Problematic Pakistan
I've been ranting since 9/11 that Pakistan was not an ally, but the seat of
the problem. Here's are some notes from a file I made in 2002 before the
Iraq war, but after Tora Bora, the final "defeat" of the Taliban in
Afghanistan:
Pakistan has harbored international terrorists for decades. Osama Bin Laden, Ayman Al-Zawahri, Rafai Ahmed Taha , and Mohammed Al-Islamouli, all prominent leaders of the Islamic Jihad and are allied with Harkat-ul-Mujahedeen who have had training camps in the Pakistan tribal areas for the past 35 years. Al Qaeda and the Taliban are still there and nobody is getting them to leave.
The Pakistani province of Baluchistan, and in Waziristan, both north and south, are where the Taliban and al Qaeda are comfortably living right now. Al Qaeda operatives are everywhere in Pakistan as well, not holed up in caves. There are madrassas right outside Karachi that are full of al Qaeda. Both the Pakistani army and intelligence services (ISI) work with, protect, and fight for the Taliban. Pakistan is not an ally, it is the seat of the problem.
When we started a war with Iraq I was floored. Sure I knew the Bush
administration was pushing for it, but I'd hoped cooler heads, like Powell,
could prevent it. However the Iraq war, shifted attention away, not only
from Afghanistan, but Pakistan too, the center of the entire terrorism
problem. I confess my boyhood fascination with Rudyard Kipling has always
been the prime force in my interest in the Pakistan region, but the
fascinating part is that all those places that played such key roles in the
Rudyard Kipling tales, are still playing the same roles, not surprisingly,
with the same outcomes.
The Silk Road and the Khyber Pass are as deadly today as they were when
Britain's Khyber Rifles were bloodied there. The win of National Assembly
seats a year or so ago, by the party Muttahida Majlise-e-Amal (MMA) in the
Northern Provinces, commonly given the humorous, but apt label, "Military
Mullah Alliance" tells you the direction Pakistan is heading. Pakistani
soldiers who serve with coalition forces and their families will no longer
be considered Muslims and "will face serious punishment under the laws
prescribed by sharia [Islamic law]." This is the fatwa issued by the
Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal, a coalition of six political-religious parties that
govern two of Pakistan's four provinces and control a serious percentage of
the national assembly.
I've been following the major players in the region for quite a few years,
so when the recent movie with Tom Hanks playing congressman Charlie Wilson
came out, I had to reflect about what the movie didn't include. Such as
Jalaluddin Haqqani, one of the major radicals we are fighting today, was one
of the guys congressman Charlie Wilson called "goodness personified" in his
campaign to arm the Mujahedeen to fight the Russians. Haqqani was a
recipient of U.S. Stinger missiles in the Afghanistan/Russia conflict,
thanks to Charlie Wilson, and he is close associate of Bin Laden as well as
the Pakistani intelligence service (ISI). He is in the North Waziristan
tribal area and an architect of the attacks on the U.S. in Afghanistan.
Try to burn these three names into your memory, Mehsud, Haqqqni, and Hekmatyar.
They are warlord leaders in Pakistan that we may never capture or kill
because they are at the top of the heap, both in experience and leadership,
having survived for years through thick and thin. They have not always gotten
along with each other, and Obama could exploit this, but they are certainly
cooperating with each other now.
A war with Pakistan would not be a smart move, but we are currently engaged
in one anyway, albeit that's not how Obama views our bombing missions there.
However, if we continue to keep troops in Afghanistan, a bad idea in my
opinion, then Obama has no choice but to continue, and even escalate, the
drone attacks in Pakistan because Pakistan is the source of the attacks on
U.S. troops. Unfortunately, we won't be able to eliminate the collateral
damage.
The reason the military is so devoted to the drones is because they are the
first weapon that can effectively fight in those mountains because they have
a capability no fighter or bomber, or land based missile, has. Namely the
ability to "hang around" an area in 24/7 shifts, always maintaining the high
ground position, long enough to wait for the target to move. That's an
incredible mountain weapon. The Indians have a few they've used since the
90s in mountain conflicts in Kashmir, but their technology is not as
sophisticated as ours.
The U.S. military discovered quickly that fighting in those mountains was
next to impossible. The Indians with far more experience in high mountain
fighting, couldn't find a place flat enough to use their 155 MM Bofor
canons, so they used laser guided missiles in addition to drones. Otherwise
the mountain defenders always have the high ground position.
The Northwestern Frontier province of Pakistan is part of the wall of the
high mountains called the Hindu Kush, the eastern part of the Himalaya
range, the tallest mountains in the world. At Pakistan's northern border is
K2; at 28,251 feet it is the second largest mountain after Mt. Everest. This
part of Pakistan also contains Mt. Nanga Parbat, arguably the most feared
and dangerous mountain in the world at 26,656 feet. Nobody in history, not
even Genghis Kahn or Alexander the Great, ever conquered those mountain
fighters.
I believe the drones, if we use enough of them, can effectively make it near
impossible for the Taliban and al Qaeda to operate effectively out of those
mountains, but we won't conquer or eliminate them. Now if the Taliban
succeed in taking over all of Pakistan, then the mountain fighting goes on
the back burner because we will face the more important danger of nuclear
war. Although taking over Pakistan could take the Taliban ten years, that is
their stated goal.
I didn't expect the Taliban take over of Swat because it's the vacation
destination of most of the region, and probably because of that, is the most
liberal/secular place in Pakistan. So now Punjab may follow, and eventually
even Islamabad. If that happens, a real war with Pakistan may be inevitable.
—Jack Slack