TPMCafe
« Afghan National Police: Pot Before Patrol | Home | The Great Decoupling Of Corporate Profits From Jobs »

Pakistan's Generals Really, Really "Heart" The Afghan Taliban

user-pic

One of the zingers from the WikiLeaks War Diaries -- some 92,000 classified reports on secret military hunting squads, on military encounters with the Taliban, unreported accidental killings of innocent civilians, and more -- is that there may be detailed logistics and financial support of the Afghanistan Taliban by Pakistan's ISI, or Inter-Services Intelligence.

As some have commented, this is not necessarily a surprise -- but given frequent Pakistan denials coupled with US military and White House claims that it has confidence that Pakistan's national security chiefs are "with us" and "not with them" -- this kind of evidence, if true, is clarifying and troubling.

King's College London War Studies Professor and New America Foundation Senior Fellow Anatol Lieven captures well the strong linkages between Pakistan's military elite and the Afghan Taliban in this graph from a longer essay, "All Kayani's Men," that ran in the March/April 2008 edition of National Interest:

Concerning the Afghan Taleban, the military and the ISI are at one, and the evidence is unequivocal: The military and ISI continue to give them shelter, and there is deep unwillingness to take serious action against them on America's behalf, both because it is feared that this would increase Pathan insurgency in Pakistan, and because they are seen as the only assets Pakistan possesses in Afghanistan.

The conviction in the Pakistani security establishment is that the West will quit Afghanistan leaving civil war behind, and that India will then throw its weight behind the non-Pathan forces of the former Northern Alliance in order to encircle Pakistan strategically.

Concerning the Pakistani Taleban and their allies, however, like the military as a whole, the ISI is now committed to the struggle against them, and by the end of 2009 had lost more than seventy of its officers in this fight - some ten times the number of CIA officers killed since 9/11, just as Pakistani military casualties fighting the Pakistani Taleban have greatly exceeded those of the US in Afghanistan. Equally, however, in 2007-2008 there were a great many stories of ISI officers intervening to rescue individual Taleban commanders from arrest by the police or the army - too many, and too circumstantial, for these all to have been invented.

It seems clear therefore that whether because individual ISI officers felt a personal commitment to these men, or because the institution as a whole still regarded them as potentially useful, actions were taking place that were against overall military policy - let alone that of the Pakistani government.

Moreover, some of these men had at least indirect links to Al Qaeda. This does not mean that the ISI knows where Osama bin Laden (if he is indeed still alive), Aiman al-Zawahiri and other Al Qaeda leaders are hiding. It does however suggest that they could probably do a good deal more to find out.

Some of the WikiLeaks documents allege that former Pakistan ISI Chief Hamid Gul ordered attacks against NATO forces and attempted to meet with senior al Qaeda members. The leaks also claim close coordination between Gul and Taliban operations. Gul has denied all of these claims.

gul.jpgThat said, General Gul recently appeared at the 5th Al Jazeera Forum in Doha on a panel with the former Foreign Minister of the Taliban and was actively engaged over the length of the forum with the Foreign Minister and a couple of other top tier 'former' Taliban leaders, including the former Taliban Ambassador to Pakistan.

I attended the forum and spoke with General Gul and these various 'former' Taliban officials.

During his panel presentation in Doha, General Gul made the controversial comment about America's presence in Afghanistan:

"Losers can't be choosers! America can cut and run like it had to in Vietnam or it can negotiate its departure with the Taliban which would like to avoid unnecessary instability and disruption. But either way, America has lost in Afghanistan."

Another Pakistan general who seems more circumspect than Gul told me:

No matter what the Americans hear from Pakistan about cutting ties with the Afghanistan Taliban, these Taliban give Pakistan "strategic depth."

It is difficult to overstate the enthusiasm that a great many Pakistani generals have for these Taliban. They will not simply shelve that enthusiasm. They may hide it, but they won't shelve it.

An interesting side note about former ISI chief Hamid Gul involves the U.S. attempting to place him on the Interpol "Terrorism Watch List."

I have learned from reliable sources that China vetoed the U.S. effort to blacklist Gul.

The interconnectedness of America's challenges today and the constraints on American action are substantial.

-- Steve Clemons publishes the popular political blog, The Washington Note, is editor-at-large at Talking Points Memo, and Clemons can be followed on Twitter @SCClemons


14 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

America once had its finger in every pie, now it seems to have its finger in every mousetrap.

user-pic

Thanks for the Anatol Lieven link. I think it should be noted that his assessment closely resembles the reporting on the ISI done by the Indian press over the last ten years.

I suppose the military strategists see some value in denying this element of the conflict(s) but from all appearances, they seem to believe their own press releases.

The first step toward dealing with the "interconnectedness" you spoke of is to enter the place where the world shares the same facts.

user-pic

Pakistan was born out of a religious war between Muslims and Hindus. The idea that Pakistan is not a radical Islamic state is naive.

user-pic

What form should the government of the government take?

user-pic

Having lived in 'that' part of the world as I have, it became clear early-on then that the best, and sometimes only way, to get people on your side, to accomplish much of anything was through bribes.

I've always wondered the source of Taliban money suspecting as I do that their loyalties are being bought. Of course, bribes go on under the radar so it's unlikely anyone knows who the cash cows are but knowing so could have a major bearing on where we're going wrong in Afghanistan/Pakistan.

user-pic

I think we are not being realistic if we think that Pakistan's agenda and the US's are going to be in sync. First: the USA is in Afghanistan for a limited time and then it will go away. Second: Pakistan is not going away. Third: Afghanistan provides Pakistan with strategic depth in the case of a war with much bigger India. Fourth: the USA and India are strengthening their ties, thus fueling Pakistani fears of encirclment.

So, obviously it is in Pakistan's supreme national interest for the USA and NATO to fail in Afghanistan and the sooner the better and have the Pashtuns back dominating the country in the shape of ISI client the Taliban.

Why would anyone ever expect the Pakistanis to sincerely do something totally contrary to their national interests, no matter how much pressure is put on them? They have simply been humoring the USA, waiting for us to go away and leave them alone. Correct analysis on their part and correct action from their national interest point of view.

user-pic

Pakistan doesn't want us to 'go away', they would like a return to the Bush days when we just gave them money with no questions or demands. The Obama administration in connecting aid to demands for action to clean up the terrorist havens in Pakistan disturbs Pakistan and has resulted in increasing attacks in Pakistan when Pakistan does temporarily clean out some limited terror havens.

Pakistan is making too much money from this conflict, through contracts, protection money paid by contractors, and direct US military aid to the Pakistan military to allow us to continue to use Pakistani ports and bases, to ever want us to leave or the war to end.

What Pakistan wants is the money with no strings attached, and no demands to clean up the 'ungovernable' tribal regions which Pakistan governs with an objective to train, arm and fund terror organizations with plausible deniability.

user-pic

What they want is us to go away so that they can achieve strategic depth. The only people they envision fighting are our new best friends the Indians. With this we are going nowhere and we never will go anywhere. As to money, with Afghanistan's mineral wealth, future oil and gas pipelines and opium, they can make more money off Afghanistan than we'll ever give them.

user-pic

In short we are fighting a proxy war with Pakistan, which we are going to finally lose. Gul has got it right.

user-pic

NEWS FLASH: General Gul made a statement today that any and all allegations of duplicity on his part, or Pakistan's, are complete fabrications and impugn the honesty and integrity of Pakistan as a strong ally in the (endless) (unwinable) war on terror.

PS from Gul: Send us more money and shoulder fired missiles.

user-pic

David Seaton is correct.

Let's look at the geopolitics involved. The US has cozied up to Pakistan's arch-enemy India, a country which is much more populous and has a much greater economy than Pakistan, plus India spends almost ten times as much on its military. So Pakistan is concerned.

While the US has offered assistance to India to expand their nuclear power plants, the US is fighting the China sale of two civil nuclear reactors to Pakistan. China has been a long-time friend of Pakistan.

India, for its part, is concerned that the military aid being supplied to Pakistan in the name of the global war on terrorism would be "misused'' against India.

India is a presence in Afghanistan, which brackets Pakistan on the other (west) side from India. India has a growing economic and political influence in Afghanistan. General Petraeus said recently: "India has a legitimate interest in this region without question as do others if you want to extend it further."

These put-downs have naturally angered Pakistan, the traditional power there. Pakistan has to be prepared for the announced withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan, and it doesn't want to be outflanked by India. Pakistan has to retain some control in Afghanistan. With the Taliban still in de facto control of most of Afghanistan, and a weak, corrupt central government, Pakistan's national interest is clear.

The problem, of course, is that Pakistan's national interest is diametrically opposed to the US (official) national interest, which nevertheless didn't keep President Obama from making Pakistan the third leg of his most recent new AfPak strategy: "Third, we will act with the full recognition that our success in Afghanistan is inextricably linked to our partnership with Pakistan."

And this guy is supposed to be smart?

user-pic

The good thing about the Wikileaks is that it jump starts the conversation about what a stinking absurd business US involvement in AfPak has become.
This is all really a war with Pakistan, but since they already have the A bomb it has to be indirect.

I am waiting for the other shoe to drop... I imagine they have been saving some very juicy bit till they got our full attention. Who knows, the Wikileaks affair also may slow the march to war with Iran.

user-pic

What has India ever done to Pakistan?

Pakistan's idea of spreading its influence usually means sending suicide bombers to kill people.

Pakistan has been a radical terror supporting failed state since the day it was separated from India by Lord Montbatten. People throughout the region need protection from the rich autocratic terror supporting scoundrels who control Pakistan.

user-pic

input this URL:
http://www.fashionsports.org
you can find many cheap and fashion stuff
(jor dan s-h-o-e-s)
(NBA NFL NHL MLB j-e-r-s-e-y)
( lv h-a-n-d-b-a-g)
(cha nel w-a-l-l-e-t)
(D&G s-u-n-g-l-a-s-s-e-s)
(ed har dy j-a-c-k-e-t)
(UG G b-o-o-t)

WE ACCEPT PYAPAL PAYMENT
YOU MUST NOT MISS IT!!

Leave a comment

Advertisement
Please disable your adblocker!
Ads are how we pay the bills!

Subscribe

The Coffee House
TPMCafe's regulars

House Brew
From Your Cafe Editor

Special Guests
Big names and big brains

Special Features
Pressing topics and trends

Table for One
An expert's week-long talk.

All Reader Posts
TPM readers discuss.

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address