M.D. Nalapat
Manipal, India - Pakistan's U.S.-approved chief of army
staff, Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, wanted a less unpredictable personality than Asif
Ali Zardari as president of the country. But the crafty equestrian from Sindh
insisted on the job, aware that the absence of high office would almost
certainly mean either a death sentence or a fresh stint in jail, as Zardari
faced several corruption charges.
Since then, "the chief" has
seethed as Zardari admitted publicly that the jihadis fighting India in Kashmir
were terrorists, and further, that he himself saw no threat from India, thus
destroying the army's rationale for consuming more than one-third of the
budget. By the time Pakistan's new president said that, like India, Pakistan
was committed to a "no first use" policy on nuclear weapons, Kayani
had made up his mind that Zardari had to go, and was searching for an
opportunity to get him out.
The chief's undiplomatic descriptions of
his nominal superior to his intimates have been many and acid, but his personal
relationship with U.S. policy gurus has thus far ensured that Washington saw
nothing untoward in the clear divergence of views and interests between the
chief and the president – or in the chief's private musings about replacing the
president. This was Pakistan, after all.
Mumbai 11/27 – the date that marks the
midpoint of the three-day terrorist siege in the city – may have shaken the
complacency of U.S. and EU policymakers about Kayani's suitability to lead an
army touted as the linchpin of the allies in the war on terror.
So far, the chief has managed to evade
suspicion that he approved the Mumbai terror strike, yet signs abound of the
active participation of serving military officers in the training and facilitation
of the terrorists who landed in Mumbai on Nov. 26, 2008. It strains credulity
that Kayani was ignorant of an operation that involved training given by
subordinates of two of his corps commanders, given the attention to minutiae of
the officer who replaced Pervez Musharraf as army chief in 2007.
Kayani's empathy with the jihadis – for the
record, presently only those active in Kashmir, although trained jihadis switch
theaters of operation frequently – are as strong as were those of his fellow
Punjabi, former President Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq. But these links have been kept
out of view of Western interlocutors, unlike those of Zia, who was open about
his affiliations.
For nearly two years the Inter-Services
Intelligence has sought permission from army headquarters to fast-track a
strategy developed in 2005 that is designed to return the Taliban to power in
Afghanistan. Permission for such an escalation in support to the Taliban was
rejected by Musharraf. However, judging by changes on the battlefield, it
appears to have been approved by the new army chief soon after the swearing-in
of Pakistan's civilian government on March 25.
The plan envisages the shifting of the
military's focus of manpower from Pakistan's western border with Afghanistan –
where it is supposed by NATO to be hunting the Taliban and homegrown insurgents
– to its eastern border with India. A breakdown in NATO supply routes through
Pakistan would then be arranged. These steps would be followed by negotiations
with the Taliban to facilitate a power-sharing agreement with the democratic
parties in Afghanistan.
The denuding of manpower from the western
front and the choking of NATO supplies through Pakistan would, it was
calculated, lead to a panic within the alliance that would facilitate such a
fatal – to the war on terror – compromise with Taliban leader Mullah Mohammed
Omar.
From then onwards – initially with covert
and later with open support from the Pakistani military – the Taliban would
eliminate its democratic partners and take over the administration of all
except perhaps the Tajik and Uzbek-dominated areas of Afghanistan.
The Mumbai attacks were expected to trigger
a military mobilization from India that would give the Pakistani army the
excuse it was searching for to disengage openly from operations against the
Taliban. That failed to happen, however.
Although the Pakistani army claims it has
no control over the Taliban – or indeed the border regions where al-Qaida
leader Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar reside – the reality is that ideology,
drug money, kinship and religious links bind the two forces, and that the
Taliban would lose its battlefield cohesion within half a year without the help
given by elements within the Pakistani military.
It is no coincidence that two major attacks
on NATO supply routes into Afghanistan have occurred in Pakistan since the
Mumbai attacks. By standing by while such Taliban attacks multiply, the
Pakistani military clearly hopes to persuade NATO to nudge Afghani President
Hamid Karzai toward a power-sharing agreement that would let the Taliban enter
his government. Once Karzai agrees to share power, Mullah Omar would graciously
accept his offer of talks aimed at integrating the Taliban into the government
in Kabul.
Reinforcing existing Western pressure on
Karzai to negotiate with the Taliban are hidden sweeteners from Saudi Arabia,
intended to help persuade Afghanistan's democratic leaders to agree to partner
with the Taliban. Once such an arrangement takes effect, it would be a matter
of three or four years before the Taliban take control of the 70 percent of
Afghanistan that some Western experts are already incorrectly ascribing to
them.
What is needed to protect the world against
terror is not compromise with the Taliban, but victory over them. Such an
outcome will not be decided on the field in Afghanistan, but in Pakistan.
Victory would necessitate choking off the Taliban's supply routes from
Pakistan, and extinguishing the numerous safe havens provided by that country
to Mullah Omar's terror outfit.
Until NATO gives the Pakistani generals the
option of either clearing out the jihadis inside Pakistan, or standing by while
NATO interdicts the supply routes to Afghanistan, the bloodletting in
Afghanistan will continue to increase. And unless the United States and the
European Union act decisively to shut down the 119 terror training camps in
Pakistan and reform the Wahabbi schools that are affiliated to individual
terror outfits, the war on terror cannot be won.
A crucial step is for the United States and
the European Union to take the lead in ensuring that it is not the army chief
who can throw out of office the president of Pakistan, but Asif Ali Zardari who
can replace an army chief whose links with jihadists are becoming too
transparent to hide.
Unfortunately for Pakistan, with the
short-sighted opportunism characteristic of that country's politicians, the
other major political figure, Nawaz Sharif, has thrown in his lot with Kayani
against Zardari. Indeed, Sharif has gone to the extent of joining hands with
the overtly Wahabbi groups in supporting the activities of the religious
schools in Pakistan that provide human fodder for the Pakistani army's
terrorist ancillaries – forgetful of the fact that after Zardari’s, it is his
head that will be next.
If the United Nations decides to impose
sanctions on individuals such as former ISI chief Hamid Gul – who was tasked
with helping the Taliban avoid NATO retribution – and expands such a list to
include carefully selected elements from the military, business and political
circles who are known to facilitate the Pakistani terror machine, several
current backers of jihad may decide to abandon a policy that can only bring
ruin to their country. Thus far, such individuals have escaped even the mildest
retribution for their activities
The time for mild rebuke is anyway over.
Unless action be taken – including sanctions on key backers of the Taliban in
Pakistan and in other countries, and interdiction of supplies within the
Taliban-infested regions of Pakistan – the war in Afghanistan will soon go the
way Mullah Omar wishes it to, courtesy of the generals in Pakistan.
-(Professor M.D. Nalapat is
vice-chair of the Manipal Advanced Research Group, UNESCO Peace Chair, and
professor of geopolitics at Manipal University. ©Copyright M.D. Nalapat.)
Prof Nalapat had in 2008 rightly predicted rise of terrorism in the AFPAK region to permeate into the West.The poisonous weed has spread into the Middle East sprouting as ISIS where the USA provided it sustenance trying to topple a stable establishment in Syria like it had successfully in Iraq earlier executing Saddam kangaroo court fashion.His Baathist remnants are providing Military backing to ISIS who wish to establish a Muslim domain world wide.The USA and NATO are unwilling to send their Boots on the ground.Despite Pakistani pretense of eliminating the menace created by ISI backed by CIA in the FATA region the USA knows it cannot get Pakistani boots on the ground else where..In the World Wars Indians died in battlefields all over Europe and Asia.Perhaps USA wants India to commit ground forces to help weed out the looming menace which has India on its list.Certain countries in the Gulf,Jordan,Egypt have realized danger from ISIS to their regimes and are getting closer to India.The ISIS dreams of past glory in the times of Saladhin and wants to realize it. .
ReplyDelete