The relationship between Pakistan’s ISI and Afghan insurgents

[asquare]

I've attached what I think is a very interesting paper (sorry I can't post links yet). It will be great to hear responses from the Pakistanis on the forum. In particular, this sort of involvement seems to be continuing. In the ISI's worldview, the Haqqani network and the Afghan Taliban are 'acceptable' terrorists (at least in the short term) who might serve as allies against the TTP. How do you expect this to play out? Is this another strategic error in the long run?

Please respond to the substance of the paper and not issues like the author's nationality (he's American) or his academic affiliation (Harvard).

 

[TheFlyingPretzel]

I think the paper is assumptive, ill-conceived, lacks neutrality, can be equated with tripe and is least convincing primarily because the author is an American national and is affiliated with Harvard.

amidoinitrite?

 

[asquare]

I think the paper is assumptive, ill-conceived, lacks neutrality, can be equated with tripe and is least convincing primarily because the author is an American national and is affiliated with Harvard.

amidoinitrite?

Well, you could respond to which bits, specifically, you find inaccurate. If you choose to read it, that is.

 

[EagleEyes]

Well, you could respond to which bits, specifically, you find inaccurate. If you choose to read it, that is.

Start with the correct title shall we?

 

[The Great One]

ISI having ties with terrorist groups an open secret: Panetta
Pakistani spy agency ISI having close ties with terror groups is an open secret and this wasthe reason why the US did not share the intelligence about the raid on Osama bin Laden's hideout with Islamabad, former Defense Secretary and ex-CIA Director Leon Panetta has said.

"We had been discussing this for months, and it was an open secret that Pakistan's intelligence agency had ties to terrorist groups — that, after all, was a major part of our rationale for not sharing our bin Laden intelligence with the ISI," Panetta wrote in his book 'Worthy Fights: A Memoir of Leadership in War and Peace' which hit the stores yesterday.

Panetta was the CIA Director in the first term of the Obama Administration and was also his Defense Secretary later.

In both these position, Panetta was a strong advocate of US-Pakistan relationship and always came out in strong defense of ISI and the Pakistan Army whenever there were allegations of the spy agency having links with the terrorist outfit.

In fact, while serving in the Obama administration – both as CIA chief and Defense Secretary – Panetta always issued certificates to ISI on allegations of its links with terror outfit. However, in his latest book, the first after he left the Obama Administration some two years ago, Panetta speaks in an altogether different tone.

"One of the most complicated international relationships to manage in my years with President Obama was that between the United States and Pakistan," Panetta wrote.

"At their core, both countries realized we needed each other’s help, but we didn't trust each other. It showed," the former Defense Secretary added.

Referring to the remarks of the then Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, before a Senate Committee, Panetta said Mullen spoke the truth that day.

"For the most part, our uneasiness concerning Pakistan was unspoken. We grumbled about it in the inner circles of government, but made nice in public. Then, on September 22, Admiral Mullen, approaching the end of his tenure as chairman of the Joint Chiefs, told a blunt truth and did so publicly,"Panetta wrote.

 

[asquare]

Start with the correct title shall we?

How would you like it changed?

 

[The Great One]

How would you like it changed?

It's already changed. BTW That attachment isn't working.

 

[asquare]

It's already changed. BTW That attachment isn't working.

Sorry I can't post a link. I've attached it again. If that doesn't work, look for a paper by Matt Waldman with the same title.

 

[Faiez]

Start with the correct title shall we?

what's wrong with the title...?

Pakistani ISI does support Afghan Taliban....Support for Afghan Taliban is significant in Pakistan....There's even political parties publicly supporting Al-Qaeda and Taliban etc etc....

also, the paper is from 2010....at that time it may not be so reliable, but right now it's not far from the reality....ISI has supported Afghan Taliban and Haqqani network..

 

[Kompromat]

Intelligence agencies do what they are supposed to. CIA has links with every single terrorist group anywhere in the world. Why no one talks about that?

 

[The Great One]

Intelligence agencies do what they are supposed to. CIA has links with every single terrorist group anywhere in the world. Why no one talks about that?

No they don't. They most certainly don't have ties to any Islamic terrorist groups, unless you are trying to insinuate that 9/11 was a CIA job at which point we must definitely laugh at you.

 

[Kompromat]

No they don't. They most certainly don't have ties to any Islamic terrorist groups, unless you are trying to insinuate that 9/11 was a CIA job at which point we must definitely laugh at you.

Go on keep laughing.

 

[Razia Sultana]

Whats so new about this open secret? BBC's documentary "Secret Pakistan" has revealed it all. The whole world knows it.

 

[asquare]

Intelligence agencies do what they are supposed to. CIA has links with every single terrorist group anywhere in the world. Why no one talks about that?

Every time the US has used terrorists as instruments of statecraft, it has come back to haunt the US. Whether it was supporting Saddam Hussain in the Iran-Iraq war, arming and funding the Taliban or the US's misadventures in South America, the terrorists, without fail, turned on the masters.

When India attempted the same thing, with the LTTE, the results were the same- they bit the hand that fed them.

So you are right, many intelligence agencies use terrorists for strategic ends- in the long run however it rarely works out as intended. In Pakistan's case the ISI's actions have had particularly tragic consequences, for the world as a whole but mostly for the Pakistani people. This is a price that the Pakistani people might have to pay for generations.

The Americans ruthlessly used the ISI against the Soviets and left the ISI out in the cold once the Americans felt they had gotten all they could out of the ISI. This left behind a deadly legacy- ISI generals who felt betrayed, who had worked so closely with the Taliban that some of them were more Talibanised than the Taliban itself and who were now flush with cash and weapons. The most famous case in point, of course, is Hamid Gul, who is still power drunk, unable to leave behind the hangover of the power games the ISI played along with the Americans during the cold war. He said a few years ago, "The ISI are the religious conscience keepers of Pakistan". When still influential retirees from an intelligence agency consider it a religious conscience keeper, you know something has gone wrong.

In India's case, the lesson to be learnt to stay out of situations where the consequences are unpredictable. I hope the Indian government stays out of Afghanistan except for humanitarian causes. Arming and training the Afghan army, as a strategic counterweight to Pakistan, will be a huge mistake. Who knows what shape that army will be in a few years from now and how that training and weaponry will be used?

 

[Mujahid Memon]

Same bullshit........different perspective..........keep going on...........cheers!