fatman17
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 32,563
- Reaction score
- 98
- Country
- Location
Ground realities
Dawn Editorial
Tuesday, 18 May, 2010
A nuclear arsenal is not something any right-thinking person would point to with pride. Still, the fact remains that Pakistan does possess this powerful deterrent and has a highly trained standing army of roughly half a million men and women. A vocal opposition has its due say in governance and those at the helm know that they cannot afford to be seen as lackeys of the US. The reverse is true of Mr Karzai, his government and Afghanistan as a whole.
At least some US policymakers are beginning to realise that Pakistan and Afghanistan cannot be conflated. Afghanistan has been at war with itself and, at the outset, with the former Soviet Union for nearly 30 years. It is a country with little or no infrastructure, a government whose writ is confined largely to Kabul and a security apparatus that is still in its infancy. In short, the administration in Kabul would struggle to exist if Nato forces were to leave the country.
Pakistan, for all its problems, is a different commodity altogether. A nuclear arsenal is not something any right-thinking person would point to with pride. Still, the fact remains that Pakistan does possess this powerful deterrent and has a highly trained standing army of roughly half a million men and women. A vocal opposition has its due say in governance and those at the helm know that they cannot afford to be seen as lackeys of the US. The reverse is true of Mr Karzai, his government and Afghanistan as a whole. When American politicians talk of AfPak, they often fail to distinguish between the unique sets of problems the two countries pose.
Against this backdrop, the views expressed recently by Bruce Riedel come as a welcome change from the inflammatory statements issued lately by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. A perceived hard-liner who helped shape the Obama administrations AfPak policy, Mr Riedel made it clear that military action or economic sanctions against Pakistan, a country determined to defend itself, cannot deliver the desired results. Mr Riedel is right. Islamabad and the army brass in Rawalpindi have made it abundantly clear that Pakistan is doing all that it can in the theatre of war and will not be bullied by US demands to do more. At a time when the country is wracked by economic and security crises, Pakistan may need America more than Washington needs Islamabad. Be that as it may, nobody with any knowledge of ground realities would argue that the US can win the battle against militancy without Pakistans active cooperation.
Outside of the conflict zone, however, our efforts to dismantle the jihadi infrastructure in the country leave much to be desired. The nexus between southern Punjab and militants in the tribal belt is well established now but the Punjab government is still in a state of denial. Madressahs known for churning out militants and suicide bombers remain operational and preachers of hate are granted audiences with top officials. We created a monster in the quest for strategic depth and it is up to us to rein it in.
Dawn Editorial
Tuesday, 18 May, 2010
A nuclear arsenal is not something any right-thinking person would point to with pride. Still, the fact remains that Pakistan does possess this powerful deterrent and has a highly trained standing army of roughly half a million men and women. A vocal opposition has its due say in governance and those at the helm know that they cannot afford to be seen as lackeys of the US. The reverse is true of Mr Karzai, his government and Afghanistan as a whole.
At least some US policymakers are beginning to realise that Pakistan and Afghanistan cannot be conflated. Afghanistan has been at war with itself and, at the outset, with the former Soviet Union for nearly 30 years. It is a country with little or no infrastructure, a government whose writ is confined largely to Kabul and a security apparatus that is still in its infancy. In short, the administration in Kabul would struggle to exist if Nato forces were to leave the country.
Pakistan, for all its problems, is a different commodity altogether. A nuclear arsenal is not something any right-thinking person would point to with pride. Still, the fact remains that Pakistan does possess this powerful deterrent and has a highly trained standing army of roughly half a million men and women. A vocal opposition has its due say in governance and those at the helm know that they cannot afford to be seen as lackeys of the US. The reverse is true of Mr Karzai, his government and Afghanistan as a whole. When American politicians talk of AfPak, they often fail to distinguish between the unique sets of problems the two countries pose.
Against this backdrop, the views expressed recently by Bruce Riedel come as a welcome change from the inflammatory statements issued lately by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. A perceived hard-liner who helped shape the Obama administrations AfPak policy, Mr Riedel made it clear that military action or economic sanctions against Pakistan, a country determined to defend itself, cannot deliver the desired results. Mr Riedel is right. Islamabad and the army brass in Rawalpindi have made it abundantly clear that Pakistan is doing all that it can in the theatre of war and will not be bullied by US demands to do more. At a time when the country is wracked by economic and security crises, Pakistan may need America more than Washington needs Islamabad. Be that as it may, nobody with any knowledge of ground realities would argue that the US can win the battle against militancy without Pakistans active cooperation.
Outside of the conflict zone, however, our efforts to dismantle the jihadi infrastructure in the country leave much to be desired. The nexus between southern Punjab and militants in the tribal belt is well established now but the Punjab government is still in a state of denial. Madressahs known for churning out militants and suicide bombers remain operational and preachers of hate are granted audiences with top officials. We created a monster in the quest for strategic depth and it is up to us to rein it in.
