Fata insurgency challenge of highest order: Obama

[Pk_Thunder]

Fata insurgency challenge of highest order: Obama​

Anwar Iqbal
Friday, 23 Jan, 2009 | 09:54 PM PST |
WASHINGTON: An international challenge of the highest order and an urgent threat to global security is how the new US President Barack Obama described the situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan in his maiden speech to his diplomatic corps.
Mr Obama was equally forceful while talking about another pivotal issue that has occupied US policy makers for half a century: the Middle East.
‘Let me be clear: America is committed to Israel's security. And we will always support Israel's right to defend itself against legitimate threats,’ he said.
‘Now, just as the terror of rocket fire aimed at innocent Israelis is intolerable, so too is a future without hope for the Palestinians,’ he added.
Reacting to his statement, the pro-Israeli neo-con media welcomed Mr Obama’s commitment to Israel but rejected his suggestion for creating a better future for the Palestinians.
‘We need to wipe them out,’ said a neo-con blogger. Some Arab commentators were also disappointed.

‘Mr Obama dispelled any notions of a change in the US Middle East policy,’ As'ad Abu Khalil, a professor of political science at California State University, told a US media outlet. ‘It’s like sprinkling sulphuric acid on the wounds of the children in Gaza.’
But both groups noticed that Mr Obama acted fast, unlike his predecessor George W. Bush who ignored the Arab-Israeli conflict for too long and was not sincere to his own peace plan.
Just two days after talking oath, Mr Obama made telephone calls to Washington's long-standing allies in the Middle East - Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and King Abdullah of Jordan.
But his Thursday afternoon statement at the State Department makes it clear that he is equally, if not more, focused on South Asia.
‘Another urgent threat to global security is the deteriorating situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan,’ he said.
‘This is the central front in our enduring struggle against terrorism and extremism.’
Drawing a parallel between the two issues, Mr Obama observed: ‘There, as in the Middle East, we must understand that we cannot deal with our problem in isolation. There is no answer in Afghanistan that does not confront the al Qaeda and Taliban bases along the border.’
He also acknowledged that the military option alone cannot end this crisis. ‘And there will be no lasting peace unless we expand spheres of opportunity for the people of Afghanistan and Pakistan,’ he said.
‘This is truly an international challenge of the highest order.’
The American people and the international community must understand that the situation in the two countries ‘is perilous and progress will take time,’ he warned.
Mr Obama conceded that violence in Afghanistan was ‘up dramatically.’
In describing the deteriorating situation in Afghanistan, Mr Obama did not focus only on the existence of the so-called terrorist safe-havens in Pakistan, indicating that his administration is open also to pointing out the drawbacks of its Afghan allies.

‘A deadly insurgency has taken deep root. The opium trade is far and away the largest in the world. The Afghan government has been unable to deliver basic services,’ he said.
Mr Obama then turned to the issue that he also highlighted during his election campaign: militancy in the tribal areas.
‘Al Qaeda and the Taliban strike from bases embedded in rugged tribal terrain along the Pakistani border,’ he said, adding that this does not only threaten Afghanistan but also is a threat to the United States.
‘While we have yet to see another attack on our soil since 9/11, al Qaeda terrorists remain at large and remain plotting,’ he warned.
Toning down his election rhetoric, which focused on using the US military might to subdue the militants, in this policy statement Mr Obama spoke instead of setting ‘achievable goals.’
‘Going forward, we must set clear priorities in pursuit of achievable goals that contribute to our collective security,’ he said.
Mr Obama said that his administration was committed to refocusing attention and resources on Afghanistan and Pakistan and to spending those resources wisely.
‘We will seek stronger partnerships with the governments of the region, sustained cooperation with our Nato allies, deeper engagement with the Afghan and Pakistani people and a comprehensive strategy to combat terror and extremism,’ he declared.
‘The world needs to understand that America will be unyielding in its defence of its security and relentless in its pursuit of those who would carry out terrorism or threaten the United States,’ the new US president warned.

 

[hasang20]

its obvious Obama isnt going to change anything sooner or later Zionest n Hindu's have a plan to delcare NWFP the area of Afganistan....but GOD this Zardari is a F*** toooL he would selll the Pakistan to India,US and Israel.

 

[roopesh]

its obvious Obama isnt going to change anything sooner or later Zionest n Hindu's have a plan to delcare NWFP the area of Afganistan....but GOD this Zardari is a F*** toooL he would selll the Pakistan to India,US and Israel.

India formally welcomed Obamas speech and demanded to declare pakistan as terror state! Too many things going against pakistan at diplomatic level. I dont see any major steps by pak govt to defend themselfs. Observe no one talking about attacking pakistan physically. Everyone trying to influence the pak govt and economy to pull it down. Military is not wat required now...pak need some brain
Bring Tariq Ali on board and offer him external affair ministry. he will takecare of everything.

 

[hasang20]

India formally welcomed Obamas speech and demanded to declare pakistan as terror state! Too many things going against pakistan at diplomatic level. I dont see any major steps by pak govt to defend themselfs. Observe no one talking about attacking pakistan physically. Everyone trying to influence the pak govt and economy to pull it down. Military is not wat required now...pak need some brain
Bring Tariq Ali on board and offer him external affair ministry. he will takecare of everything.

Military option is open for our Nukes to go to India and finish off things with Israel too than we can go to sleep if later we are developing ICBMs can reach US than we will sleep alot well ! India needs not to be nuked.Economic wont matter when theres no scum of the earths.

 

[Pk_Thunder]

KERRY: Pakistan needs our support​

U.S., regional security depends on it
John Kerry
Friday, January 23, 2009


As America's second post-9/11 President takes office, a single country has become ground zero for the terrorist threat we face. The consensus among our intelligence agencies is that top Al Qaeda leaders are plotting their next attack from Pakistan, where the prevalence of religious extremists and nuclear weapons make that country the central, crucial front in our struggle to protect America from terrorism. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen, has called the border region the "site of planning for the next attack" on the United States.

Pakistan is under enormous pressure from all sides, from tensions with India to a ferocious insurgency in the tribal belt to a financial crisis that threatens the solvency of the Pakistani state. And all of this is being held together by a fledgling civilian government not even a year old. For our sake and theirs, America must do more to help Pakistan.

Crucial to this effort will be finding a winning regional strategy that recognizes the centrality of Pakistan's relationships with neighbors such as Afghanistan and India.

It has become conventional wisdom that the war in Afghanistan can be lost in Pakistan, whose tribal belt offers a sanctuary from which Taliban insurgents launch cross-border raids against us and our Afghan allies. What is often overlooked, however, is that the opposite is true as well: Violent instability in Afghanistan can undercut essential counterinsurgency efforts in Pakistan.

We saw brutal evidence of this in the recent attack on the Pakistani Frontier Corps by militants operating from clandestine bases across the border inside Afghanistan. Pakistan's success in exerting control over its tribal areas depends on U.S. and NATO forces getting the resources they need to accomplish their mission on the Afghan side of the border.

Similarly, as the aftermath of the November terror attacks in Mumbai reminded us, getting Pakistan to focus its military on extremist sanctuaries that endanger American troops also depends on lowering tensions with India. We must work assiduously to help Pakistan and India to find a path back to the bilateral peace talks which were disrupted by the Mumbai attacks.

I recently returned from South Asia, and my conversations there left me with some observations that may be helpful in explaining how and why we must support Pakistan and its people.

While there is an increasingly broad consensus that Pakistan is the strategic center of gravity for defeating insurgents in Afghanistan, a military strategy alone cannot prevail on either side of the border. An effective counter-insurgency must address longer-term political, economic, and development challenges, especially in Pakistan's Federally Administered Tribal Areas and the Northwest Frontier Province on the Afghan border.

This is why I will seek swift passage of the Enhanced Partnership with Pakistan Act, which would triple non-military assistance to Pakistan through projects that will directly support the Pakistani people, strengthen democratic institutions, promote economic freedoms, and encourage investment in the agriculture, education and infrastructure sectors.

In my recent travels, I met with the leadership. While I believe President Asif Ali Zardari, Army Chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani and Lt. General Ahmed Shuja Pasha, the intelligence chief, are credible in their commitment to defeating the militant factions threatening their country, as always it will be the follow-through that counts.

As vital as civilian aid will be in Pakistan's success, we also need to provide the tools to fight the extremists. The list ranges from electronic detection and communications equipment to helicopters that can move swiftly in the inhospitable terrain of the tribal belt. We can do this and still demand greater accountability from Pakistan's military.

Pakistan is experiencing a dire and crippling financial crisis. In just one year, the country's reserves have declined 75 percent to $3.45 billion, forcing Pakistan to turn to the International Monetary Fund for a rescue package.

America must lead an international effort to protect Pakistan from financial collapse. Pakistan's leaders will have to act responsibly in the months ahead - but by necessity they will also look increasingly to the international community for support. Passage of the partnership act will be a good start, but not enough to stave off the risk that Pakistan's fragile civilian government will be shaken by severe economic unrest. Future international aid packages should include verifiable guarantees that the money will be spent on economic development that helps the Pakistani people. And as we do, we should leverage our assistance to restore belief in the legitimacy of our mission.

While our support is crucial, key to the success of all of these efforts will be the Pakistani leadership's ability to resolve outstanding political issues so it can focus on the difficult challenges of governing.

For all its challenges, Pakistan remains a vital partner in our efforts against Al Qaeda's global insurgency. My recent visits have convinced me that success in Afghanistan demands that we help build a stable and moderate Pakistan. That means our relationship with Pakistan cannot begin and end with helping its military - we must also speak directly to its people and its civilian government. Pakistan's prosperity and its security - as well as our own - depend on it.

 

[Omar1984]

I honestly think that theres no way US is going to win this war.

To win this war US must win the hearts of the locals and thats not happening. The locals see the US as the bad guy and more are siding with militants.

It doesn't matter how much money the US is going to give Pakistan, they will never win the hearts of the Pakistani people...the only one who'll be satisfied is Zardari and his wallet.

 

[roopesh]

...the only one who'll be satisfied is Zardari and his wallet.

How abt india??

 

[Omar1984]

How abt india??

I could care less about india to be honest.

 

[TruthSeeker]

I honestly think that theres no way US is going to win this war.

To win this war US must win the hearts of the locals and thats not happening. The locals see the US as the bad guy and more are siding with militants.

So, you are suggesting that the US "back off" from FATA and Afghanistan and take a defensive posture back home. Just "protect the homeland" by whatever security means we can. That MIGHT work if the Jihadis harbored in Pakistan do not then attack the US homeland. But, if they do, all hell will break out for Pakistan. And I do mean HELL.