Image from Reuters/CSM
In a news exclusive Wednesday, the Christian Science Monitor reported that Pakistan has arrested “nearly half of the Afghanistan Taliban’s leadership in recent days.” Pakistan intelligence officials told the Monitor that 7 of the 15 members of the Quetta Shura are now in Pakistani custody, four more individuals than has been reported in the news so far. “This is the first confirmation of the wider scale of the Pakistan crackdown on the Taliban leadership, something the U.S. has sought,” the Monitor noted.
The arrest of Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar in Karachi February 6, the Afghan Taliban’s second-in-command, garnered much news coverage, as did the more recent capture of Maulvi Abdul Kabir, a prominent commander in charge of insurgent operations in eastern Afghanistan, and Mullah Muhammad Younis. According to the Monitor, though, Pakistan has also arrested other Afghan Taliban militants from the Quetta Shura, including Mullah Abdul Qayoum Zakir, who oversees the movement’s military affairs, Mullah Muhammad Hassan, Mullah Ahmed Jan Akhunzada, and Mullah Abdul Raouf.
This development is significant because it points to a wider crackdown by the Pakistani military on the Afghan Taliban. Yesterday, Spencer Ackerman over at the Washington Independent quoted Defense Secretary Robert Gates saying,
I would say that what we are seeing is the importance of operations, on both sides of the border, and a manifestation of real progress, on the Pakistani side, of dealing with the threats that I’ve talked about; whether they’re the Pakistan Taliban, the Afghan Taliban or al Qaeda, that they all work together, and the success of one is success of the rest. So I think that the recent events have been another positive indication of the Pakistanis’ commitment to stabilizing this border area.
There has been increasing debate over these recent arrests, and whether it truly represents increased U.S.-Pakistan cooperation. In a Foreign Policy piece entitled, “Three Huge Ways Pakistan Still Isn’t Cooperating,” David Kenner wrote after the capture of Baradar,
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 [Teresita] 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.
The Christian Science Monitor offers a somewhat similar explanation for the sudden shift, noting the aforementioned crackdown may to be related to efforts by some Taliban leaders to “explore talks with Western and Afghan authorities independently of Pakistan.” The Monitor cited a UN official, who added, “Pakistan wants a seat at the table [at the negotiations]. They don’t want the Taliban to act independently.”
Arif Rafiq, over at the Pakistan Policy blog, (via Five Rupees), further noted, “And equally important, as Afghans have engaged in a multitude of secret peace talks in the region, the Pakistan Army would like to ensure that it, to the exclusion of India, is part of the glue that holds together any power sharing arrangement in Kabul. In other words, it doesn’t want the Afghans to make their own peace and shut Pakistan out of the process. If Pakistan were excluded, then what was the trouble of the past eight years for?”
Ultimately, the increased arrests by the Pakistani military do represent a shift in greater U.S.-Pakistan intelligence sharing and cooperation. However, it would be naive to suggest that this was done to further American aims and strategic objectives. Quite the contrary. It’s to ensure Pakistan’s interests in the region are protected. The Army went against the Pakistani Taliban because its militants were attacking the state and harming Pakistani civilians. While the perceived crackdown on the Afghan Taliban is garnering similar results, the motivation and desired end are quite different.
At the end of the day, should Washington care about these motivations if it means Pakistan cooperates?
There are three major taliban groups: Those controlled by the Haqqanis, those controlled by Hekmatyar (reputed to be close to Iran these days) and those controlled by the Quetta shura.
Quetta shura:
Quetta shura guys were unmolested since recently, with ISI even helping them get released from the clutches of the norther alliance in 2001 (reported in NY Times). But recently, they are getting arrested.
Haqqanis:
Our army has made it clear they are not going to go into South Waziristan (the home ground of the Haqqanis) and have ruled out any military action anywhere for the next six months to one year.
Hekmatyar:
There are also hints of collaboration with Iran with the arrest of the Jundallah chief — reputedly with Pakistan’s help. This may be to consolidate influence with the Hekmatyar group.
So that leaves out two groups, Haqqani (who has been willing to help Pakistan — like blowing up the Indian consulate in kabul, the deadliest suicide attack in Afghanistan since 2001) and Hekmatyar.
Let us see if our army will move against these too with the same commitment. This will ultimately be the test if we have really “renounced” the taliban or playing power politics with one group against the other to gain leverage.
I would tend towards the latter, because COAS Kayani has made it very clear that Afghanistan is legitimate security concern for Pakistan, and Pakistan would like to have influence and a friendly regime there.
The Haqqani Network I thought was actually based in North Waziristan – is that what you meant?
Also on the Hekmatyar-Jundullah link, who has been reporting/talking about that?
Also, Zahid Hussain has a good related piece in today’s Wall Street Journal, about handing over Baradar to Afghanistan: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703510204575085430452913408.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsThird
Highly ironic that ISI is arresting the Quetta Shura b/c they are “too soft.”
Are you going to be attending any of the UVA Miller Center conference on Pakistan-US relations tomorrow and Friday, Kalsoom?
Am assuming that’s in Charlottesville? If so, no. I haven’t lived there since I graduated six years ago
Who are the talking heads who will be speaking at that conference though?
Hassan Abbas from Columbia probably the most prominent.
Yes, in Charlottesville.
[...] Pakistani custody, four more individuals than has been reported in […] Read more at: CHUP! – Changing Up Pakistan afghan taliban, afghanistan taliban, border area, christian science monitor, eastern [...]
Recent developments in this war on terror have been fasted and fruitful. Hunting the top leadership of Taliban is indeed the right strategy to adopt.
[...] surprised or even all that angry if Pakistan’s recent actions against the Afghan Taliban derived purely from self-interest. The fact that the US and Afghanistan’s interests are aligning more and more with the [...]
What I feel is that, after the CIA agents were killed by the Taliban US has got tough with Pakistan. US must have told Pakistan that is Rawalpindi, either you go after the Afghan Taliban in right earnest or US will do it. To demonstrate their seriousness US stepped up the drones attack in North Waziristan where all these Taliban are taking refuge. Pakistan wanted to do something spectacular but it should not have any detremental effects on its interests in Afghan matters. So it arrested those Quetta Shura members so that US will be happy. But whatever happiness US must have got evaporated as Pakistan managed to perform a machiavellian trick. It leaked the news of the arressts and now the Lahore High Court stepped in so that CIA cannot get a look at those Quetta Shura. Pakistan can now shrug of any criticism and say they have done their duty and it is now in the hands of the court. Court can take years to sort out the matter. If Pakistan was serious then ISI and CIA could have managed to whisk away those Shura members without anyone getting wiser. Nobody would have known that such a thing has happened. Now the Quetta Shura can operate from a well protected safe house in Pakistan.
ok I think you are getting this completely wrong. Facts show that these both are working under the TTP umbrella and that is why the security forces have been working on cracking down QS so strictly over the past few days.
From the Al-Majlis blog’s weekly roundup:
An unnamed White House official, discussing the Pakistani government’s recent decision to round up several high-ranking members of the Quetta Shura Taliban:
“We are not sure what these recent detentions [by Pakistani security services of Afghan Taliban leaders] have meant. There’s been multiple [such detentions] over the years, but it’s been inconsistent… we’ve had an ongoing discussion with Pakisan about the nature of the enemy itself… the Pakistanis have by way of their actions demonstrated that they are wiling to take the fight to elements of that network, but not to all elements at the same time, and not on our [desired] time. That’s understandable. They have their perspective, we have our perspective.”
In the recent weeks Pakistan has stepped up its efforts to apprehend the militants that are seeking refuge in the cosmopolitans such as Karachi, the militants are on a run as their previous safe heavens are no longer their and crossing back to Afghanistan is also difficult due the operation Mustark, we need to maintain the right amount of pressure and already we are seeing the acts of terrorism have decreased to a degree. At the same time, the development process needs to be initiated in the reclaimed areas of South Waziristan.
Quetta shura and the Afghan Taliban are now working somewhat under the same umbrella. Coming hard onto them is defeating the TTP and that is a need of the time. Lately there has been a harsh crackdown on the QS due to their strong coalition with the Afghan Taliban.
“Trouble of the past eight years”?
Really?
The Pakistani establishment took ‘troubles’ to dismantle the Taliban?
Doesn’t that quite clearly contradict what you say they are doing now? Which is making good for the lost time of the preceding 8 years when they did absolutely nothing when they very easily could have?
Masking their inefficiency and insincerity of all these years by employing clever terms like “wider crackdown” doesn’t fool anyone too.
So much for your argument about Pakistan deserving the final say in any peace process in Afghanistan.
Now, not only does Pakistan not deserve an absolute say, but rather, they do not deserve ANY say.
You should raise the question what they were doing during the 8 years preceding (what you represent ) 8 years of incessant stamping of terror activities.
They were there to destabilise Afghanistan. Something which they couldn’t do as openly from 2001 onwards but nonetheless and considering the circumstances prevailing, did an admirable job of.
So the Afghan people should let a government that cannot even represent its own people (and is subservient to the views of the jihadi spawning institution that is the Pak army) decide their fate?
Really?
Logic FAIL.
But then again, I wouldn’t expect anything else from a Pakistani ‘blogger’ now would I?
