Three Huge Ways Pakistan Still Isn't Cooperating

The capture of Mullah Baradar doesn't change the fact that, on many important security issues, the United States and Pakistan still don't see eye to eye.

BY DAVID KENNER | FEBRUARY 18, 2010

The dramatic news of Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar's capture has revived a long-dormant spirit of optimism regarding the U.S.-led effort in Afghanistan. Eager for a clear-cut victory after the country's slow-motion collapse during the past five years, many hoped that the arrest of Baradar, Taliban leader Mullah Omar's top deputy, would not only be a turning point for the NATO war effort in Afghanistan, but would also usher in a new era of cooperation with Pakistan's main spy agency, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI).

In the New York Times' article on Baradar's capture, the paper referred to unnamed Americans who think Pakistani officials, most notably Gen. Ashfaq Kayani, "have gradually come around to the view that they can no longer support the Taliban in Afghanistan ... without endangering themselves." Baradar's arrest was evidence of a "sea change in Pakistani behavior," Bruce Riedel, a former CIA official, told the Times.

Not so fast. The circumstances surrounding Baradar's capture are still murky, making it difficult to extract any meaning from the Pakistani decision to arrest the Taliban leader. And even if U.S. and Pakistani interests overlapped in the case of Baradar, there are still a slew of outstanding issues between the two countries that appear no closer to resolution.

"The basic problem is that there are things we don't know about this operation, and that we will probably never know," says Teresita Schaffer, director of the South Asia Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. The most optimistic explanation is that the ISI thinks the Afghan Taliban has become a threat to its interests in Pakistan, and has decided to move against the group. But Schaffer also floated another, less cheerful, possibility: Baradar, as suggested by this Newsweek profile, is more open to negotiations with Afghan President Hamid Karzai's government than some of the Taliban hierarchy's hard-line members. The ISI could have arrested him in a bid to thwart negotiations meant to assimilate the Afghan Taliban back into Afghanistan's political fold, which would likely cost Pakistan its influence as the group's patron. In other words, given the information available to the public, the Pakistanis could have arrested Baradar with the hopes of halting Taliban attacks against NATO forces in Afghanistan -- or they could have arrested him in an attempt to continue those attacks.

Even assuming that Baradar's arrest is a step in the right direction, there remains a long list of issues on which the United States and the Pakistani military do not see eye to eye. The most obvious is the Haqqani network, which operates out of North Waziristan and has become one of the most lethal threats to NATO forces in Afghanistan. Although General Kayani has shown a willingness to go after Taliban operatives in South Waziristan, the Pakistani military has repeatedly rebuffed U.S. requests to take on Haqqani operatives to the north. For years, U.S. officials have accused the ISI of maintaining links to tribal patriarch Jalaluddin Haqqani. In one particularly blunt message delivered in 2008, CIA Deputy Director Stephen Kappes traveled to Islamabad to tell the Pakistanis, "[W]e know there's a connection ... and we think you could do more and we want you to do more about it," as summarized by a senior American official to the New York Times. U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has also stated publicly that Pakistan's ties to the Haqqani network, as well as other extremist groups in the tribal areas, "are a real concern to us." The ISI is thought to maintain its ties to Haqqani because it perceives his organization as a valuable asset in countering Indian influence in Afghanistan.

Pakistan's fixation with India has also led the country to sponsor Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), a paramilitary group focused on forcing India out of Kashmir. The United States designated LeT as a terrorist organization in December 2001, in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks; under Western pressure, then Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf also banned the group in 2002. Nevertheless, LeT reconstituted itself as Jamaat-ud-Dawa and continued to plan and carry out attacks against Indian interests, culminating in the spectacular November 2008 attacks in Mumbai. The Mumbai massacre raised to a fever pitch Western and Indian calls for Pakistan to crack down on the organization. "Pakistan has restricted the aboveground organization, Jamaat-ud-Dawa, but not to a significant degree," notes Stephen Tankel, a visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and author of the forthcoming Storming the World Stage: The Story of Lashkar-e-Taiba. "They can operate under different names, and they continue to raise funds."

A Majeed/AFP/Getty Images

 

David Kenner is an assistant editor at Foreign Policy.

Facebook|Twitter|Reddit

ANDREWJOHNSON

1:51 AM ET

February 19, 2010

Three Huge Ways Pakistan Still Isn't Cooperating

The issue was to be discussed in a Supreme Court hearing Thursday. But after a meeting with Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammed Chaudhry on Wednesday,
http://www.articlesbase.com/health-articles/advanced-acai-review-does-advanced-acai-really-work-1778693.html

 

MULLA

2:45 PM ET

February 22, 2010

US is wrong when comes to Pakistan

US failed foreign policy and short term interests is the only reason for present global terror situation. Why ? Everybody knows except Americans. That is why they still support US govt wrong foreign policy.
When Khan run a wallmart with nuke technology what US did to punish Pakistan ?
When China sold nuclear technology what US did to stop it. Is any body thinks Pakistanis are smart enoguh to have there on nukes overnite ? Not in million years. Is there any guarantee there nukes ever works ? Even God don't know that !! Then why the world scare of Pakistani nukes. Pakistani nuke is just a smoke screen to scare the world.
So US has to come clean with sincerity to check Pakistan. Then give a green signal to India to finish the job. This is the only long term and workable solution for ever. Otherwise solution to rogue Pakistan will be a never ending loop.

 

AKS

2:22 AM ET

February 19, 2010

Utter Tripe

This is an outrageously terrible article. I'm not saying that your contentions are entirely inaccurate but there is no coherency in your article and as Khalid Mufti points out the tone is annoyingly patronizing.

Pakistan will never cooperate fully with the US nor will the US cooperate fully with the Pakistanis, the countries will cooperate with one another where they share a common interest. Hell, Pakistanis could easily argue that the US isn't doing enough to help Pakistan secure its eastern border.

And the inclusion of Dawood Ibrahim (a criminal no doubt, and a major nuisance) in an article regarding Afghanistan is plain stupid. Now if your argument had been about regional stability, then sure Dawood Ibrahim is an issue, though even the Indians admit that its not a major one.

 

NPEGASUS

12:23 AM ET

February 20, 2010

Utter tripe? Not really!

AKS:

The niggling complaint about Pakistan is its selective cooperation in ending terrorism. Pakistan is free to argue that it'd assist only if it serves its national interests. Fair enough; but then Pakistanis should not expect US assistance - civilian or military - and come to terms that the Americans will go in for the kill by themselves. Contrary to your argument, the US is helping Pakistan on its eastern border by nudging India to restart the talks with Pakistan. That is what Pakistan wanted and the US has helped her out.

 

MYK007

2:30 AM ET

February 19, 2010

what a biased article

Readers should definitely note that almost half (or probably more) is about Pakistan's stance towards India. Author started with talking about Afghanistan to get sympathy of reader and then shifted towards Pakistan's policy on India, Completely ignoring the ground realities.

 

DEVI

3:09 AM ET

February 19, 2010

af.pak.in....the trio

its af/pak/india... baby. all intertwined!!!
the afghan taliban operates from pakistan after all. and pakistan hates india!
by the way, how is not india related?
it should be af/pak/in
if paki arms are taken over, i bet you india would be among its first targets, so really its is all relevant. all should be understood as a package....as a trio.
is not the recent push from the pakistanis to capture baradur and other such offensives to appease to the americans? to bring the pakis on the negotiating table? i thought this was a charade so that pakis made sure that indians dont have too much influence inside afganisthan?

anyways what do i know? i just cannot seperate india from af.pak. please help me if you can!!!!!!!

 

FARHANSK

10:33 AM ET

February 19, 2010

Biased article

I do not know who is the author mr kenner, but the language is biased and with delibrate intention of protraying and ungrateful friend. Now with Americal officials portraying that it was a lucky incident, it is obvious that even if pakistan goes to the hilt to eliminate Taliban, US would remain ungrateful and like a bad wife always demand more money (more than what a husband can provide).

 

SMCI60652

11:00 AM ET

February 19, 2010

What's in it for Pakistan?

Most of what Dave points out is factual, but the premise is flawed.

The only reason the United States wants cooperation is because that is what secures its national secruity interests as our current administration see's them.

When Bush wanted order and stability in Pakistan and cooperation with rendition of high-value Taliban targets, he backed a military dictator and saw fit to send 11 billion dollars in aid without so much as a peep about 'democratization.' Where was the outcry from the US about human rights when Musharraf ordered the ISI to round up thousands of innocent (and guilty) citizens who were never heard-from again? Their perdicament and the lawsuits brought against the ISI are a major part of the reason the Supreme Court stepped up and Musharraf was eventually forced to resign. Come to think of it, the Obama Administration STILL hasn't condemned those disappearences.

The dynamic Obama inherited was an unpopular Pakistani Army from a domestic front and a largely un'cooperative' Pakistani Army and Intelligence establishment on Afghanistan. The "Lawyers" Movement was on the rise and the PPP was popular, so hell, why not join in with the crowd and leverage the Army's weakness to try to force it to 'cooperate' to our liking? So we hedge our bets on Kerry-Lugar and send a shot accross the bow to let the Pak Military know that we're willing to back their domestic opponents if they don't get their act toghether. Zardari's plea for a Chinese bail-out last year and its prompt rejection was a God-send for American policy. It was quickly followed by IMF loan stipulations that demanded a 30% reduction in the Military budget over the next dacade... ostensibly the same time the future of its Eastern Flank will be playing out.

So we've repeatedly tried to back the Pakistani Establishment into a corner and force them to act as we please, and yet it's APPAULING when they might want to pursue goals and strategies that THEY see in THEIR national interest. And yes, even if those include the passive acceptance or active backing of insurgents or terrorists. I mean COME ON! We in the US are talking as if we've never backed terrorists or dictators before. Gimme a break!

At some point the K Street circuit, Congress, the DOD, State and White House will have to just wisen up and accept the fact that what we think about Pakistan's paranoia about India is irrelevent. It is what it is, and no matter how retarded we may think it is, our strategy has to be aligned with that paranoia in mind.

As for Dave's premise, 'cooperation' isn't a virtue nor should it ever be in Foreign Policy. It's a temporary coincidence when the particulars of varying national security interests happen to overlap.

 

NPEGASUS

11:57 PM ET

February 19, 2010

Aid or entitlement?

SMCI60652:

Your silly argument is akin to 'I'll take your assistance and then spit on your face'. You ask what is in it for Pakistan? Everything! America has been keeping Pakistan afloat with aid, weapons and assistance for the most part of Pakistan's existance. The US taxpayers are footing the bill to fund critical development projects in Pakistan because the state of Pakistan cannot; even in times of peace. Sadly, American assistance is now seen as entitlement.

The truth is, throughout history, Pakistani generals or politicians constantly invited American aid or support to further their political or economic interests; either to fulfill their urge to rule or exact revenge on their rivals or both. Many times at the cost of Pakistan's interests. They've conveniently used the cloak of American pressure or the paranoia of India for public consumption and for people like you to grandstand.

 

G ALI

2:09 AM ET

February 20, 2010

Stop idiotic comments.

NPEGASUS

The fact is that most of the aid US has been given to Pakistan has been stolen by the politicians (don’t worry your leaders are the same – remember Bosphors issue). Pakistan is kept afloat by it’s people. My advice to you, stop making a fool of yourself.

 

NPEGASUS

3:49 PM ET

February 20, 2010

Stop lashing out

G Ali,

You're making fool of yourself by lashing out.

 

NORBOOSE

5:33 PM ET

February 19, 2010

India will always be more important to us than Pakistan

We will always place India ahead of Pakistan, and thats good. India is the only decent democracy that has the long term potential to play on the same level as us, China, and Russia. India is a very natural strategic ally. Pleasing Pakistan at the expense of our relations with the Indians, would be extremely short-sighted. We can cut some mutually advantageous deals withthe Pakistanis, but we are not going to be real allies in the near future. I know it would be incredibly helpful for Pakistan to be totally on our side, but its just not going to happen.

 

NPEGASUS

11:19 PM ET

February 19, 2010

US and Pakistan: a chimera

The US and Pakistan are not strategic allies; they never were. The US is stuck in close relationship with Pakistan because of necessity and they both know it. Pakistan will sometimes help, mostly obfuscate or deny facts and but will not forget to extract goodies in return as long as its affair with America lasts.

Like the UK, Israel or Japan, India carries the potential of being a strategic ally of the US in this century. You're right, the US-India relationship should be nurtured carefully.

 

GURMEET CHADHA

11:31 PM ET

February 19, 2010

Accurate article - attitude to India is the key

The article is quite accurate about why Pakistan (or, to be more precise, the Pakistan army) is not cooperating with us. The key difference comes down to their attitude toward India. This is what drives their threat perception. This is what causes them to seek "strategic depth" in Afghanistan and to support the Taliban. To them, a fanatical Hindu India is bent upon the country's destruction, and India's interests are a zero-sum game.

As for why "Pakistan's fraught relationship with India is not going away any time soon", it's important to remember that in such a poor country, the Pakistan army justifies its enormous budget and economic power by maintaining the India myth. All Pakistan army recruits are indoctrinated into this propaganda.

This propaganda is not limited to the army. The curriculum and textbooks in public schools (not madrassas) are indoctrinating the next generation, as well. Prominent Pakistani educators have documented many instances of:

- Insensitivity to the existing religious diversity of the nation
- Incitement to militancy and violence, including encouragement of Jehad and Shahadat (martyrdom)
- Perspectives that encourage prejudice, bigotry and discrimination towards fellow citizens, especially women and religious minorities, and other towards nations.
- A glorification of war and the use of force

All of the above cause a lopsided view of history to emerge, with Indians and Hindus as the villains.

(See www.ipsr.org for full report).

 

GURMEET CHADHA

11:34 PM ET

February 19, 2010

subtle subversion URL

Sorry, the URL for the state of Pakistani public school curricula and textbooks is www.sdpi.org.

 

G ALI

1:47 AM ET

February 20, 2010

Thank you for living up to the expectation

Thank you for the information. Since you can spell Pakistan, Jihad etc., you are an expert on Pakistan. And please never miss a chance to put Pakistan down after all as an Indian it is your national duty.

The moment I saw this article I knew some Indian would be here making fool of himself, thanks for living up to the expectation.

 

ALI MIR

2:04 PM ET

February 20, 2010

not cooperating enough?

Pakistan has done more than enough more 2000 soldiers have laid down their lives and more than 10,000 people have been killed in suicide bombings .the economic of Pakistan has suffered losses of more 35 billion dollars .The U.S say it has done a lot for Pakistan giving aid of 10 billion dollars of 75% goes to meet the expense of services provided to Nato forces .As for civilian aid 80% of which flows back to U.S .Why should Pakistan trust the U.S when it abandon in it’s our need not once but thrice in the past .Pakistan is bearing the cost of more than 3 million Afghan refugees for past 30 year with little help from outside .As for India let me ask who created and supported LTTE in Sri lanka and in 1971 interfered in Pakistan’s internal matter and invade and created Bangladesh .The growing Hindu extremism of VHP and RSS in India and their treatment of minorities such as Gujarat riots of 2002 and Sam jota express bombing in which 64 Pakistani nationals were killed by Hindu extremist on Indian soil. Pakistan is located in very geo- strategic location .Pakistan may need the U.S but U.S needs Pakistan far more badly. Pakistan should trust it’s time tested ally China.

 

DEPETRIS@WORDPRESS.COM

4:14 PM ET

February 20, 2010

Ignore Lashkar-e-Taiba for the benefit of Afghanistan

The fact of the matter is that the United States cannot expect Pakistan to severe all ties to Islamic groups. The India threat has been in the psyche of the Pakistani Government since the state's inception in the 1940's, and there is no getting around that. After three wars and tens of thousands of lives lost, the India-Pakistan divide is still extremely strong. And it is this reason why groups such as Lashkar-e-Taiba.continue to operate with relative impunity (sure, a couple of people were arrested for the Mumbai attack, but the organization is still resilient).

Considering that the U.S. is trying to pacify Afghanistan in a really short time, it would be sensible for Washington to bypass the India-Pakistan dispute (if this is indeed possible). Don't press the issue with Lashkar-e-Taiba, because this group is concerned primarily with India and the Kashmir region. To my knowledge, Taiba militants don't kill U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan, so why stir up a hornets nest? The U.S. needs to selectively pick-and-prod the Pakistanis on their support for terrorist groups, avoiding ones that have nothing to do with the mission in neighboring Afghanistan.

We can't expect to dive into the issue and run away with an absolute victory. The Pakistanis are way too obsessed with a growing threat of their rival to cave in entirely.

-Dan DePetris

http://www.depetris.wordpress.com

 

ARIA

8:33 PM ET

February 20, 2010

Duplicitious ISI

The ISI and the Pakistani military are a duplicitous double headed monster that has tunnel vision. Their anti Indian and anti Afghan policies are out of touch with the realities on the ground and they are foolishly exposing themselves as two duplicitous institutions by arresting the likes of Abdul Ghani Baradar (Brother) and other high ranking Taliban shadow governors and foreign fighters.

 

RROD

11:31 PM ET

February 20, 2010

One of the difficulties is

One of the difficulties is that without Baradar they have no way to communicate with the rest of the Taliban commanders, but the Taliban can still function very nicely.
If the pressure gets too high the Taliban will easily bury their weapons for a while and resume their attempts to achieve a separate Pashto state again later.

RROD

 

AKBAR AL ZIB

3:29 AM ET

February 21, 2010

Benazir Bhutto's Will Says ISI Cheif Hamid Gul is her Assasin

Former ISI chief Hamid Gul was imprisoned by General Musharaff and released immediately before Benazir Bhutto returned to Pakistan. He was released because of a direct intervention on his behalf from the Saudi Foreign Minister.
Benazir Bhutto made several speeches about how the Saudis had taken over large parts of Pakistan, and how the Salafi Madrasses were importing Wahabi extremism to Pakistan. Bhutto mentioned how norms of behavior had changed for women and how the attacks on girls' schools were specific to the Saudi influence. She stated that her first act if she was re elected Prime Minister would be to purge Pakistan of the Saudi influence. Hamid Gul was freed from prison in time to plan the first bomb attack on Benazir Bhutto's convoy, at which time she only escaped being murdered because of the heavy armor on her vehicle. Hamid Gul hated Benazir Bhutto and he was certainly in a position to plot her assasination. It looks like Saudi influence helped him accomplish his task and helped to muddy the waters of the investigation that followed Bhutto's murder. Benazir Bhutto knew very well that she had enemies within the power establishment and prior to her return to Pakistan she requested bodyguards from Blackwater . The US State Department under the directions of Condoleeza Rice, refused this request, their pretext was that it would antagonize the Pakistani public to see Benazir Bhutto protected by US bodyguards. Bhutto also requested a bodyguard team from the UK which was denied to her for similar vapid, or perhaps truly evil, reasons. Bhutto made the same requests for Blackwater , or UK bodyguards, after the first bomb attack on her convoy, when her life was clearly in danger, but the request was again over ruled by Condoleeza Rice and her counterparts in the UK. One has to ask how far the Saudi influence reached and how Condoleeza Rice could possibly have been so blind. The situation is reminiscent of King David murdering Uriah the Hittite by sending him out to lead the battle against the Ammonites and then withdrawing his bodyguard so the Ammonites would surround him and cut him to pieces.

 

SYLVIA VILLALOBOS

9:15 AM ET

February 22, 2010

Davids real intention in sending Uriah

Davids real intention in sending Uriah to the front line to be murdered by the Hettites is because of Bathsheba. U.S is playing safe on the issues of giving protection to Bhutto. Because if they did they will lose Saudi's support. It was like having your piece of cake and eating it at the same time.

 

FARHANSK

7:58 AM ET

February 21, 2010

NPEGASUS listen

At least understand one point of view from Pakistan

All the aid given to Pakistan has been for some purpose. Pakistan Army is doing a job at a fraction of a cost to US exchequer of what your own army is doing in Afghanistan. All past relationships were contractual in nature, you are right, so far no strategic alliance

We are paying the price for your misadventure in Afghanistan. The country was first flooded with Klashinkov and drugs US created a myth of access to warm waters and launched a Jihad against Soviets. This fundamentally changed our society. Pakistan is simply unrecognizable from 70s.

The second misadventure has given us terrorism, daily suicide bombing. For you suicide bombing is just statistics for us it is lives lost. Had US at least left Afghanistan with proper Demobiliization, Disarmament and Rehabilitation program for Afghans, may be this stage would never had come

 

AHSON HASAN

10:06 PM ET

February 21, 2010

Three Huge Ways Pakistan Still Isn't Cooperating

Beyond all the nostalgia and high-sounding nonsense, the bottom line is that Pakistan is a big-time disappointment for not only its own people but for the world at large as well.

There is this 'dodgy' phenomenon, an aura of deceit that surrounds the Pakistan governmental acts and omissions. It is a down-right rip-off state that steals and robs its citizens and tries to 'live a lie' when it comes to dealing with other states.

I know it'll be absolutely naive and lame to state one agrees in toto with the writer of this article, especially in the face of the rather 'arrogant' expression of disgust by the Pakistan protagonists in the comments section. Having said that, lets talk real and lets measure up the pathetically depleted Pakistani system that is rotten to the core and deplorably corrupted.

Forget about the Pakis 'cooperating', realize that that country totally lacks in the ability to get things together and work on issues that impact the local populace. The country is economically and politically in shambles. Anyone and everyone who knows the system a little bit is aware of the broken and rickety environment that exists in that country.

As long as the US and Western aid ends up in wrong hands, forget about obtaining any cooperation from the Pakistani army. They will continue to shelter that real culprits and cook up 'encounters' to claim victories.

Peace and tranquility cannot be achieved in an environment of mistrust and utter dishonesty. Those defending Islamabad perhaps don't even know much about how complicated Pakistani military bureaucracy is. The problem is that the military/Taliban and like have stupendously brainwashed people and hence we find folks coming out to say stuff in favor of that country.

The other issue is that, most unfortunately, Islam being what it is in Pakistan – a political wheeling dealing tool in the hands of the Taliban sympathizers – all structures and role players revolve around the wretched ‘faith’. There is a tremendous amount of exploitation in the name Islam that takes place on a day-to-day basis.

Long story short, Pakistan is an anarchy, a stampede that has little or no place in the heart of the international community. That country needs to come out clean and play a straight-forward and honest game.

In the meantime, one definitely feels for the policy-makers in Washington who deal with Pakistan and encounter nothing but frustration.

 

AMERIKI1

12:26 PM ET

February 22, 2010

ISI

The ISI is behind the survival of the terrorist structure in the region. In order to win this war the west needs to dismantle the ISI first.

 

MULLA

2:42 PM ET

February 22, 2010

US is wrong when comes to Pakistan

US failed foreign policy and short term interests is the only reason for present global terror situation. Why ? Everybody knows except Americans. That is why they still support US govt wrong foreign policy.
When Khan run a wallmart with nuke technology what US did to punish Pakistan ?
When China sold nuclear technology what US did to stop it. Is any body thinks Pakistanis are smart enoguh to have there on nukes overnite ? Not in million years. Is there any guarantee there nukes ever works ? Even God don't know that !! Then why the world scare of Pakistani nukes. Pakistani nuke is just a smoke screen to scare the world.
So US has to come clean with sincerity to check Pakistan. Then give a green signal to India to finish the job. This is the only long term and workable solution for ever. Otherwise solution to rogue Pakistan will be a never ending loop.

 

MURADK28

9:31 PM ET

February 22, 2010

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH (that country Plays the game very well)

Pakistan and the ISI, has made fools of us.

I am American born Pashtun, and very ashamed of Pakistan.