What's new

Pak rebuffs US on Haqqani network crackdown

I was refering to the Pashtoons of Afghanistan. There is no doubt that ethnic problems exist in Afghanistan(who has done what and what everyone says and what is the side of story of everyone is another thing which is not related to this topic) and if you think your country dont have this problem then you are wrong or turning a blind eye. By the way Gharghast is also Pakistani and as per his/her posts I can see something different from yours although both of you are pashtoons.

Absolutely. Not only do ethnic tensions exist in Afghanistan, but also in Pakistan of course. However, there is consensus on one matter which is that NWFP is integral part of Pakistan and the Durand Line is a remnant legacy of the Brits. Following independence, the Pashtoon decided to join Pakistan voluntarily after holding a referendum in 1947. If some loya jirga held in 1949 in Afghanistan declares the Durand Line invalid isn't Pakistan's problem. That's a mere illusion from across the border. The fact that half of the army consists of Pashtoon brethren should be enough indication where our allegiance lies. I visited an army hospital in Peshawar and people were lining up to have their blood test taken in order to join the army. People are ready to sacrifice their lives for Pakistan. There was ample room to stand outside the hospital.
 
Right, let Pakistan publicly declare that the ONLY way Haqqani / Hikmatyar / Mullah Omar can retain any relevance in Afghanistan is by contesting democratic elections. Let Pakistan further aver that until that happens, Afghan and ISAF efforts to bring them to justice are fully justified and legitimate.
That has become a very hard argument to make convincingly with Karzai widely considered corrupt, in league with drug lords and war lords, and having been perceived as just stolen an election.

One of the yardsticks for Pakistan that I use (in terms of judging the continuity of the democratic system) is how the next general elections will play out. If they are considered largely free and fair like the last elections, democracy will be strengthened tremendously, and more people will have faith in the system (as it right now you would find Pakistanis divided on the issue).

If however they are reduced to the farces we have seen in the past, and no recourse is available to rectify them (judiciary does not successfully step in), people will continue to lose faith in a democratic system, political instability will reign and nothing will get done. With Pakistanis themselves as of yet undecided about how they view their democratic system, expecting them to endorse a perceived 'puppet, corrupt, Mayor of Kabul', and the system he ostensibly manipulates to his benefit, is a bit moved from reality.
 
Absolutely. Not only do ethnic tensions exist in Afghanistan, but also Pakistan of course. However, there is consensus on one matter which is that NWFP is integral part of Pakistan and the Durand Line is a remnant legacy of the Brits. Following independence, the Pashtoon decided to join Pakistan voluntarily after holding a referendum in 1947. If some loya jirga held in 1949 in Afghanistan declares the Durand Line invalid isn't Pakistan's problem. That's a mere illusion from across the border.

You should never forget that there are pashtoon elements in pakistan which are actively working agaisnt pakistan in favour of separation from pakistan, i can provide you with their site if you want. If you ask my opinion about Durand line, I personally dont call it a line, it is a proper border between pakistan and afghanistan and nwfp natrual part of paksitan. but those guys in afghanistan who are loved by pakistan and supported by pakistan think differently, they call nwfp as pashtonistan and they claim it was part of affghanistan. and if paksitan keep on interfering in afghanistan and try to destablive afghanistan any further, people will be even more against paksitan.
 
Correct I was only reminding you some facts. If i dont have the right about your country you never have the right about my country. You impose yourself on me but when i come up with a defence you cry loud. dont you remember taht you guys always play ethnic cards in afghanistan to achieve something? Tajik, Pashtoon, Uzbek this and that, dont we see this all the time from your side?

When Pakistan imposed itself on India?

As far as the ethnic card in Afghanistan its not Pakistan but the Afghan people who decided and are deciding why they are excluded.

During the first Afghan war Pakistan supported all groups. It was India who was having cramps over that fact that even northern allience people were our boys.


yes, thats why you are afraid of a dependant afghanistan and deny democracy, if there is a democracy the result will be shocking for you.

Who we are to deny democracy to Afghans. The only ones who are denying the true democracy to Afghans are those who have excluded the majority Pashtoons and imposed Criminals on entire Afghan population.

you have no right to speak on our behalf.

"Our behalf" wow when did Indians have become Afghans??????????

:what:
 
You should never forget that there are pashtoon elements in pakistan which are actively working agaisnt pakistan in favour of separation from pakistan, i can provide you with their site if you want. If you ask my opinion about Durand line, I personally dont call it a line, it is a proper border between pakistan and afghanistan and nwfp natrual part of paksitan. but those guys in afghanistan who are loved by pakistan and supported by pakistan think differently, they call nwfp as pashtonistan and they claim it was part of affghanistan. and if paksitan keep on interfering in afghanistan and try to destablive afghanistan any further, people will be even more against paksitan.

Those guys that you're referring to are either foreign agents with a hidden agenda or simply put miscreants. Such miscreants are only a handful. Such separatists exist in every sphere of the globe. Pakistan isn't an exception. I can assure you that a whopping majority of Pakistani Pashtoon support a strong and prosperous Pakistan. The Pakistani Pashtoon squarely stand behind Pakistan army which is fighting a just war against foreign miscreants that challenge the writ of the state. I, however, agree that Pakistan has no right to interfere in Afghanistan as it's a sovereign nation. Also, Afghanistan should not become a safe haven for other neighbouring countries which is used as a base to attack Pakistan. Once these problems are sorted out I'm certain that both can come to some sort of mutual understanding. I believe that Afghanistan and Pakistan have a lot in common. Both share mutual interests within the region. Both want to see each other stabilize so that trade and commerce can flourish.
 


When Pakistan imposed itself on India?

For god's sake I am not indian, I am from Afghanistan.


As far as the ethnic card in Afghanistan its not Pakistan but the Afghan people who decided and are deciding why they are excluded.

During the first Afghan war Pakistan supported all groups. It was India who was having cramps over that fact that even northern allience people were our boys.


Yes, but later on when the Mujahideen wee in power, paksistan armed and supported one agaisnt the other to fuel civil war and put a gov of their wish in afghanistan. this support was not because they love that specific group it was because Devide and Rule.


Who we are to deny democracy to Afghans. The only ones who are denying the true democracy to Afghans are those who have excluded the majority Pashtoons and imposed Criminals on entire Afghan population.

You are our neighbour and by supporting armed gangs and criminals you try to take away free will of our people, this is how it works for pakistan. Here you go you again played the ethnic card to achieve something. for your information: Pashtoons are the largest group in afghanistan not majority, which are 2 different cocepts. and again there are more pashtoon ministers, governmers cabinet members, powerful people including the president, in current afghan gov than the other ethnic groups, and by refering to the other ethnic groups as criminals you are not only insulting those non pashtoon ethnic groups(60% of the population of afghanistan) but afghan nation as a whole. let me tell you something, afghans have alot of issue with themselves no doubt about it and one thing they agree with each other is their stance about paksitan, no matter which group they belong to, and the reason is your foreign policy towards afghanistan.


"Our behalf" wow when did Indians have become Afghans??????????

:what:



I am from afghanistan.
 

Those guys that you're referring to are either foreign agents with a hidden agenda or simply put miscreants. Such miscreants are only a handful. Such separatists exist in every sphere of the globe. Pakistan isn't an exception. I can assure you that a whopping majority of Pakistani Pashtoon support a strong and prosperous Pakistan. The Pakistani Pashtoon squarely stand behind Pakistan army which is fighting a just war against foreign miscreants that challenge the writ of the state.

Good for you guys and Pakistan, I never have a problem with that and it is you guys internal issue.

I, however, agree that Pakistan has no right to interfere in Afghanistan as it's a sovereign nation. Also, Afghanistan should not become a safe haven for other neighbouring countries which is used as a base to attack Pakistan. Once these problems are sorted out I'm certain that both can come to some sort of mutual understanding. I believe that Afghanistan and Pakistan have a lot in common. Both share mutual interests within the region. Both want to see each other stabilize so that trade and commerce can flourish.

you are right, and that goal can be achieved while pakistan itself stop supporting the guys like mullah omar to destroy afghanistan. as you said there are alot of common between us. religion, neighbourhood and everything, but as long as there is misturst nothing can happen. by alineiating public of afghanistan, pakistan can achieve nothing by supporting this or that group.
 
you are right, and that goal can be achieved while pakistan itself stop supporting the guys like mullah omar to destroy afghanistan. as you said there are alot of common between us. religion, neighbourhood and everything, but as long as there is misturst nothing can happen. by alineiating public of afghanistan, pakistan can achieve nothing by supporting this or that group.
The thing is thought that we are not 'supporting' Mullah Omar or Haqqani with training, equipment or funds - even many US analysts agree on that.

The only thing that Pakistan could be accused of is 'inaction', but as I pointed out above, our 'inaction' was part of a consistent (albeit flawed in hindsight) approach towards both Afghan and Pakistani Taliban, and not some 'conspiracy against Afghanistan' by solely refraining from action against the 'Afghan Taliban'.

Secondly, Mullah Omar and Haqqani they don't run money printing presses in Quetta or NW to supply the Taliban with money. That money comes from drug trade, gulf, illegal activities that occur in Afghanistan itself or outside of Afghanistan and Pakistan. The major part of the Afghan insurgency is Afghanistan based and run by commanders on the ground in Afghanistan. Even if Mullah Omar was killed, the insurgency would not go away, just like the Pakistani Taliban insurgency did not go away with the killing of first Nek Mohammed, then Abdullah Mehsud and then Baitullah Mehsud in Pakistan.

The failure to control that insurgency is a failure of the GoA and NATO, not Pakistan. This focus on 'Quetta Shura' and NW is more of a distraction from the failures in Afghanistan - the insurgency will be won by what the GoA and NATO accomplish in Afghanistan, not what happens in Quetta or NW.
 
The thing is thought that we are not 'supporting' Mullah Omar or Haqqani with training, equipment or funds - even many US analysts agree on that.

On the other hand, there are also credible reports of the deep linkages between Mullah Omar / Haqqani and Pakistani agencies.

That has become a very hard argument to make convincingly with Karzai widely considered corrupt, in league with drug lords and war lords, and having been perceived as just stolen an election.

Your refusal to support Afghan democracy, and refusal to condemn the Taliban agenda of trying to forcibly take over, is revealing.

The conduct of the elections was flawed, but it's important to remember that the "ghost polling stations" were the result of the lawlessness created by your Talib friends. Now you can't turn around and use the problems with the election as an excuse to support further lawlessness by the Taliban.

Corruption is a legitimate concern, but it needs to be dealt with by the lawful and democratic process.
 
Last edited:
Les Américains ont attaqué Afganistan,mais non pas le pakistan!
Les afgans talibans ne se battent pas contre le pakistan mais contre l'OTAN!
Quand l'armé pakistanaise avaient commencé l'offensive contre TTP in south waziristan, les américans ont trahi le pakistan! Nous devons faire la meme chose avec eux!

pakistan TTP talibans=terroristes, not jihadis
afgan talibans== freedome fighters!
:pakistan:

Would you please translate it in English

Something like this:

The Americans attacked Afghanistan, but not Pakistan!
The Afgan Taliban are not fighting against Pakistan but against NATO!
When the Pakistani army began an offensive against TTP in South Waziristan, the Americans have betrayed Pakistan! We must do the same thing with them!

TTP = Pakistan Taliban terrorists, not jihadis
afgan == Taliban freedom fighters!
 
If you wish to create a cause celebre over Tora Bora, that's fine and reasonably accurate. There was a shot at getting OBL from what I know. Whether that chance could have been improved by a different operational handling or not is speculation.

Your "inaction" is sufficient example alone of state policy after eight years. It is, afterall, Pakistani lands to which you cry foul of HELLFIRE. It is from those same lands that for eight years these foreigners have resided.

Afterall, if OBL escaped FROM Afghanistan, it's then a question of to where he escaped. Pakistan, of course. Eight years and counting. The fact of the matter, though, is that men like OBL and Omar are essentially figureheads at this point. That's not to dismiss the importance of such but there's little indication that they're deeply involved in tactical and even operational issues in Afghanistan. As such, they're in the safest places that they can be for the sake of everybody concerned.

It's the other guys where your "inaction" remains a burden borne by others- Abdul Ghani Baradar and Sirraq Haqqani, not to mention your own home-grown tribals like Bahadur and Nazir. It's odd that you suggest negotiations as a continuity of policy with respect to both groups. One has to wonder at the terms of the negotiations with those indigenous and foreign elements residing on Pakistani soil but wishing to make war on Afghanistan? One, too, might even wonder at the terms offered to Mehsud and others WRT Afghanistan and even their predecessors like Nek Mohammad?

I seriously question the terms of such negotiations with foreign entities like Haqqani, Hekmatyar, Zawahiri/OBL, Omar, et al might accord given what we know of past relationships and strategic objectives.

That, too, is policy, is it not?

"Inaction", as you put it, places the lives of forty other nations' soldiers at lethal risk along with the citizens of Afghanistan. There is an overwhelming international face to this U.N. effort and nobody generally is sour on promoting Afghan stability through the auspices of the U.N., except maybe Pakistan.

That means elections. However inept that they may be, they are a start. Halaka Khan was clear, further, that these elections are hardly cast in a vacuum. They are conducted amidst an insurgency where your proxies oppose such under any circumstance-and were effective in doing so. Your alternative candidate to these elections, Abdullah Abdullah, by all accounts, carries the imprimatur of the N.A.

Criticisms of corruption coming from Pakistani circles should be muted in any case. After all, there's a reason that auditing requirements are bedrocked in the K-L bill and that's to assure monies allocated are properly directed. Your own legacy, in short, isn't sufficiently grounded in either democracy or solid ethics of governance to cast aspersions at an Afghanistan under attack from your soil while trying to raise forth some semblance of modernity.

This effort hardly resembles the Soviet occupation. It's collective in nature which compellingly negates any notion of "occupation". Most thoughtful Pakistanis should realize this affirmation. Then again, most Pakistanis should realize the responsibilities which make sovereign rights possible. If they did, there'd be no question in the mind of any Pakistani about affording sanctuary to afghan taliban foreigners and their associates nor that it's acceptable for indigenous tribals to take foreign policy and national security policy into their own hands by waging a "volunteer" war from within your borders.

That should be clear but isn't. Here's the kicker-

Nowhere and at no time has your government made a definitive statement against the principles/objectives of these men and that their actions, citizen or otherwise, were both illegal, unwanted, and a nuisance to the greater good.

You could even suggest your temporary weakness that it's not possible to address the problem immediately and in telling fashion but a day of reckoning harkens for all those who don't heed those words.

That would be the clear affirmation that Pakistan, regardless of present resources, won't abide the presence of these men upon your soil under any condition.

Not one bullet of resources are fired by doing so but that above hypothetical statement seems to have been absent so far. Its absence is telling after eight years of silence on this matter.

Hogwash and whining indeed.:disagree:
 
On the other hand, there are also credible reports of the deep linkages between Mullah Omar / Haqqani and Pakistani agencies.

Your refusal to support Afghan democracy, and refusal to condemn the Taliban agenda of trying to forcibly take over, is revealing.

please provide credible evidence and not reports of pak agencies having such links.

you mean support warlords who have been worse than talibans and could never unite the country? support drug traffickers including karzai's brother who is on US (CIA) pay list? if u havent noticed, US is tryin to create an afghan army with hardly any pashtun (roughly 50% of total population) participation which itself is a flawed concept.

now i dont see how this US backed democracy is any better for afghan ppl than talibans.

and i dont know where did we say we support the afghan taliban agenda of forcibly taking over but through talks.
 
On the other hand, there are also credible reports of the deep linkages between Mullah Omar / Haqqani and Pakistani agencies.



Your refusal to support Afghan democracy, and refusal to condemn the Taliban agenda of trying to forcibly take over, is revealing.

The conduct of the elections was flawed, but it's important to remember that the "ghost polling stations" were the result of the lawlessness created by your Talib friends. Now you can't turn around and use the problems with the election as an excuse to support further lawlessness by the Taliban.

Corruption is a legitimate concern, but it needs to be dealt with by the lawful and democratic process.

Halaku you forget one fact, Taliban were the last government of Afghanistan...so of course Pakistan would have links with them but the links were not what they are made out to be.
Still, at best the relationship was a complicated thing and certainly the Taliban did not listen to many things that Pakistan would have wanted their cooperation on.
Whether it was the pursuit of Laskhar e Jhangvi leaders, the handing over of Osama to Saudi Arabia, the settlement of Pakistan Afghan border...we met with silence and non assistance.
So i cannot digest the oversimplification which makes Taliban seem like our pet Bunny Rabbits...our trade and security depends a lot on good terms with Afghans so when Taliban were in power across the border we did recognize them, that does not mean we were their masters or we were pulling the strings through our agencies...

Our links were with the Mujahideen out of which many became the Taliban as well...however by virtue of same definition then the western world and agencies also had links to the Taliban during Afghan war...so the credible reports should also emphasize on the fact that many agencies were in touch with Afghan Mujahideen who later split into many factions one of them being Taliban...this is open truth and not something we hide, though i am always surprised that many people do not look beyond Pakistan...this is the selective interpretation which has resulted in a very distorted view of what is the cause of Taliban and what is their support base...

They were ex Mujahideen and Afghan students who promised a change f.rom the civil war, chaos and bloodshed which was not ending despite the soviets long gone, as a result they enjoyed local support at least very strongly amongst the Pashtuns but not limited to just Pashtuns....they formed the strongest government in recent decades in Afghanistan.
Right or wrong is not the point, they were in power and see themselves as a government wrongfully overthrown by use of foreign troops, it is not easy for their leaders to come to polls since they see it all as being done at the behest of occupying forces...coming to polls maybe signaling their own defeat as a government in forced exile.

If i am to analyze on what is going through the Taliban leadership's minds i would say that reconciliation with foreign forces is not something that will endear the Taliban to the locals, the Afghans dislike cowards and people who are in league with foreigners...for most part this is the one thing which will seal the fate of Taliban as far as their integrity is concerned...they cannot just surrender or throw away their arms without imposing some of their demands on the current setup regarding the return of foreign troops to their own countries.
I think even if Omar wanted to negotiate, he would fist need to have some of his demands regarding this particular aspect met as well.

Regarding the polls, we forget that the Taliban and their supporters do not accept the current government since they were overthrown with help of foreign forces and were not simply ousted by Afghan people, it is not a simple matter of coming to the polls to show their political strength...to them the polls have no validity at all...

That this bloody stalemate needs to change is no doubt clear in my mind. Negotiations have to be really exhausted, give the Taliban some assurances and if they betray like the Taliban of Swat then they shall lose all or most of their local support...this maybe a hard pill to swallow and certainly is not the norm but if we look f.rom an ideal perspective (which we all try to standby in our judgmental posts in the cyberworld)...this is truly the logical approach...a step by step exhaustion of all non military options...same thing we tried in Swat and it worked extremely well since the people knew clearly who was betraying whom at the end of the day.
This is the only practical way to move forward.

I am not a supporter of the good Taliban ideology since they claimed a lot of good initially but took many extreme steps which are not justified in Islam, however there has to be a realistic approach which takes into account their support and brings forth the means to either make the Taliban and their supporters part of the setup or dramatically reduce the local support of Taliban if indeed they do not uphold their end of the bargain whatever that may be.
 
Last edited:
Afterall, if OBL escaped FROM Afghanistan, it's then a question of to where he escaped. Pakistan, of course.

S-2, self reflection is the need of the hour...you also need to realize what a mess you guys made and why you cannot just push us further in your do more euphoria...

Osama escaped f.rom Tora Bora, where he went to is anyone's guesswork...
Using those mountains he could have gone back into the adjacent Afghan area and not just Pakistan.

You guys lost track of him despite the significance attached to OBL at the start of US attack, clearly OBL was the reason the Taliban were attacked. If the world's best military corners their primary target and fails to capture him, then excuse me for not buying all the crap that is thrown our way citing our deliberate aversion to taking on terrorists.
We have captured more AQ operatives than anyone…we have hurt them a lot and have been brutally attacked by them…thinking that we are shielding OBL is really pathetic…if that is what passes for logic then I guess the conspiracy theorists have similar logic when they say that OBL was also deliberately let go off by the USA…burns you does it not?
Then what you are saying burns me as well.

Now after OBL escaped you are assuming he went to Pakistan.
Your assumption has become a fact it seems because you have still not managed to capture OBL, so now the only reason you can repeatedly come up with for your failure in this task is Pakistan, how convenient...:disagree:

We have started our definite march on extremists after a national consensus only recently, the previous years were not decisive because as a nation we were divided on this issue due to many complications. That is no more the case as far as majority is concerned.
Still you would do well to note that the arrangement of Pakistan with the Tribals was an arrangement that the father of the nation made and we honor it and cannot rip it apart...working within the limitations it certainly had to be a long haul and certainly many things have already changed...still when you always talk about FATA being Pakistan or not...it is part of Pakistan but has its own set of rules within which we have had to operate...
That we have successfully launched our Army without irritating or making our Tribal brothers angry is an unprecedented success and shows the headway made by our leadership and intelligence in maintaining balance in our operations and earning the trust of the Tribals...even my father who led a formation of Mohmand Scouts in his Army career believed that it would take sheer genius and a very mature high command to carry out these operations while maintaining good terms with the tribes…he termed it as a highly dangerous and complex maneuver...a do or die...which was certainly the need of the hour but very risky nonetheless.
I guess the High command and all concerned have done an excellent job so far and it also seems that even the Tribals like all Pakistanis are out of the Soviet War syndrome and want an end to the terrorists who have been using the name of Islam and Jihad to pass themselves on as the relics of Afghan Jihad…
I can say that we have had breakthrough on a very large scale and that is why I maintain that now is not the time to unduly throw negative statements in our direction…

Despite the advances made we have to do it in our own time and manner but we shall definitely clear our areas of any extremists...it is a long haul...i do not ever recall the people of Pakistan supporting the US invasion and even our Government only provided logistical support...we had no agreement to fight against Afghans...we are not doing anything contrary to our agreements even if the agreements were made under circumstances not acceptable to many of my countrymen.

This is the unified stance of most Pakistanis and even if you do not like it...in the long run this will lead to destruction of all terrorists...despite sticking to our own plans we shall still be firmly acting against terrorists, it is as good as it gets…unless of course you care two hoots for Pakistan and would like it to bleed to death.

The space being denied to extremists will bear fruits for all people...
 
Analysis: Hard reality as US pushes Pakistan

By ANNE GEARAN (AP) – 1 hour ago

ISLAMABAD — Pakistan will not go as far as Washington wants, and there's nothing the U.S. can do about it: That's the sobering reality as the U.S. tries to persuade a hesitant Pakistan to finish off the fight against terrorists.

Expand the current assault against the Taliban? Pakistan has made clear that will happen only on its own terms. U.S. officials acknowledge that so far they haven't won the argument that militants who target America are enemies of Pakistan, too.

The U.S. has offered Pakistan $7.5 billion in military aid and broader cooperation with the armed forces. The assistance is intended to help Pakistan speed up its fight not only against internal militants, but also against al-Qaida and Taliban leaders hiding near the border with Afghanistan.

Pakistanis are deeply suspicious of America's power and motives, making it difficult for their leaders to accede to Washington's pressure in public, lest they look like U.S. puppets.

U.S. officials say that while Pakistani officials cooperate more in private, there are definite limits. The U.S. wanted Pakistan to move forces deeper into the tribal belt before winter. It didn't happen, and might not at all.

A senior U.S. diplomat hinted at a separate agreement that would allow the U.S. itself to take on some of the hidden war against Pakistan's militants.

Speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive talks with Pakistan, the diplomat said last week that more U.S. action is expected against the Haqqani network, led by longtime resistance fighter and former U.S. ally Jalaluddin Haqqani. His network, based in the Waziristan tribal area in northwest Pakistan, reportedly has strong ties with al-Qaida and targets U.S. forces in eastern Afghanistan from across the border.

The diplomat said the stepped-up U.S. action would come with Pakistani support, but would not elaborate on the potential cooperation.

Pakistani officials claim they have targeted the Haqqani leadership, albeit unsuccessfully, and will go after the network when the time is right. Some U.S. officials believe that, others don't.

Military officials say the Haqqani problem illustrates how the United States sometimes needs Pakistan more than the other way around.

The U.S. military now counts the Haqqani network as the single gravest threat to U.S. forces fighting over the border in Afghanistan, and badly wants Pakistan to push the militants from their border refuges. But the Pakistani answer seems to be that unless and until the Haqqanis threaten Pakistan, they won't be a priority.

Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, was the latest U.S. official to make the case in a visit to Pakistan's capital last week.

More than most U.S. officials, Mullen has cordial, long-standing relationships with Pakistan's generals, the strongest power base inside the country. Despite those ties, Mullen's quiet effort met with a polite noncommittal from his hosts.

Mullen advises patience and humility in dealing with Pakistan, a view not shared by some leading Republicans in Congress. Mullen said Pakistan doesn't get enough credit for the push since spring against militants in the Swat valley and South Waziristan.

"Too many people eagerly and easily criticize Pakistan for what they have not done," Mullen said Sunday, days after Pakistan's military leaders took Mullen on a tour of a reclaimed Swat.

"When I go to Swat, and look at what they did there on the military I think it's pretty extraordinary."


Most of the groups aligned against the U.S. are in North Waziristan, a tribal area not pressed hard by Pakistan's army. The only firepower directed at militants there comes from American missile-loaded drones.

Mullen told students at Pakistan's National Defense University that the U.S. is concerned about what it sees as a growing coordination among terrorist networks in and around Pakistan.

"I do not, certainly, claim that they are great friends, but they are collaborating in ways that quite frankly, scare me quite a bit," Mullen said last week.

He did not come out and say Pakistan needs to expand the fight against militants. But his point was clear.

In an exchange of letters over recent weeks, Obama asked for more cooperation and Pakistan's president, Asif Ali Zardari, pledged some additional help, U.S. officials said. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity to describe private correspondence.

Zardari, reflecting the views of Pakistan's powerful military, said his government will move against militants that attack U.S. forces when it is able to do so, the officials said.

That leaves ample room for Pakistan's civilian leaders to pursue their own agenda — and on their own schedule.

Without additional pressure from inside Pakistan, the only other option is for the U.S. to finish the fight against terrorists on its own. But Pakistan doesn't allow outright U.S. military action on its soil.

Mullen seemed to recognize that when he told the military students that he knows the U.S. is perceived as acting in its own interests almost at any cost, so it can hardly ask others not to put their own needs first.

"Sometimes that gets lost on us," he said.


The Associated Press: Analysis: Hard reality as US pushes Pakistan
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom