AFGHAN STALEMATE

Last week Admiral Michael Mullen made rather blunt remarks in Islamabad that ISI’s continued links with the Haqqani network were at the core of Pakistan’s problematic relations with the United States. “The ISI has a rich history of how they operated in this part of the world, to protect their own country…The Haqqani network had fuelled the Afghan insurgency by supporting, training and funding fighters who were killing American and coalition troops in Afghanistan,” said the Admiral. Jockeying between the conflicting strategies of simultaneously wooing and weakening the Haqqani’s, Admiral is often fatigued enough to relapse into Bush era strategic environment. Dynamics of Afghan conflict have moved to new planes; it is an open secret that Admiral’s boys had been intimately negotiating with Haqqanis, both with and without ISI’s facilitation.

Likewise, recently released biannual report of the White House to Congress on Pakistan and Afghanistan, has cast critical aspersions on Pakistan, both in the domain of governance and counter-insurgency operations. This report is an indictment on Pakistan; and it accepts no responsibility regarding deliberate ambiguities in American policies towards Afghanistan and Pakistan. White House is of the view that “There remains no clear path to defeating the insurgency in Pakistan, despite the unprecedented and sustained deployment of over 147,000 forces”.

The latest phase of the Mohmand operations which concluded in March has been cited as an example of Pakistan’s inability to hold and build areas cleared of militants. The fact that 50,000 internally displaced persons has been able to return to their homes in Mohmand agency as a result of “Operation Brekhna” finds no appreciation. Pakistan’s political and military leadership have been assessed harshly. America expects Pakistan to perform a feat single-handed which Americans could not accomplish with the military might of over 40 countries at their disposal.

America’s policy of measured vagueness in the context of troops’ pullout from Afghanistan has begun to haunt it; indeed the bluff has been called. Though tempo of the events in Libya has eclipsed the Afghan issue, it will soon reoccupy the centre stage. Libyan conflict cannot be resolved inline with American blueprints without inducting a large number of land forces into the North African theatre; and such numbers would only be available if and when troops could be de-inducted from Afghanistan, and Iraq.

Though, Defence Secretary Robert Gates had told a recent West Point audience that “any future defence secretary who advises the president to again send a big American land army into Asia or into the Middle East or Africa should have his head examined”, he may already be busy in a number crunching exercise; challenges of extricating over 100,000 American troops from Afghanistan without a clear victory are indeed phenomenal.

Morale of the American troops is marred by fatigue, homesickness, weariness and mental disorders. Suicide rate among the American soldiers is on the rise; there were 252 cases in 2010. This trend is linked to drug abuse, brain injuries, depression and back home worries. Apart from numerous cases of indiscipline in Iraq and Afghanistan, several cases of shootings within military establishments have also occurred inside American mainland.

President Karzai has announced the start of the transition process in Afghanistan. Going by the numbers, recruitment of Afghan security forces is expected to achieve its target figure of around 300,000 Afghans by coming October. However, infiltration of security forces by the Taliban is out of the ordinary. There have been a number of recent cases of Afghan security personnel killing foreign soldiers. Earlier this month, two American soldiers on a training mission were killed by a policeman.

Representation of Pushtuns in the security forces remains a challenge. Only 3.7 per cent of recruited Pushtuns are from southern Afghanistan against a target figure of 10 per cent. Tajiks are over represented in the Afghan National Army by about 8 per cent and by more than 15 per cent in the police. With these compositional and Psychological issues at hand, Afghan security forces represent a ticking bomb.

Reconstitution of the upgraded ‘Peace Commission’ radiates a ray of hope. President Karzai has announced that the upgraded commission also enjoyed US support. However, track record of such earlier efforts is not quite enviable. Moreover any concept or terminology that originates from America is not likely to sell well amongst the masses of Afghanistan. Any solution that is not owned and led by Afghans is destined to doom.

Turkey has since long been sincerely trying to play its role to sort out Afghanistan problem and for this purpose it has hosted several rounds of talks between Pakistani and Afghan leadership. Turkish initiative of allowing Taliban to set up their liaison office in Turkey is a positive development. This would bring various factions of Taliban closer to each other; and existence of a formal office would give legitimacy to an otherwise established reality of the political clout of Taliban. It would be appropriate if other countries as well as OIC, NAM, SAARC and the UN also allow such representation to Taliban. However, once again the fundamental error is exclusion of Iran from this process. Sustainable peace cannot be achieved in Afghanistan without taking Iran on board.

If anything could restore normalcy in today’s troubled Afghanistan, it is a comprehensive national reconciliation in which all Afghan have a stake. Fast emerging unfavourable security situation has compelled the US to negotiate with Taliban for a political settlement. Strenuous efforts (read machinations) are being made by the USA to win over Taliban. Initially these contacts were made secretly with India as behind the door facilitator. Later on, secrecy had to be abandoned when the US as well as President Karzai concluded that without active participation of Pakistan no headway could be made. Main stream Taliban entities are still united under Mullah Omar and have rejected pre-conditions of USA. They are aware that the US is no longer in a position to call the shots. Despite two troop surges the balance remains tilted in favour of Taliban. Taliban could not be split up. They are convinced that they have already won the war, and the countdown has started. Hence they are in no mood to compromise on American terms. For them, the US is now like a wounded animal which has transformed from a hunter into a hunted prey.

There are test balloons indicating an American stay up to 2024. President Karzai has recently stated that America intends to establish permanent military bases in Afghanistan. The US has for long been eying on Kabul, Baghram, Kandahar, Shindad and Herat as its military bases. These places are being speedily fortified and modernised. However, resurgence of Taliban, war weariness, haywire economy and uprisings in Middle East and Africa are compelling America to call it a day. Though Lisbon summit extended the tenure of this dead-ended war till 2014, a speedy withdrawal may be in the offing.

Education is India’s only advantage over us: CM

By Rahib Raza

LAHORE: Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif has said that Pakistan lags behind India only because of a lack of education facilities here, but expressed confidence that the nation’s young people would tackle this issue.

Kinnaird students celebrate at the 74th convocation in the college amphitheatre on Tuesday.

“I don’t have any doubts that you will become the leaders, that you will show your expertise to the world and that we will confidently hand over our duties to you,” Shairf said in his speech at the 74th convocation of Kinnaird College for Women University at its Perin Boga Amphitheatre on Tuesday night.

The chief minister lamented that Pakistan was living on “leftovers” – a reference to the schools and universities set up by the British and by missionaries, which account for most of the country’s top institutions.

He said he had initiated the Danish schools programme in the province to set up institutes that would cater to children from all backgrounds. “The Danish schools will provide the best primary and basic education to the children who have never seen the inside of an institute before,” he said.

Some 500 post-graduate students, 473 graduate students, 19 academic gold medallists, 15 co-curricular gold medallists, 68 students on the principal’s honour list, and 34 from the 2006-2010 session and 30 from the 2005-2009 session with a CGPA of 3.80 or above were honoured at the convocation.

Dr Alexander John Malik, the bishop of Lahore and chairman of the KCWU Board of Governors, presided over the ceremony. He congratulated the students and told them they should look to their futures with enthusiasm and commitment.

He said KCWU had shown it was the best college for girls. “That’s why parents turn to KCWU to find their daughters-in-law and organisations look here for future leaders, PhDs and researchers,” he said.

Principal Rukhsana David in her speech tried to motivate the fresh graduates to make their mark in Pakistan. She also spoke about the new developments at the institute. The day ended with a formal dinner with parents, faculty members and teachers.

Farooq Altaf, the law secretary; Fakir Aijazuddin, the principal of Aitchison College; Haseeb Athar, the education secretary; Ahad Cheema, the district coordination officer; Mujahid Kamran, the vice chancellor of Punjab University; Marcia Grant, the vice rector of FC College; and former KCWU principal Mira Phailbus also attended the convocation.

Crowd control

Heavy security and low capacity meant many students and their parents were unable to find seats for the convocation at Perin Boga Amphitheatre and so had to sit on staircases and walls.

The ceremony began two hours late as visitors were vetted at the entrance by security men. The corridors leading to the entrance were packed. The doors were closed once the chief minister arrived, leaving many people stranded outside. “The timing was poor. Many people didn’t get the chance to join in. They should have told us to be at the venue three hours early,” said Saba Alam, a student.

The crowded venue also meant that the graduating students could not walk up to the stage to receive their degrees. Instead, their names were announced and they stood at their seats. Many students left afterwards, before the chief minister’s speech.

What the NATO attack exposes

By Mosharraf Zaidi

During the process that lead to President Barack Obama’s announcement of a surge in Afghanistan last year, Pakistan’s role in the situation in Afghanistan became of a greater importance than any other single factor. From the perspective of both the US military and its civilian leadership, the “safe haven” that Al-Qaeda enjoys in FATA represents a danger to American lives. Bob Woodward’s new book about the process that led to the surge is called “Obama’s Wars”. In it, the reader can almost hear US officials speak about Pakistan, in graphic detail. It is an exciting read, and something to experience for every Pakistani interested in the country’s future and its relationship to the rest of the world.

The NATO attack on an FC post at 5:25 am on September 30 that killed three Pakistani paramilitary soldiers needs to be seen in the context of the Afghanistan surge and US government’s approach to its war in Afghanistan. Since Obama hit the reset button in his speech at West Point on December 1, 2009, the war in Afghanistan is layered upon a foundation of US national security “truths” about which there is virtual consensus in Washington DC.

This first of these is that the “new” war is between Al-Qaeda and the United States – the Kandahari Taliban are a sideshow. The second is that Pakistan’s tribal areas (FATA) are now the primary theatre of war between Al-Qaeda and the US. The clandestine operations of the American intelligence community, lead by the CIA, and the US military’s so-called “black ops”, or covert actions, conducted by the Joint Special Operations Command are the central instruments of America’s war on Al-Qaeda – wherever that war may take America. Right now, it takes them to FATA, over, and over, and over again. For US policy makers, this is a no-brainer. If Al-Qaeda is in FATA, then so is the United States, right behind them, chasing them, hounding them, and killing them.

Pakistani hypernationalists will often spew weak, unsubstantiated and ridiculous things to rail at the imperialism of the US war effort. But what most Pakistanis, hypernationalist or not, have little to say about, is how this problem can be solved without proactive American action. To put it more kindly, and as it is likely framed in for-the-record discussions between Gen Kayani and Gen Patraeus – how can threats from Al-Qaeda and its allies in FATA, be eliminated, without America help?

To hear some folks tell it, Pakistan is virtually doing everything it possibly can, given the limitations imposed on this country by its financial situation, by the poor credibility of a an elite seen to be corrupt and disloyal to the concerns of the average Pakistani, and by the politics of waging war on one’s own territory and people.

Exhibit A for these folks is the commitment demonstrated by the Pakistani military’s repeated operations in FATA. Indeed, these operations may be vital to Pakistani national security. The simplistic notion that war operations in FATA undertaken by the Pakistani military are being conducted to please America ignore the fundamental reality posed by Al-Qaeda, and indeed by the motley crew of alphabet soup groups like the LeT, SSP, JeM and others. We don’t have to cheerlead America’s war to understand the implications of the war that terrorists are trying to take to the rest of the world. Simply put, any international action by these groups, whether in India, or the United States or elsewhere, will produce retaliation – a prospect that puts the national security of Pakistan in grave, grave danger. Military operations in FATA however do not inspire confidence, because they are not anchored in a coherent strategy or plan of any kind.

Pakistan has to deal with threats to its internal security, such as those posed by the TTP and their ilk. It also has to deal with threats to its national security from outside – including the threat of retaliation if a terrorist group based in Pakistan successfully attacked another country, or indeed even the threat of conspiracies hatched by other countries.

Right now, Pakistan has no strategy that adequately addresses these twin threats – both of which find fertile soil in FATA. The internal governance mechanisms to deal with security, like anti-terror legislation, police reform, decentralization, or intelligence triangulation have barely moved an inch while all hell has broken loose since mid 2007. Not surprising, given the lack of a counterterrorism strategy. The external governance mechanisms have a long record of failure in resolving security issues – from the compromised neutrality of the UN system, to the impotence of SAARC, and indeed, credibility-starved OIC. Even if they worked, Pakistan’s schizophrenic foreign policy regime would probably have dried the pool of any sympathy out there for Pakistan.

High and dry, with an uncontrollably angry enemy within, and lots of enemies outside, Pakistanis must be careful before remonstrating too strongly against NATO’s aggression in FATA. Pakistan is conducting military operations and aerial bombardment itself. Pakistan gave the US fly-by rights, and access to airfields long ago. Simply put, the American war in Af-Pak does not exist without strong, concerted, deliberate and assiduous Pakistani efforts. Indeed, Pakistani government officials last year were among the most ardent supporters of Obama’s Afghan surge. Simply put, Pakistan has repeatedly welcomed and enabled the US war in Afghanistan, and Pakistan knows exactly where the center of gravity for this war lies. The fact that NATO was behind the trigger last week is a technicality. Yet acting against terrorists should not be controversial, it should be unquestionably job number one. Those terrorists are sworn to killing innocent people – and they have fulfilled that promise over, and over, and over again.

That is why opposition to America’s continued presence in Afghanistan, to drone attacks in FATA, and to what is going to become much more frequent US visits to FATA across the Durand Line needs to do better than burn flags and fabricate conspiracy theories. Any opposition that is motivated by emotions should be solemnly rejected.

Genuine opposition must be based on rule of law, both domestic and international, on the rights of Pakistani citizens, both Pakhtuns and all others, and on the need for clarity, accountability, and transparency in public policy – here in Pakistan and elsewhere. To mount serious opposition, notwithstanding mistakes and violations by other parties, Pakistanis and their friends need to be able to articulate compelling answers to two critical questions that Pakistanis should have been asking their military and political elite all along. First, what is the plan to protect Pakistani lives and property from attacks by terrorists on Pakistani soil? Second, what is the plan to restrict the operations of known terrorist groups who plan to attack other countries? Sadly, thus far, there is no Pakistani plan.

It should be exceedingly clear that countries that have no plans of their own, are going to have plans made for them. Blocking NATO supply routes is not a counterterrorism strategy, and it cannot be how national security should work in a country of 180 million people. It is cheap theatrics. The problems in FATA weaken internal Pakistani security and are a Pakistani national security problem. The life and death struggles of Pakistan’s brave soldiers – including the three FC soldiers killed by NATO – and its resilient people deserves much better than these cheap reactive theatrics.