| Submit your comments on this article |
| India-Pakistan |
| Analysis: Pakistan unlikely to cooperate with US |
| 2009-09-25 |
| Pakistan's doubts about U.S. commitment to the Afghan war make it less likely to cooperate in targeting Taliban commanders said to be directing the insurgency across the border. Because those are Pakistan's bastards and the biggest earner of foreign currency for Pakistan. BTW, Islamabad thanks the US for decapitating the "bad" taliban who concentrated their attacks within Pakistan. Pakistan has been ambivalent about the militants, sometimes trying to enlist them as potential allies in case they take control again in neighboring Afghanistan -- a prospect many here believe is getting closer. ... |
| Posted by:ed |
| #7 I believe the Taliban were originally intended to be aimed at Kashmir, along with the other jihadi groups Pakistan developed. It was only when opportunity appeared that they were turned against Afghanistan. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2009-09-25 18:15 |
| #6 Although at that time the most democratic forces (the PPP) were out of power. The Taliban were created by the Government of Benazir Bhutto. The ISI, who backed Hekmatyar, opposed the Interior Ministry's Taliban proposal at the time. |
| Posted by: john frum 2009-09-25 15:35 |
| #5 "would be not JUST a mistake" |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2009-09-25 13:32 |
| #4 a generation means going back to the 1980s. when Pakistan cooperated with our attempt to bring down the evil empire at its achilles heel. I really dont thing the use of "blameworthy" is appropriate for that, unless one is nostalgic for the time when the Red Army kept the peace in Poland, Czecho, and Hungary (as some pundits sometimes seem to be) now after 1988, up to 1996, the Pakis, like everyone else, faced chaos in afghanistan. A chaose which we in the US turned our eyes from. A chaos which included intervention by the reformed USSR/Russian Republic, by India, and by Iran. That they wanted to keep playing their own side, and used whomever they could do so, is hardly surprising, and not unreasonable. In 1996 they supported the Taliban takeover. That true, is blameworthy. Although at that time the most democratic forces (the PPP) were out of power. So again, I hold the ISI blameworthy, but not every element in the paki polity. (treating states as units, as comforting as it is to "realists" makes no sense in south asia) And lets be honest, we were not pushing Pakistan to back off from the Taliban prior to sept 11, 2001 under EITHER Clinton or Bush - at least AFAIK. The history their is complex. We must be quite wary of the ISI. But to refuse to try to help the current govt in Pakistan, based on that past, would be not a mistake, but I think not as well grounded morally as some seem to imply. as for obama, there ARE some pundits who say he is taking his time in order to have a more defensible position when he DOES okay a troop increase. And, it should be borne in mind, while we dont want Pakistan to doubt our commitment, or Afghans in the provinces to do so, it might not be a bad thing for Hamid Kharzai to doubt our commitment. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2009-09-25 13:31 |
| #3 Oh, the Pakistanis are plenty blameworthy, liberalhawk. After all, the problem wouldn't exist had Pakistan not created, funded, trained, guided and commanded it for a generation or so. Nonetheless, when President Obama publicly dithers about whether, how long, and under what circumstances the US will remain in Afghanistan, those who will have to live with the results are wise to hedge their bets. So I agree with the rest of your post. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2009-09-25 12:22 |
| #2 what this says to me, is that the pakis have to hedge their bets against a US withdrawl. Thats only rational, they still have to live in the region if we leave, and if the taliban is gonna to take Afghanistan anyway, or at least the Pashtun half- which is the hafl that borders pakistan, they are well advised to try to coop them. This doesnt indicat e to me that the Pakis are blameworthy - it DOES suggest that those pundits who think we can fight an antiterror war after departing Afghanistan are blameworthy. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2009-09-25 11:44 |
| #1 a big bomb (I am not buying rounds) that is dropped by accident on ISI HQ might get noticed. |
| Posted by: 3dc 2009-09-25 01:25 |