Obama’s New Afghan Plan

By K.N. Pandita

In its first response to President Barak Obama’s new Afghan strategy, Pakistan has been literally blowing hot and cold. To be or not to be is her nerve-breaking dilemma.

Ahmad Rashid, the stalwart journalist and expert on Pakistan-Afghanistan politics made a cryptic but meaningful remark:  “It is now going to be much more difficult for Pakistan who has been in a state of denial about it (shielding Islamic insurgents). It is crunch time.”  

Despite all the bravado, which Pakistan foreign office usually exhibits on terror-related issues, it had only to offer a crestfallen reaction to Obama’s New Point military base speech.

Preview of Obama’s speech draws our attention to a two-page letter he had sent to Pakistani President through his National Security Adviser, General (retired) James Jones a couple of weeks before his historic speech.

Warning Zaradari that Af-Pak region remained enduring threat to US’ security, Obama said, “Islamist insurgents including members of Al-Qaeda have for years enjoyed a sanctuary in the lawless tribal area of Pakistan.”

President Obama has offered Pakistan an expanded strategic partnership, including additional military and economic cooperation, while warning with unusual bluntness that its use of insurgent groups to pursue policy goals “cannot continue” The offer “includes an effort to help reduce tensions between Pakistan and India.”

The importance of Pakistan in the context of war against the Islamist insurgents can be understood from the fact that it remained the hot core of the months-long strategy review at various levels in the US foreign office.  The long-term consequences of failure in Pakistan, the review concluded, far outweigh those in Afghanistan.

Obama called for closer collaboration against all extremist groups, and his letter named five: al-Qaeda, the Afghan Taliban, the Haqqani network, Lashkar-e-Taiba, and the Pakistani Taliban organization known as Tehrik-e-Taliban. Using vague diplomatic language, he said that ambiguity in Pakistan’s relationship with any of them could no longer be ignored.

James Jones, who delivered President Obama’s letter to Pakistani President, was blunt in his conversations with top Pakistani government and military officials. The US and foreign officials said that “certain things have to happen in Pakistan to ensure Afghanistan’s security”.  “If Pakistan cannot deliver,” Jones warned, “The United States may be impelled to use any means at its disposal to rout insurgents based along Pakistan’s western and southern borders with Afghanistan. “

”Al-Qaeda has a base in Pakistan,” British Prime Minister Brown said in an interview with Sky News. “That base is still there — they are able to recruit from abroad. The Pakistan authorities must convince us that they are taking all the action that is necessary to deal with that threat,” he added.

Obama administration’s perception of Af-Pak scenario may be summed up as this: (a) Pakistan is the epicenter of international terrorism (b) Pakistan has adopted a double role of fighting the terrorists that threaten the government but clandestinely supporting the terrorists who venture cross border terrorism for political purposes, (c) need for adopting strict carrot and stick policy towards Pakistan, and (d) ensuring safety of Pakistan’s nuclear industry which would not preclude American military intervention if needed

Pakistani Taliban attacks on GHQ and other sensitive installations have generated an atmosphere of uncertainty about the security of nuclear industry in that country. At a time when world community is bringing pressure on Iran to downgrade her nuclear weapon capability, the danger of nuclear vulnerability in Pakistan is a source of extreme concern for Washington.

Within the US official circles, it is clear that in a situation of escalation of fighting in Af-Pak region, the US and NATO forces would not be deterred by anything to give a hot pursuit to the terrorists deep inside Pakistan territory.

Pakistan somersaulted over her reaction to Obama’s carrot and stick policy. In its statement, the foreign office spokesperson tamely expressed his country’s willingness to be the strategic partner of the US and gloated over the role, which the US would assign her in a bid to bring peace and security to the region.

But then, it said it had reservations because there was not clarity on some of the things stated.  It expressed concern about the location where additional US troops would be deployed and it wanted assurance that the new plan did not hurt Pakistan.

In the course of US-Pakistan interaction Islamabad has been reportedly insisting on US’ commitment on two issues. Pakistan wants India’s exit from Afghanistan, so that no role is left for her. including humanitarian assistance. But the US has discounted Pakistan’s allegation that India is using Afghan soil for providing arms and ammunition to Pakistani Taliban fighting Pak army in Waziristan.

Indo-Afghan friendly relations pre-date emergence of Pakistan as a sovereign state in 1947. Afghans in the length and breadth of the country had condemned destruction of Bamiyan Buddha statue at the hands of Taliban in 1999.

The second demand is of resolving Kashmir dispute with India.  India has agreed to ease the situation on her western border assuming that Pakistan puts an end to her India-centric terrorism. Some internal changes in J&K state are under consideration to assuage the feelings of a handful of anti-India people. However, the Prime Minister made it clear in Washington that there will not be any redrawing of the lines in Kashmir.

Obama’s new strategy of taking on the threat of Islamist insurgents and terrorists is a major policy decision that will have impact on global strategies.  His war against international terror is not only America’s war; it is the war of free world to protect a civilization that has been created and sustained through tears and toil, sacrifice and dedication over several millennia. Obama is leading a historical and crucial fight against the forces of darkness and destruction which have put humanity under siege.

India, a victim of terrorism, much before the tragedy of 9/11, and a declared target of terrorist outfits, must put its act together to lend outright support to the effort of the US-NATO forces engaged in eradicating the menace. We, as a multi-ethnic and multi-cultural nation comprising nearly one fourth of the world’s population and wedded to secular democratic arrangement, cannot stand by as idle onlookers when the free world is fighting the battle of entire humanity and its coming generations. This is no time to be satisfied with a situation in which perpetrators of terrorism are faced with their Frankenstein. A responsible nation cannot afford to behave like sadists.

India must re-shape her relations with the United States in the light of very bold and courageous leadership of President Obama. No Indian government can escape the responsibility of protecting the life of her citizens against Theo-fascism and terrorism wherever its source lies. We must understand that we can no more bring the onus of a terrorist attack to the doorsteps of our neighbour.  We have to fight our battle ourselves.
(The writer is the former Director of the Centre of Central Asian Studies, Kashmir University).

Comments are closed.