An article recently published in the New York Times has both infuriated and confused me. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/22/world/asia/22pstan.html?ref=todayspaper. This article deals with complaints made by Pakistani officials concerning our increased presence in Afghanistan. I admit that this entire situation has a personal side to it. One of my best friend’s sons, whom I babysat as an infant, is an officer in the USMC. He is presently deployed in Afghanistan and as a platoon leader; is in the middle of this “increased presence.” I have previously written articles voicing my objection to their president’s, Ali Zardari, method of requesting aid via the Washington Post. Presently, we have pledged $1.5 billion per year for the next 5 years to help stimulate Pakistan’s economy. Considering we have done such a superb job stimulating our own; forgive me if I find a considerable amount of irony in that gesture.
“Pakistani officials have told the Obama administration that the Marines fighting the Taliban in southern Afghanistan will force militants across the border into Pakistan…”
I have apparently been mistaken in my perception that this was a joint effort. I had assumed that the Taliban posed as great a threat to Pakistan as it does to the U.S. In fact; after my posting about Zardari on a different site; I received the following comment from a Pakistani national. (I wasn’t aware I had such a broad readership.)
Zameer said:
this author from USA has critized upon the opinion written by our elected president of Pakistan in Washington post ; Remember ,Zardari has all the basic rights to write , speak or propagate for Pakistan and people of Pakistan has given him this right ; I am a common man in Pakistan ; i think if president Zardari is demanding more and more support from USA , then he is doing very well ; his Pakistani troops (both civilian and army are being killed by Taliban ; and if Zardari does not stop them , then Mr. author , your throat will also be cut by some Taliban leader one day ; face the facts and do not mix up the things ; When your own secretary of state Hilary Clinton admits and takes the responsibility of creation of alqaeda and Taliban then why you cry over Mr. Zardari if he writes the same truth in Washington post ; please do not bother regarding nuclear arsenals of Pakistan rather bother your own pentagon which was attacked by alqaead in 9/11 despite all security arrangements ; Zardari is not corrupt ; no court has been able to find proofs of his corruption ; correct your record accordingly '; Mr. Zardari is not only leading anti terrorism war for Pakistan’s survival rather yours survival as well;
OK Zameer; you got it. Though I find my friend’s accusations to be absurd; it displays why I am so confused over this sudden change in attitude regarding the pursuit of the Taliban. It’s important to note that Zardari was quoted as saying; “This is our war. It is our wives and children who are being killed.” Wrong again Zardari! Has he forgotten that 3,000 innocent Americans were killed by these people? He has consistently sought our help in fighting these insurgents and now they consider our more concerted effort to be a threat to their security.
“Pakistani officials still consider India their top priority and the Taliban militants a problem that can be negotiated. In the long term, the Taliban in Afghanistan may even remain potential allies for Pakistan…” WHAAAAT?
Yes, the Taliban has long been applauded for their willingness to negotiate. You need only ask the innocent civilians in Afghanistan to find out how willing the Taliban is to reach peaceful resolutions. My confusion is based on the sudden change of heart. It was less than 2 weeks ago that the Pakistani Army confronted the Taliban in the Swat Valley with considerable success.
“Last year, Washington presented evidence to Pakistani leaders that Mr. Haqqani, working with Inter-Services Intelligence, was responsible for the bombing last summer of the Indian Embassy in Kabul that killed 54 people.”
Ah hah-now I’m starting to get it! Haqquani is an Afghan Taliban leader who the U.S. contest is operating under Pakistani protection. So, apparently, as long as the Taliban strikes at India from time to time-they get a pass. Joe Klein writes in Time Magazine:
“In the latest National Interest, Bruce Riedel-who led the Obama Administration’s Afghanistan and Pakistan policy review-suggests that a coup led by Islamist, Taliban-sympathetic elements of the Pakistani army remains a very real possibility. Pakistan has at least 60 nuclear weapons. The chance that al-Qaeda sympathizers might gain access to those weapons is the real issue in Afghanistan and Pakistan.”
From what I can ascertain from all of this is that while our young men and women are risking their lives; Pakistan has redirected their focus from the Taliban back to India. Of course; India has always been Pakistan’s biggest threat. However, to attempt to detract our focus away from our objective is bullshit. To Pakistan I say: If you don’t wish to join us anymore-stay the fuck out of the way. This is our fight and always has been. To even suggest that we change direction is a slap in the face to our soldiers. So step aside Pakistan and let our troops do their job and when we’re done-you can do all the negotiating you want with those murdering pieces of shit. What do you have to say for yourself now Zameer?
Showing posts with label Taliban. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Taliban. Show all posts
Sunday, July 26, 2009
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Time is running out for Pakistan
Among the plethora of plans submitted by the Obama administration lies one that has garnered very little attention. It has the potential to have significant effects on a country and to our efforts of putting a stop to al Qaeda’s reign of terror and governmental destabilizing. The plan calls for tripling the amount of monetary aid we have been providing Pakistan from $500 million to $1.5 billion annually. This aid is cloaked under the guise of “nonmilitary” assistance due to the crumbling economy in Pakistan. This plan, not unlike many of the President’s other plans, has one codicil attached to it that refutes the nonmilitary assistance it purports to be.
The administration has made it clear that if the Pakistani government does not increase its efforts to stop the flow of Taliban forces into their country; this aid will be significantly reduced if not eliminated entirely. This is something that the government can ill afford considering they were on the brink of bankruptcy as recently as last fall. Amidst all of this we find a refreshingly pragmatic voice of reason in the person of Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Sen. Levin has expressed concern over the possible backfiring of this plan should the Pakistanis perceive it as a bribe of sorts.
"It's got to be that we are supporting Pakistan policies because if we appear to be buying something they would otherwise not pursue, it is counterproductive."
Personally, I have trouble seeing how they can perceive it any other way! Do we actually think that they are incapable of seeing directly through this charade, or is it that we know we have them in a corner.
According to Julian Barnes of the LA Times: both Michele Flournoy, undersecretary of Defense Policy, and Gen. David H. Patraeus, head of U.S. Central Command, feel that increased support by the Pakistani military is vital to our effort to stem the tide of further infiltration by extremist forces. The Taliban has already made significant strides in establishing a foothold in many areas of Pakistan. This is an extremely critical time and without additional support; Pakistan is placing itself in an even more precarious position.
This is a situation that Pakistan definitely doesn’t need at this time. The government, headed by President Asif Ali Zardari, is currently under attack from opposing political parties and Zardari has shown that he has no problem imposing martial law to prevent any possibility of being ousted. The magnitudes of the problems facing Pakistan, both internally and in its dealings with the Taliban, are best described by James Traub. Traub is a writer for the New York Times Magazine and author of the book The Freedom Agenda. He has spent over a year in Pakistan and with President Zadari. His depiction of the President provides additional concerns regarding our revised aid plan.
It is important to note that Zardari spent 7 years in prison after Zardari and his wife, then Prime Minister, were accused of embezzling $1.5 billion from the government. The irony in that amount is alarming to me! There were also allegations of murder and attempted murder that led to his imprisonment earlier. To further emphasize the instability of the government; Zardari’s wife, Benazir Bhutto, who had served two terms as Prime Minister, was assassinated by terrorists in December of 2007; shortly after her return from exile. It would appear that unstable would be a very generous description of the Pakistani government.
To further exacerbate their problems; Samina Ahmed, the International Crisis Group’s (ICG) longtime Pakistan analyst, has stated that the Taliban now have gained control of one half of the country and have rendered their security forces useless in these areas. U.S. military commanders have acknowledged that the city of Quetta in one of the larger provinces in Pakistan has become the headquarters of the Taliban.
If things weren’t bad enough; the constant bombing missions by our unmanned Predators (an apt name), which are responsible for countless deaths of innocent civilians are also responsible for driving the Taliban further into Pakistan. The military strategies employed by the U.S. along with Pakistan’s seemingly deliberate ignorance of the threat posed by the extremists have created a virtual time bomb.
Normally, I would be the first one to call for our immediate withdrawal from this border region and leave that joke of a government to its own devices. However, there are some very serious ramifications that may result from these actions. Should the Taliban succeed in gaining control of Pakistan; not only would they be in control of a very strategic part of the world but they would also have access to a large nuclear arsenal presently possessed by the government. Once again; I have more questions than answers, but there is one thing I am certain of. Nuclear weapons in the hands of al Qaeda will only result in further atrocities for the U.S. and its allies. This is a situation we simply cannot walk away from.
The administration has made it clear that if the Pakistani government does not increase its efforts to stop the flow of Taliban forces into their country; this aid will be significantly reduced if not eliminated entirely. This is something that the government can ill afford considering they were on the brink of bankruptcy as recently as last fall. Amidst all of this we find a refreshingly pragmatic voice of reason in the person of Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Sen. Levin has expressed concern over the possible backfiring of this plan should the Pakistanis perceive it as a bribe of sorts.
"It's got to be that we are supporting Pakistan policies because if we appear to be buying something they would otherwise not pursue, it is counterproductive."
Personally, I have trouble seeing how they can perceive it any other way! Do we actually think that they are incapable of seeing directly through this charade, or is it that we know we have them in a corner.
According to Julian Barnes of the LA Times: both Michele Flournoy, undersecretary of Defense Policy, and Gen. David H. Patraeus, head of U.S. Central Command, feel that increased support by the Pakistani military is vital to our effort to stem the tide of further infiltration by extremist forces. The Taliban has already made significant strides in establishing a foothold in many areas of Pakistan. This is an extremely critical time and without additional support; Pakistan is placing itself in an even more precarious position.
This is a situation that Pakistan definitely doesn’t need at this time. The government, headed by President Asif Ali Zardari, is currently under attack from opposing political parties and Zardari has shown that he has no problem imposing martial law to prevent any possibility of being ousted. The magnitudes of the problems facing Pakistan, both internally and in its dealings with the Taliban, are best described by James Traub. Traub is a writer for the New York Times Magazine and author of the book The Freedom Agenda. He has spent over a year in Pakistan and with President Zadari. His depiction of the President provides additional concerns regarding our revised aid plan.
It is important to note that Zardari spent 7 years in prison after Zardari and his wife, then Prime Minister, were accused of embezzling $1.5 billion from the government. The irony in that amount is alarming to me! There were also allegations of murder and attempted murder that led to his imprisonment earlier. To further emphasize the instability of the government; Zardari’s wife, Benazir Bhutto, who had served two terms as Prime Minister, was assassinated by terrorists in December of 2007; shortly after her return from exile. It would appear that unstable would be a very generous description of the Pakistani government.
To further exacerbate their problems; Samina Ahmed, the International Crisis Group’s (ICG) longtime Pakistan analyst, has stated that the Taliban now have gained control of one half of the country and have rendered their security forces useless in these areas. U.S. military commanders have acknowledged that the city of Quetta in one of the larger provinces in Pakistan has become the headquarters of the Taliban.
If things weren’t bad enough; the constant bombing missions by our unmanned Predators (an apt name), which are responsible for countless deaths of innocent civilians are also responsible for driving the Taliban further into Pakistan. The military strategies employed by the U.S. along with Pakistan’s seemingly deliberate ignorance of the threat posed by the extremists have created a virtual time bomb.
Normally, I would be the first one to call for our immediate withdrawal from this border region and leave that joke of a government to its own devices. However, there are some very serious ramifications that may result from these actions. Should the Taliban succeed in gaining control of Pakistan; not only would they be in control of a very strategic part of the world but they would also have access to a large nuclear arsenal presently possessed by the government. Once again; I have more questions than answers, but there is one thing I am certain of. Nuclear weapons in the hands of al Qaeda will only result in further atrocities for the U.S. and its allies. This is a situation we simply cannot walk away from.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
