Rohit Kumar's Views

Just another WordPress.com weblog

Posts Tagged ‘civilian government

U.S. Tries to Calm Pakistan Over Airstrike

leave a comment »

By: HELENE COOPER & ERIC SCHMITT

WASHINGTON – The Obama administration scrambled to halt a sharp deterioration in its troubled relationship with Pakistan on Wednesday, offering Pakistani officials multiple apologies for a helicopter strike on a border post that killed three Pakistani soldiers last week.


Militant gunmen in Nowshera, Pakistan, attacked a convoy of NATO oil tankers that were headed to Afghanistan on Wednesday.

But even as the White House tried to mollify Pakistan, officials acknowledged that the uneasy allies faced looming tensions over a host of issues far larger than the airstrike and the subsequent closing of supply lines into Afghanistan.

American pressure to show progress in Afghanistan is translating into increased pressure on Pakistan to crack down on terrorist groups. It is also running up against Pakistan’s sensitivity about its sovereignty and its determination to play a crucial role in any reconciliation with the Taliban.

American and NATO officials said privately that the Pakistani government’s closing of a crucial border crossing might have made it easier for militants to attack backed-up tanker trucks carrying fuel through Pakistan to Afghanistan to support the American war effort.

Still, the unusual apologies, officials and outside analysts said, were intended to clear away the debris from the explosive events along the border, in hopes of maintaining Pakistani cooperation.

“We have historically had astonishing sources of resilience in our relations with Pakistan,” said Teresita Schaffer, a South Asia expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “One should not too quickly assume we’re in a breakpoint. But having said that, the time we’re in right now, the intensity of anti-American feeling, the antipathy of militants, all of these things make new crises a little more complicated to get through than the old ones were.”

The overall commander of forces in Afghanistan, Gen. David H. Petraeus, has been pulling out all the stops – aggressively using the American troop buildup, greatly expanding Special Operations raids (as many as a dozen commando raids a night) and pressing the Central Intelligence Agency to ramp up Predator and Reaper drone operations in Pakistan.

He has also, through the not-so-veiled threat of cross-border ground operations, put pressure on the Pakistani Army to pursue militants in the tribal areas even as the army has continued to struggle with relief from the catastrophic floods this summer.

The fragility of Pakistan – and the tentativeness of the alliance – were underscored in a White House report to Congress this week, which sharply criticized the Pakistani military effort against Al Qaeda and other insurgents and noted the ineffectiveness of its civilian government.

American officials lined up to placate Pakistan on intrusions of its sovereignty. General Petraeus offered Pakistan the most explicit American mea culpa yet for the cross-border helicopter strikes, saying that the American-led coalition forces “deeply regret” the “tragic loss of life.”

Anne W. Patterson, the American ambassador to Pakistan, quickly followed suit, calling “Pakistan’s brave security forces” an important ally in the war. Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, offered a private, but official, apology to Pakistan’s military chief, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, in a telephone call on Wednesday afternoon.

Both American and Pakistani officials said that they expected that Wednesday’s apologies would be effective, at least in the short term, and that Pakistan would soon reopen the border crossing at Torkham, a supply route for the NATO coalition in landlocked Afghanistan that runs from the port of Karachi to the Khyber region. The Pakistani government closed that route last week to protest the cross-border strikes.

“It’s obvious that the situation right now ain’t good,” said a senior NATO official, who agreed to speak candidly but only anonymously. “The best thing we could do is to strip away as many of the relatively smaller things as possible so we can focus on the big issues. And crazy as it may seem, the border crossing is a relatively small issue, compared to the others.”

Those other issues were flagged in the latest quarterly report from the White House to Congress on developments in the region. The assessment, first reported in The Wall Street Journal on Wednesday, takes aim at both the Pakistani military and the government.

For instance, “the Pakistani military continued to avoid military engagements that would put it in direct conflict with Afghan Taliban or Al Qaeda forces in North Waziristan,” the report said. It also painted Pakistan’s president, Asif Ali Zardari, as out of touch with his own populace, a disconnect that the report said was exacerbated by Mr. Zardari’s “decision to travel to Europe despite the floods.” The overall Pakistani response to the catastrophic floods this summer, the report said, was viewed by Pakistanis as “slow and inadequate.”

Frustration with Pakistan is growing in the United States in part because “we’re living in the post-Faisal Shahzad era,” said Daniel Markey of the Council on Foreign Relations, referring to the Pakistani-American who was sentenced to life in prison on Tuesday for the attempted Times Square bombing.

Mr. Markey said that tensions among counterterrorism officials had also mounted because of the unspecified threats of terrorist attacks in Europe. “Frustration has really mounted, so the drumbeat is getting louder,” he said.

Making things worse, the administration is expected to brief Congressional officials on an Internet video, which surfaced last week, that showed men in Pakistani military uniforms executing six young men in civilian clothes, underscoring concerns about unlawful killings by Pakistani soldiers supported by the United States.

A prominent House Democrat warned on Wednesday that American aid to Pakistan could be imperiled. “I am appalled by the horrific contents of the recent video, which appears to show extrajudicial killings by the Pakistani military,” Representative Howard L. Berman, a California Democrat who leads the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said in a statement.

“The failure of Pakistani officials to punish those responsible could have implications for future security assistance to Pakistan,” he said.

A joint Pakistan-NATO inquiry on the helicopter strike concluded on Wednesday that Pakistani border soldiers who initially fired on NATO helicopters were “simply firing warning shots after hearing the nearby engagement and hearing the helicopters flying nearby,” said Brig. Gen. Timothy M. Zadalis, a NATO spokesman, in a statement.

“This tragic event could have been avoided with better coalition force coordination with the Pakistani military,” he said.

Advertisements

Pakistan: A firmer footing

leave a comment »

By Farhan Bokhari and James Lamont

Yusuf Raza Gilani, Pakistan’s prime minister, likes to receive visitors in the library of the prime ministerial mansion in Islamabad, its bookshelves decorated with ceremonial swords, daggers and other armorial objects. On the leonine crest of one small shield, a gift from Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University, is the motto: “Ponder the improbable”.


Charm offensive: the Pakistani army in South Waziristan, close to the Afghan border. Successful campaigns against militants here and in the Swat valley have won Islamabad praise from the US

The words are apt for Mr Gilani, and for the country’s leadership as a whole. The civilian government led by him and President Asif Ali Zardari has defied the odds by staying in power and taking on militant Taliban groups that have struck the country’s main cities and even the army’s high command in Rawalpindi. Pakistanis have held their breath for the past two years, awaiting a regime change orchestrated by General Ashfaq Pervez Kiyani, the powerful army chief. In a country blighted by military rule for most of its 63 years, such a move would not be unprecedented.

However, Gen Kiyani has opted to work with the political leadership rather than against it. Indeed, the Pakistan People’s party administration is on course to become the first democratically elected government to serve a full term for three decades. It has galvanised the nation for a fight against militants. Most recently, Islamabad has basked in the embrace of Washington as both countries tried to rebuild a troubled partnership.

The combination of these three developments puts Pakistan in one of its strongest positions for two decades. The US is left with few choices but to back the country as it seeks to win the war in Afghanistan. But to become a credible and stable American ally for the long haul, Pakistan has to reform its economy, scale back the influence of the army and improve its relationship with India, its mighty southern neighbour. Gen Kiyani, a shrewd tactician, appears to be the man on whom this depends.

Not long ago, civilian rule looked shaky. There was speculation about “Minus One”, a code in Islamabad political circles for the removal of Mr Zardari, husband of slain opposition leader and former premier Benazir Bhutto. A government stand-off with the judiciary and the opposition, which caused protests in Lahore, the second largest city, almost invited the army to step in to restore order in March last year. In addition, the Taliban came within 90km of Islamabad after capturing the Swat valley, a tourist destination.

The civilian administration looks more assured today but internal security concerns, and international engagement over Afghanistan and with India, have propelled Gen Kiyani to its side.

Although once considered a weak understudy for the president, Mr Gilani is now viewed by the military as the more popular politician and has won its support for styling himself a leader of a country on a “war footing”. His ruling party is now poised to reverse vestiges of military rule by shifting powers from the presidency to the premiership, and return Pakistan to the founding vision of a parliamentary democracy.

“We have very ably completed two years with consensus in parliament,” says Mr Gilani. “The biggest success is that we have gathered the whole nation together on one platform for a fight against terrorism and that is the biggest victory ever.”

Bigger battles lie ahead. For the US, Pakistan’s neighbours and many Pakistanis, one of the most formidable challenges is reforming the pervasive security structure, which controls everything from cornflake factories to nuclear missiles. They want a decisive break with militant organisations that continue to sow discord in India, Afghanistan and Pakistan, and pose an increasingly global threat.

Many inside and outside Pakistan continue to see the army as pre-eminent, and suspect fighting India remains its priority rather than fighting old allies among the Afghan Taliban and Punjab-based militant groups.

Yet the country has won credibility, and praise, for the latter. Its clout has grown rapidly in Washington following successful campaigns against militants in South Waziristan, close to the Afghan border, and the Swat valley, and the arrest in February of Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, the Taliban military chief in Afghanistan, and four other prominent Taliban leaders this year. US diplomats say the relationship has been “transformed” in recent months. “Pakistan has shown its ability to give a direction to future events, and to bring the Taliban to the negotiating table,” says one.

But there is no doubt that the US and Nato allies want Pakistan to do more. On his visit to Afghanistan last month Barack Obama, US president, said: “We have seen already progress with respect to the military campaign [in Pakistan] against extremism, but we also want to continue to make progress on [civilian assistance].”

At the core of the relationship with America is the endgame in Afghanistan. While Mr Obama is anxious to oversee the return of most of his troops fighting there ahead of the next US presidential election in 2012 and present a successful end to the campaign, Pakistan wants financial help in return for assisting the US, and its role in the country’s future recognised with political power for its former militant allies.

It is the emphasis on the fight against militants that has changed Pakistan’s precarious political balance. His leading role in engagement with Washington, which he visited at the end of last month, has brought the publicity-shy Gen Kiyani a more public role in what Hillary Clinton, US secretary of state, has called an “integrated” civilian and military leadership. The shift started in February when Gen Kiyani publicly outlined Islamabad’s priorities on its western and eastern borders, addressing goals in Afghanistan and disputes with India.

“Kiyani is clearly driving the agenda of the US-Pakistan engagement,” says Maria Kuusisto of the Eurasia Group, a political risk consultancy. “In the run-up to the dialogue, Kiyani called the relevant [secretaries], including ministers of foreign affairs, finance and water and power, to his army headquarters for consultations – and during the dialogue, Kiyani has taken the lead in presenting Pakistan’s case.”

While the US has welcomed Gen Kiyani’s participation as reflecting a united civilian and military leadership, his increasingly public role carries risks for Pakistan.

First, if the relationship with Washington falls short of expectations, Gen Kiyani stands to get the blame within Pakistan for the failure of a dialogue he is leading. Pakistan went to to the US with a list of demands, including better trade access, speedy delivery of financial assistance, construction of new power stations and help on disputes with India over the contested territory of Kashmir and water-sharing agreements in a drought-prone region. The government is also pushing for a civil nuclear deal similar to the one struck with India, which gave its nuclear programme global legitimacy – in spite of Pakistan’s record of nuclear proliferation – in the interests of “regional stability”. It came away with little new, in spite of a warm reception from Mrs Clinton.

The talks were “more significant for their atmospherics than any tangible outcome”, says Maleeha Lodhi, Pakistan’s former ambassador to the US and the UK. “Important, however, were assurances conveyed to the Pakistani delegation that America’s long- term strategic interests were consistent with Pakistan’s security.”

Taking on the Taliban

Pakistan has arrested as many as 20 Taliban and al-Qaeda leaders in its territory this year, giving hope to the US and other western allies that a country that once provided shelter to the Afghan Taliban is increasing pressure on militants along its border with Afghanistan. The arrests by the Inter-Services Intelligence military spy agency, including that of the Afghan Taliban’s second-in-command, are seen as a disruption of the Quetta Shura, a Taliban leadership council.

According to Gen Mahmood Durrani, previously Pakistan’s ambassador to the US and a former national security adviser, “The general’s presence is ‘optical’ to suggest that the army is going under the civil leaders’ [authority].”

Second, a more prominent role for the army is likely to reinforce the notion that the military is the most powerful force in the land, and that the civilian leadership is near irrelevant. This would be a stumbling block for recently restarted talks between Pakistan and India. New Delhi often complains that, with a choice between a weak civilian leadership and a powerful anti-Indian army, it does not know whom to talk to in Islamabad.

Indian commentators view American-trained Gen Kiyani as a chip off the old block. They are mistrustful of his past in the Inter-Services Intelligence, the nerve centre of the security system, and of his role as a commander in the 1990s on Pakistan’s side of the Line of Control in Kashmir at a time when cross-border insurgency increased. India’s diplomats are alarmed by what they see as his calculating introduction of water as a source of dispute. Some more hawkish analysts say water shortages in south Asia, rather than Kashmir, threaten to fuel future jihadi violence.

Gen Kiyani has impressed on the global stage, however. “The bluster that marked Musharraf has been dumped for quiet gravitas,” says Indrani Bagchi, diplomatic editor of the Times of India. She believes he is capable of outmanoeuvring India and Afghanistan at international meetings, such as January’s London conference on Afghanistan, where Pakistan’s role as a partner for the US and Nato in Afghanistan was boosted.

Third, a larger role for the army is unlikely to address some of the country’s gravest issues: the economy and internal administrative reform. Failure to oversee a robust set of economic reforms is risky in a country of 180m, mainly poor, people. Pakistan has made little progress in securing better trade access to European Union markets and larger preferential quotas for entry to the US. Uncertainty is mounting over government promises to the International Monetary Fund to strengthen the economy and a widening fiscal deficit.

“Can [Pakistan’s] policies be taken seriously when we have gone through three international financial bail-outs in the last 12 years and you can still not be certain if another one in the future will be required?” says Abid Hasan, former adviser on Pakistan to the World Bank. “There are long-term issues related to the rule of law, politics, governance and the economy.”

. . .

There is a sense in Pakistan that the military is in the ascendant; and for some this is welcome. “The Pakistani army is a very sophisticated army,” says Khurshid Kasuri, foreign minister under General Pervez Musharraf. “These people have been to defence universities all over the world. They have been to security conferences.”

Those in the wider region are less enthusiastic. Lalit Mansingh, former Indian foreign secretary, says Gen Kiyani is stepping into a more political role, though it is not clear how far he will go. He says a key question will be whether he extends his term as a service chief, a decision that must be taken by Mr Zardari. Gen Shuja Pasha, ISI head and an ally of Gen Kiyani, this year extended his term on grounds that it was not appropriate to replace him in the heat of battle. Other senior generals, such as Lt Gen Khalid Kidwai, chief of strategic plans division, have not stepped aside.

Gen Kiyani is due to step down in November but now looks nearly indispensable. “The really substantive, and strategic, exchanges [in Washington] took place outside the formal dialogue process in unpublicised meetings including a dinner hosted by Admiral [Mike] Mullen [the senior US military commander] and attended by Gen Kiyani,” says Ms Lodhi.

With the army at the head of the table and its chief likely to shun retirement, “Ponder the Improbable” may yet prove to be a fitting epitaph for a civilian government once again edged aside by the generals.