the Taliban earlier, and which if it does still maintain, cause such great concern for the American administration?
As for the Indians, they see an ISI agent behind every rock in Kashmir and in Afghanistan where they are trying to dig their heels. They do not hesitate to blame ISI for the indigenous freedom struggle in Kashmir or acts of terrorism by Indian extremists.
One hopes the US will allow space to ISI in its own interest and this hostile environment will not deter ISI from pursing its security objectives.
Email:
shahidrsiddiqi@gmail.com
