Pakistan presents a Policy Paper to the US on Afghanistan

[sparklingway]

Policy paper catches Obama’s attention​

From the Newspaper
Yesterday
By Syed Talat Hussain

ISLAMABAD: “General, rest assured. I will read every word of it,” said US President Barack Obama to the Pakistan chief of army staff who had just handed him a 13-page document.

On his way out of the room President Obama took the paper with him, not leaving it for his staff to place in the usual pipelines of official communication.

The document, branded as a non-paper, is an attempt to give voice to Pakistan`s strategic interests in the policy review of the Afghanistan situation under way at the White House.

Diplomatic sources confirm that by taking the extraordinary step of placing the paper directly in the hands of President Obama, Gen Kayani has placed a strong “foot in the door of policy review”.

“I cannot say that the paper is going to be become President Obama`s favourite reading material, but for the first time he has a direct understanding of where the Pakistan military is coming from on issues that are vital for the US and for global security,” said a western diplomat.

“I know at least one person who is quite convinced of the paper`s arguments, and his name is Lt-Gen Douglas E. Lute,” said the diplomat, talking of the senior adviser and coordinator for Afghanistan and Pakistan.

“The other person I have heard speak in great detail about the paper`s contents is the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, Admiral Michael Mullen,” said the same source.

The five-part paper details Pakistan`s assessment of the situation in Afghanistan, with regard to the ongoing conflict and efforts to negotiate with the Taliban. It focuses on the nature of Pakistan`s relations with the US and lists the possible ways out of the widening trust deficit between the two countries. It marks Pakistan`s concerns regarding India, besides reviewing counter-terrorism efforts in the Fata region. It closes on a rather harsh note where the Pakistani public`s perceptions of the US are listed as a way of portraying the challenges ahead for both Washington and Islamabad.

Diplomatic sources in Islamabad claim that on the eve of the policy review the paper has become “a rather significant document used not just for reference but also to assess precisely where Pakistan stands on the matrix of South Asian security”.“This is the first time we have a written account of the Pakistani establishment`s core concerns,” said a western diplomat who has knowledge of the paper`s contents.

Pakistan foreign office sources confirm that penning strategic concerns in totality is unusual. “This reduces diplomatic manoeuvrability,” said an official. “But this paper had to be sent because we were not sure whether Pakistan`s point of view is properly understood in the White House. President Obama needs to understand the full context of our arguments on Afghanistan, on strategic ties with the US and India, and counter-terrorism.”

He admitted, however, that the paper did not have “a whole lot of input” from the Pakistan foreign office. “When it was prepared it was a highly classified document. I don`t think more than a handful of people knew what was going to be in it and how it was going to be presented,” said the official.

These people included Foreign Secretary Salman Bashir, Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi and Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani. Official sources confirm that both the prime minister and the foreign minister read the paper before it was handed over. The paper had decisive input from military commanders and the ISI. Military sources say that it took three days to chisel out the final version.

Cross-questioning

Pakistani delegates who attended the strategic dialogue`s formal round in Washington the day after the paper was handed over to President Obama said that all the US participants were carrying copies of it.

“The first round of the talks was more like senate committee cross-questioning,” said a Pakistani member of the delegation. “Gen Kayani and the foreign minister were bombarded with queries by US members.”

The way forward in Afghanistan attracted the most attention.

“The US administration is caught in a difficult situation. They are preconditioning dialogue with the Taliban. They want the Taliban to first renounce violence, publicly disown Al Qaeda, and swear to abide by the constitution of Afghanistan,” said a Pakistani member of the delegation requesting anonymity. “What we are saying is that these preconditions should become end-conditions: negotiations should be a way to reach these goals.”

Those who have seen the paper say that it highlights the urgency of the situation in Afghanistan, saying that time is “short” and resources “limited”. It warns Washington that “idealism will have to operate within the confines of hard ground realities”.

Talking about the perquisite for an “all-embracing solution” to Afghanistan`s problem the paper says that sharp focus has to be kept on the “history, geography and culture of Afghanistan”. It suggests that a “new strategic framework” has to be defined, including an “operating strategy”.

Long-term interests

The paper calls Afghanistan`s war a matter of life and death for Pakistan. Gen Kayani articulated a similar argument in front of the US president while handing over the paper.

“Afghanistan is not just another war for us,” the general told the president, according to a delegate present. “We have to look after our long-term interests and cannot do anything in the short-term that would compromise those.”

In the paper, Pakistan`s long-term interests are defined as “achieving enduring peace based on a stable environment”. The usual terminology of “friendly Afghanistan” does not find mention in the final outcome suggested in the paper, said a military source familiar with its contents.

Pakistan`s desire to see “an all inclusive approach, open to all Afghans irrespective of their opposing viewpoints” permeates the paper`s portion on Afghanistan. But even then it says that peace in Afghanistan might never be “complete, permanently stable, or uncontested” and should always be judged in “relative terms and in the Afghan environment”.

It advises Washington to have a “minimal agenda” and push for “broader public support” to achieve stability in Afghanistan.

Policy paper catches Obama’s attention | Home: Latest news, Breaking news, Pakistan News, World news, business, sport and multimedia | DAWN.COM

 

[sparklingway]

No prizes on why this is literally handed out to mediamen a day after the shenanigans of the military brass come into question courtesy wikileaks expose.

 

[H2O3C4Nitrogen]

No prizes on why this is literally handed out to mediamen a day after the shenanigans of the military brass come into question courtesy wikileaks expose.

I expect some more to come out , and its not bad to come out all true and pure. However such things can and might fuel interior rifts between the opposing school of thoughts.

 

[kidwaibhai]

After hearing everything that Gen Kayani and Lt. Gen Pasha said, i think it is time for them to resign. But it is good that americans know where we stand officially.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

No prizes on why this is literally handed out to mediamen a day after the shenanigans of the military brass come into question courtesy wikileaks expose.

Given Zardaris unpopularity I doubt news about Kiyani considering the option to have Zardari resign, when the country was facing a Zardari induced period of unrest and turmoil, would be an unpopular position amongst the masses. In any case, Kiyani found a way for the parties involved to compromise and prevented Zardari from initiating anarchy in the steets.

The parliamentary source from FATA reporting on the DG ISI's presentation to Parliament is not credible IMO. Most of the claims made by the source in that cable were proven wrong within months, and I strongly doubt the DG ISI would discuss the particulars of covert policy WRT Afghanistan and the Taliban outside of a very small circle- President, PM, FM, DM etc.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

After hearing everything that Gen Kayani and Lt. Gen Pasha said, i think it is time for them to resign. But it is good that americans know where we stand officially.

What did they do that you think they should resign?

 

[Areesh]

After hearing everything that Gen Kayani and Lt. Gen Pasha said, i think it is time for them to resign. But it is good that americans know where we stand officially.

And why should they. At least from this article it is difficult for me to understand why should they resign?

 

[Saleem]

can anybody post the ppapr / link here?

 

[kidwaibhai]

What did they do that you think they should resign?

They were discussing over throwing a democratically elected government with an ambassador of a foreign country. they were blatantly making political statements. This does not suit staff officers that is why i think they need to resign. I for one have lost all respect for Gen Kayani and Lt. Gen Pasha

 

[VCheng]

They were discussing over throwing a democratically elected government with an ambassador of a foreign country. they were blatantly making political statements. This does not suit staff officers that is why i think they need to resign. I for one have lost all respect for Gen Kayani and Lt. Gen Pasha

However, NOTHING of the sort will of course happen.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

They were discussing over throwing a democratically elected government with an ambassador of a foreign country. they were blatantly making political statements. This does not suit staff officers that is why i think they need to resign. I for one have lost all respect for Gen Kayani and Lt. Gen Pasha

That is not an accurate representation of what Kiyani said - he was not looking at dismissing the government, but at having Zardari resign as President, while maintaining the PPP government in power.

The fact of the matter is that Pakistan could not afford the instability and chaos Zardari was pushing towards through his confrontational moves to disqualify the Sharifs and dismiss the Punjab government for no reason other than to try and undermine the Sharifs and horsetrade the PPP into power, as well as his reneging on the promise to restore the judiciary. All of this at a time of existing instability in Pakistan with rising terrorism and a sinking economy. Zardaris moves to dismiss the Punjab Government and Taseers mass transfers of bureaucrats probably led to the security failures that resulted in the Sri lankan team attacks.

Like it or not, when a nuclear power with an ascendant terrorist movement looks like descending into anarchy and chaos because the President is acting like a power hungry dictator, the world gets concerned and other power centers have to step in to try and defuse the crises. Kiyani,s conversation indicated an attempt to convey to concerned world powers the possible steps the COAS could take to defuse the crises sparked by Zardari- it was not a statement of intent on his part, and the fact that Zardari and the PPP are still in power, and the crisis defused, indicate the pragmatic conflict resolution steps taken by the COAS.

Would you have rather had violence and chaos on the streets as the PMLN and PPP fought out Zardaris power grabbing moves, and destabilized the entire country?

 

[VCheng]

....

Like it or not, when a nuclear power with an ascendant terrorist movement looks like descending into anarchy and chaos because the President is acting like a power hungry dictator, the world gets concerned and other power centers have to step in to try and defuse the crises.

......

Excellent words, but they also mean that the following inferences logically should follow:

1. The institutions of the said nuclear power are not working as they should.

2. Descent into anarchy and chaos cannot be allowed to happen given the complications associated with the existence of the know-how and materials of nuclear devices.

3. The long-term solution should be to de-nuclearize the weapons and stabilize the institutions.

Like it or not, #3 is going to be imposed sooner or later.

 

[H2O3C4Nitrogen]

Excellent words, but they also mean that the following inferences logically should follow:

1. The institutions of the said nuclear power are not working as they should.

2. Descent into anarchy and chaos cannot be allowed to happen given the complications associated with the existence of the know-how and materials of nuclear devices.

3. The long-term solution should be to de-nuclearize the weapons and stabilize the institutions.

Like it or not, #3 is going to be imposed sooner or later.

On what credible information you are basing such an assertion that "The institutions of the said nuclear power are not working as they should.". ?
The DE-nuclearisation cannot be achieved owing to the dynamics of region and hostilities bound to it.Like it or not but Pakistan would continue to pursue Nuclear Weapons as this is the only deterrence against India due to which Nash Equilibrium is achieved in South Asia through the doctrine of Mutually assured destruction.

 

[kidwaibhai]

That is not an accurate representation of what Kiyani said - he was not looking at dismissing the government, but at having Zardari resign as President, while maintaining the PPP government in power.

The fact of the matter is that Pakistan could not afford the instability and chaos Zardari was pushing towards through his confrontational moves to disqualify the Sharifs and dismiss the Punjab government for no reason other than to try and undermine the Sharifs and horsetrade the PPP into power, as well as his reneging on the promise to restore the judiciary. All of this at a time of existing instability in Pakistan with rising terrorism and a sinking economy. Zardaris moves to dismiss the Punjab Government and Taseers mass transfers of bureaucrats probably led to the security failures that resulted in the Sri lankan team attacks.

Like it or not, when a nuclear power with an ascendant terrorist movement looks like descending into anarchy and chaos because the President is acting like a power hungry dictator, the world gets concerned and other power centers have to step in to try and defuse the crises. Kiyani,s conversation indicated an attempt to convey to concerned world powers the possible steps the COAS could take to defuse the crises sparked by Zardari- it was not a statement of intent on his part, and the fact that Zardari and the PPP are still in power, and the crisis defused, indicate the pragmatic conflict resolution steps taken by the COAS.

Would you have rather had violence and chaos on the streets as the PMLN and PPP fought out Zardaris power grabbing moves, and destabilized the entire country?

Its very hard to disagree with you because i respect you but let me give it a try. Kayani was discussing with a foreign diplomate that he was going to remove the democratically elected president who by the way he works for (disclaimer: I too would like to see Zardari leave but only through democratic means).
Kayani was interfering in politics in contravention of the oath he took when he became an officer in the Pakistan army. By removing zardari he was usurping the will of the pakistani people.
I am some what uneasy but appreciative of the role he played in the long march saga. But he again was indulging in politics by saying that he doesnt was nawaz in power. He had no right to say that again that is the will of the Pakistani people who they send in office of the PM.
My basic problem i guess is that i thought this was the first general who actually got it that Pakistan can only become a modern nation through democratically elected government not through military Junta's. But i guess he is just like all the others.

 

[somebozo]

Will this be leaked by wiki as soon??