As the war in Afghanistan continues, so does the purported regional chess game between India and Pakistan. Below, Tariq Tufail, from Karachi, presents his views on Pakistan’s evolving policy in Afghanistan:
A huge shift in the U.S. Afghanistan policy is reportedly taking place. The London conference and the meeting in Turkey indicate that some degree of reconciliation and an integration of the Taliban into the mainstream in Afghanistan will be attempted in the next 18 months. To support this effort, donors have already pledged about $500 million. When these events unfold, they will have a great effect on Afghanistan and the region, comparable to the Soviet withdrawal, the fall of the Najibullah Government and the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan.
What are the ramifications for Pakistani security and foreign policy? Unfortunately, I think this policy shift comes at an inconvenient time for Pakistan, when the Pakistani public and armed forces have not completely renounced the use of Islamist proxies to achieve our diplomatic objectives. In this context, there is a great danger that Pakistan will commit foreign policy and security blunders.
First, a background:
Pakistan’s perception of its security is India-centric. To this effect, Pakistan has always sought “strategic depth” in Afghanistan. Though the definition is vague (and probably dreamed up by our generals who have given us similar disastrous “strategies” in the past), the prevalent theory is that a friendly and pliable Afghan government will provide the landmass and the population in any future conflict with India. Furthermore, a Pro-Pakistan (and by implication anti-India) tilt in Afghanistan will protect Pakistan from:
(i) a two-pronged front against India
(ii) Pashtun nationalism endangering both the Durrand line and our territorial integrity
While the pursuit of “strategic depth” by itself is neither unethical nor dangerous, the method by which we had pursued it until the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan has endangered our security and threatened the very existence of Pakistan.
The training of Afghan fighters for the Soviet Jihad, the infrastructure of madrassas, gun culture and drug running, have severely destabilized our tribal areas and FATA. The extremist interpretation of Islam, which provided the ideological foundation for the mujahideen, on the one hand prevented economic and social development, and on the other served as a magnet for undesirables all over the world (it was in this environment that Osama Bin Laden found refuge in Afghanistan). While it was immoral and unethical to foist this culture on the Afghans, it was also inevitable for these same extremist ideologies, gun and drug cultures to spill on to the Pakistani side of the border, endangering our own population.
In addition to utilizing the various terrorist organizations and militants to create a pliant Afghan government, Pakistan also has had a history of using such groups against India. The hijacking of Indian Airlines Flight 814 and its diversion to Afghanistan in order to free people of (Pakistani) Punjab origin (among them Omar Sheikh Sayeed, implicated in the killing of Daniel Pearl, and Maulana Mazood Azhar, the Amir of Jaish-e-Mohammed, implicated in assasination attempts on Gen. Musharraf) is a significant example. (Before the readers of this article protest that Pakistan had nothing to do with the Taliban, the role of Pakistani armed forces and intelligence agents in the training and nurturing of Taliban is undeniable and one can refer to the Kunduz “Airlift of Evil” also covered in “Descent into Chaos” by Ahmed Rashid.)
Fast forwarding to the future:
It is inevitable that Pakistan will play a central role in the reconciliation between the Taliban and ISAF in Afghanistan. Pakistan’s leverage arises from:
(i) the possible sheltering of the top leadership of the Taliban (including Mullah Omar, and members of the “Quetta Shura“), as well as our influence with other figures like Jalaluddin Haqqani and Gulbuddin Hekmatiyar,
(ii) the role of Pakistani armed forces in preventing Taliban movement from Afghanistan into Pakistan to carry out cross-border attacks and,
(iii) Our indispensability for logistic routes and supply of NATO forces in Afghanistan.
The way we use this leverage will determine whether our security will be strengthened in the long term or whether we slip into another spiral of instability, several orders of magnitude worse than what we have today.
Is there a danger in reverting to Pre-9/11 status and why is it a bad idea?
COAS Kayani has indicated that Pakistan’s primary security threat is India and “strategic depth” is still being sought in Afghanistan. In addition, there is a widespread school of thought in Pakistan that the current violence and instability in the country is the result of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. Therefore, taking these factors into account, it is clear that the establishment finds it very attractive to revert to a pre-9/11 status – where the Taliban is supported and nurtured by the ISI and armed forces, a pliant Taliban-supported government is installed in Afghanistan with the associated medieval interpretation of Islam, and the various Afghan forces are used for leverage against India in Kashmir. In fact, this possibility has rattled India, which until a few weeks back had refused talks with Pakistan until concrete progress was made in the Mumbai case, but now is pushing for dialogue.
The prevalent sentiment that a Pre-9/11 scenario will put Pakistan on the driver’s seat in Afghanistan, India and the rest of the world, was further enforced by our foreign minister, who declared, “India had blinked on talks” and “Pakistan has held its ground.” Pakistan’s foreign minister even reneged on the progress made so far on Track-II diplomacy with India on Kashmir under the Musharraf regime. In addition, Jamaat-ud-Dawah and other “Punjabi Taliban” groups who were laying low after Mumbai, surfaced and held a rally in Muzaffarabad on Feb 5, promising, among other things, to “spread Jihad in other parts of India beyond Kashmir.” All this before talks had even begun with India. In one sense, they can be viewed as pre-talks sabre rattling, and in another sense, it can be viewed as the establishment’s desire to return to a Pre-9/11, Pre-Mumbai status quo, which may be advantageous in the short-term.
However, this line of thinking is a huge fallacy due to two reasons:
1. Proxy warfare didn’t work in Kashmir
Pakistan has to wake up to the fact that Kashmir’s “jihad” has been a spectacular failure. After sparking many wars, sending in many Jihadis, sponsoring numerous resolutions in various international fora, we are nowhere near wrestling control of Kashmir. Direct military action supported by the Mujahideen is unlikely to work. The Kargil war was a spectacular defeat–despite recent attempts to spin it as a success–Nawaz Sharif to his credit made a face-saving exit after the sudden trip to the U.S. to meet President Clinton. If anything Kargil has indicated that future wars over Kashmir will invite international wrath as well as destabilize our politics.
India has held democratic elections and thinned out their military presence in Kashmir and the number of violent incidents have gone down year after year since 2002. Even when Pakistan’s leverage on the Mujahideen was the strongest, (in the 90’s), and India’s economy was simultaneously the weakest with a balance of payment crisis, India demonstrated that it could hold on to Kashmir. Instead of harming India, armed jihad against India has destabilized the Pakistani population, killed and maimed Kashmiris, reduced our international standing, de-legitimized the Kashmir cause and is unlikely to yield any result in the changed international attitude towards terrorism. Moreover, China‘s wariness about the Mujahideen given the problem it faces in Xinjiang (recall that China did not support Pakistan during Kargil), the increasing economic gap between India and Pakistan (which will soon translate into a gap in defense and diplomatic capabilities) and the concomitant hardening of Indian public opinion as they flex their national strength further reduce any possibility of success.
2. With great power comes great responsibility
Secondly, if Pakistan is co-opted to hammer out a solution in Afghanistan by using our influence on the Taliban, the international community will shift responsibility to us . If another 9/11-like attack occurs by elements sheltered by the Taliban, Pakistan will subsequently be blamed or asked to “do more”. Given the ideological leanings of the Taliban, as well as their involvement in the gun culture and violence, it is inevitable that Afghanistan will once again become a magnet for undesirable elements. Who in their right mind would want to be responsible for the actions of such elements?
Policing the behavior of Taliban, while simultaneously facing the threat of economic and military retaliation from the West for their bad behavior is an unenviable proposition.
So unpalatable as it might be, we should recognize the changed international scenario, the harm that we are causing to our population and go for a radical rethink of our Afghan policy and strategy.
The contribution is the sole opinion of the author and does not necessarily represent the opinion of CHUP. If you would like to contribute a piece to CHUP, please email Kalsoom at changinguppakistan[at]gmail[dot]com. Pieces should be no longer than 800 words please. For past contributions, click here.
there is a whiff of anti-punjabi opinion in this article that hurts the author’s credibility.
“The hijacking of Indian Airlines Flight 814 and its diversion to Afghanistan in order to free people of (Pakistani) Punjab origin.”
What was the need to make reference to the freed people as Punjabi? I don’t understand.
Secondly, most of the analysis in this article is well documented and expounded upon. What do you propose instead? What solutions?
Fahd-
The solutions part is my fault, I was editing the post down and asked Tariq if I could take it out for length purposes. Here are the solutions he proposed that were edited out:
“What Pakistan should do
Pakistan should insist on
1. Massive guaranteed assistance to economically develop our tribal
areas and NWFP concentrating on education, health, governance and
better integration with the rest of the country through roads, railway
and economic linkages
2. Disavow our policy of using Islam-inspired proxy elements to gain
leverage in Afghan government and with India in Kashmir and other
places
3. Build influence with the Afghan government through trade and
cultural linkages by strengthening their government by establishing
institutions like postal services and investing in Afghan
infrastructure
4. Limit the presence of ISI and Pakistan Army trainers in
Afghanistan, resist the temptation of creating and using Mujahideen
5. In return for renouncing the use of proxies, a commitment by the
west to ensure a solution to the Kashmir problem and other outstanding
issues with India that is acceptable to all parties
Pakistan should not commit the mistake of thinking that our position
is unassailable because of weakening position of the west and India in
Afghanistan. An unstable Afghanistan under taliban control will be
inconvenient to India and the west, but fatal to Pakistan.”
[…] place. The London conference and the meeting in Turkey indicate […] Read more at: CHUP! – Changing Up Pakistan afghan government, afghanistan pakistan, chess game, conundrum, inconvenient time, india and […]
Please dont view it as “anti Punjabi” opinion.
I am trying to point out that the Taliban helped with the Indian Airlines Flight 814 hijack drama in order to force India to free prisoners who were neither Pashtun, nor Afghan. The hijackers, who were not taliban, chose to land the plane in Afghanistan to seek help from the taliban. I pointed the fact that they were Punjabi to highlight the links between Punjabi Jihadi organizations and the Taliban.
I did this to reinforce my immediately preceding statement that Pakistan has had a “history of using such groups against India”.
Just to smoothen ruffled feathers, let me highlight the fact that three of the five hijackers were from Karachi, one from Sukkur and the other from Punjab. So Sindh as well as Punjab were well represented in the hijacking and are equally competent in the terror business.
Tariq –
“So unpalatable as it might be, we should recognize the changed international scenario, the harm that we are causing to our population and go for a radical rethink of our Afghan policy and strategy.”
Agree in principle. However, the rethink is radical precisely because it would simultaneously require a rethink of Pakistan’s policy toward India itself.
The overwhelming power and influence the Pakistani national security apparatus wields — not to mention, in many ways, the nationalistic fabric of Pakistan as a state — is predicated on an anti-Indian platform.
So I guess one question is how exactly can we influence a critical mass of the ISI/Army to subscribe to the radical rethink you are suggesting, in the short-term?
Even if the US and the West could foster a viable solution to Kashmir and other issues, it could take many years, do you think the Army/ISI would completely cut off relations with proxies in the interim?
Agree with Torkham – the fundamental question is, how do we influence a critical mass within the military to do a large-scale rethink?
@ Torkham
Agree with the question that you pose.
Jane Perlez’s in the NY Times today – “Pakistan is Said to Pursue Pakistan Role in Afghan Talks”
“What the Pakistanis can offer is their influence over the Taliban network of Jalaluddin and Siraj Haqqani, whose forces American commanders say are the most lethal battling American and NATO soldiers in Afghanistan.
They are close allies of Al Qaeda. But they also have long ties to Pakistan’s military and intelligence agencies that have protected them inside Pakistani territory.
In return for trying to rein in the Haqqanis, Pakistan will be looking for a friendly Afghanistan and for ways to stem the growing Indian presence there, Pakistani and American officials said.”
So timely piece, Tariq.
U.S is the biggest donor to Pakistan in the war on terror. But the question remains that will the inflow of grants be justified? The grants from the West reaches Pakistan but many funds are expired as they are not utlised in the right places. Only transparency can fix this problem!
I look forward to your response, Tariq.
Also, as Kalsoom mentions, the post was particularly timely given Pakistan’s interest in fostering negotiations with elements of the insurgency.
I have posted my thoughts on at least one aspect of that complicated issue, here:
Pakistan needs to analyze the situation as per its own needs as our circumstances differ, and Pakistan has been more successful in carrying out the military offensive, the peace deal can also backfire for Pakistan as the Pakistani Taliban may term it as a moral victory. So if such elements seek reconciliation they have to abide by our laws and follow the existing system of governance.
Dear Torkham
What you have asked is a difficult question. I have at several times, attempted to answer this, even written a few articles, but have not put them up anywhere because I feel that they are just my opinion and not backed up by any real evidence.
But I tremendously disagree with your characterization of anti-India sentiments on the “Influence the Pakistani national security apparatus”. Yes the influence of the National security apparatus matters in the sense that they have the most visible impact — be it on our politics, nuclear weapons or foreign policy. Sometimes the “national security apparatus” takes over Pakistan by touting the Anti-India angle (what was the reason for Zia and Musharraf Coup again?)
But that is not the only factor (or even a factor at all). If you purely consider “national security” from a overt aggression angle — I doubt India is going to invade us any time soon, we have the bomb and are crazy enough to use it. If you consider “national security” from a covert aggression angle, I feel that India would be more than willing to strike a bargain of not supporting covert groups against each other.
Anti-India sentiment in Pakistan does not arise from a purely “national security” standpoint.
An Urge to avenge ’71, a desire to ensure our food security by controlling water (in Kashmir), the spirit of Ghazwa-e-hind, subtle propaganda through media and school textbooks so much that we forget why specifically we hate India are all reasons, sometimes reasons which are more important than even our perception of “national security”.
Maybe I will write a bigger response to this.
In the meantime, you will find this article interesting: http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/publication/19922/why_pakistanis_support_islamist_militancy.html
(“Why Pakistanis Support Islamist Militancy” by Jacob N. Shapiro, C. Christine Fair put up at Harvard University)
Some findings:
* Respondents who come from economically successful areas or who believe that Pakistan is doing well economically compared to India were more likely to support militant groups, not less.
* Religiosity is a poor predictor of Pakistani support for militant organizations.
* There is no discernible relationship between respondents’ faith in democracy or support for core democratic rights and their disapproval of the Taliban or al-Qaida.
* identifying strongly as a Muslim does not predict support for Taliban militants fighting in Afghanistan or for al-Qaida.
Food for thought huh?
I thought that article was super interesting. This part was particularly significant:
” To reduce this support [of militant groups], policymakers must pay greater attention to supporters’ political concerns and grievances. This is good news. Achieving meaningful improvements in Pakistan’s socioeconomic development is a generations-long task, but politics can change much more quickly.”
Another interesting point was that someone’s support for the LeT doesn’t necessarily extend to Al Qaeda, etc., i.e., there are nuances in people’s support for militant groups, so it seems we in turn have to take a nuanced approach in countering this support. Far more complicated that one blanket strategy.
Kalsoom
Yes that is interesting, but after reading the entire paper, I somehow feel that the authors are attempting a futile task: That of “How to analyze rationally and logically deal with an irrational person”. That simply wont work.
This “addressing political concerns” prescription is like dressing a cut in a man’s finger when he has been shot through the chest.
“Militant groups” have three facets:
1. TNSM for example, who want Sharia to be declared in Swat for ensuring good governance etc. They are the fringe group.
2. LeJ/SSP etc which are primarily for control of Mosques/funds, Deobandi vs Barelvi, Anti Shia etc. These are purely theology based groups. How will that change by addressing “political concerns”? Ban Shias? Work out a “Mosque & funds sharing” formula?
3. Other groups like JuD/LeT, JeM, HM etc who have nothing to do with “political grievances”. JuD’s selling point is not “We will improve governance”, their selling point is “give us money to kill the infidels” and “Jews are plotting against us to overthrow Islam”. How will that change by addressing “political concerns” ?
The problem is two fold
1. These groups are winning the propaganda war. Politicians/Army fighting these groups appeal to the people using theology (“these people are not true muslims”). People are not stupid. If you consider the “true muslim” angle — the militant groups with their mosques, sermons, beards, quotes from the Hadiths–to me look like better muslims than alcohol sipping generals or Suit clad politicians in far away Islamabad.
2. The groups have not been completely and vehemently rejected by “the establishment”. JuD has not been shut down. Hafiz Saeed not arrested (apparently for “lack of evidence” — are you kidding me?), Omar Sheikh’s groups is still roaming free. Any reasonable person is forced to conclude that the establishment is unwilling to touch every militant group who have killed non-Pakistanis!!
Before addressing “Political concerns”, I think that a simpler and more effective strategy would be for us to disown and stop supporting any and all Jihadi groups. Disarm them, arrest the top leadership and convict those who have indulged in violence.
Then lets worry about “political concerns”
Also
The americans are not so baby faced innocents either. “someone’s support for the LeT doesn’t necessarily extend to Al Qaeda” is ludicrous and should be taken with a bucket of salt.
That might just be a “think tank fig leaf” to justify not pressing Pakistan to work against all Jihadi groups, just like drawing a distinction between “good taliban” and “bad taliban”. It is just a negotiation ploy to tell us “do what you want with Afghanistan and India, but make sure nobody attacks us”.
Pakistanis supporting LeT may not support Al Qaeda, but the important question is, are these two groups really different? It is like a study which discovers “Tariq prefers Fanta over Coke!!” and feeling all scholarly about it, while ignoring the fact that they are owned by the same company.
I wanted to add to my response that what I am talking about is not Indo-Pak friendship — that will probably take a generation or more.
What I am talking about is more narrow: A realization, at this point in time, that our pursuit of “advantage” against India should not be so all consuming to put our very existence under threat.
We should make a series of decisions, (which as a side effect may or may not benefit India, that is immaterial), which leads us on the right path of less violence, just legal system, a functioning country where people feel empowered, more economic prospects and more domestic and international peace.
This I think can be pursued by abandoning “Lets one up India tomorrow” as the central tenet of our policy and adopting “lets strengthen Pakistan tomorrow” as a central policy.
People in Pakistan confuse the latter for the former. Maybe they just want the former and not the latter.
Brilliant analysis- main post as well as the follow-up comments.
Also, thank you for directing me to that article. I will read it thoroughly this week. I really respect Dr. Fair.
Pakistan has its limitations in this war against terror, owing to its capacity and the political situation at home. Any large-scale offensive would need delicate planning and it should be timely executed. As it is our war and only we can decide when to strike and where to strike
very informative piece..
thanks for sharing !!
Tariq-
It looks like my lengthy response to you didn’t go through somehow. I will have to re-gather my thoughts and try and post again later when I have a chance.
[…] blog dedicated to Pakistan issues, Changing Up Pakistan (CHUP). Guest contributor, Tariq Tufail, wrote an interesting and well-written piece on the blog entitled “The India-Afghanistan-Pakistan Conundrum.” I’ll let […]
I re-wrote a full response to your comments on my blog here:
P.S. I don’t know how you keep up with all this traffic on your blog Kalsoom, but great work and great blog!
I got plenty of flak for writing the previous article “The root of all our evils”. The tariq there (without the “tufail” part) is me. One such flak went along the lines of “if you are so brave, where is the rest of your name and address”.
Well read this blog post (which has mysteriously disappeared, so I am posting a google cache) http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:OtKmZwL7i9EJ:gmcmissing.wordpress.com/2010/02/11/what-happened-in-new-delhi-conference/
Quite long actually. I may or may not agree about what the author did. But read what happened to him. I have attached a snippet below.
All I am trying to do, is to make enough money to buy cigarettes, or maybe a pair of shoes. Certainly to pay for internet so I can do some blog postings now and then. I am not a brave person. I am not an important person. I dont have “contacts”. I do certainly hope there are 10,000 tariq tufails in Karachi.
——–
“Private Number”
Again.
My phone rang again.
It was only three hours after the previous phone call.
“Hello,” I attended the phone.
This time it was a call from a “sister intelligence organization”.
“We are calling from the intelligence [of course, he mentioned the agency. I am going to give you ample time to speculate] we have heard you are going to India.”
“Yes, that is right,” he replied, “who told you?”
He laughed and said, “your passport is lying before us”
“My passport?” I was about to shriek with surprise.
“Yes your passport,” he interjected.
“But I sent my passport to the Indian High Commission via courier ( I am not mentioning the name of the courier. You could guess it yourselfs. It is the most popular one in Pakistan). How come it landed in your hands?” I said too many things in a single breath.
He laughed and said in a Punjabi accent English, “ O Sirrr Jeee.Everything comes to us. You don’t worry about it.”
For a minute, I went mad at the courier service’s professional dishonesty. How could they take my passport to someone else? Who would take responsibility for tomorrow my passport is put into another Ajmal Kasab’s pocket and I am declared as a terrorist? Thus, I would advise you all not to trust these courier services (at least in Pakistan) when applying for a visa. They will take your passport to different people and the status of your shipment will always state ‘pending’.
——–
Worst times have arrived therefore Mr. 10% (ten percent) have become leaders of our beloved country. I will not go into the details how corrupt our leaders are. Along with corruption they don’t care if poor people live or die. Zardari and his government have sold our country for few dollars and now our national interests are also on sale by him. When I think about the situation in Pakistan my heart really goes, looking at the necessity which Pakistani nation does not have, such as Sugar, Wheat flour, Electricity, Gas, jobs, clean drinking water and there is huge list of other necessities which Pakistani nation does not enjoy. However leaders of Pakistan have turned a blind eye to the problems of poor people. I always wonder that why Pakistan does not utilizes 18 billion people and produce various items which can later be sold in international market such as Airplanes, Fast Trains, Weapon technology and various other items. Leaders of Pakistan have pledged to neglect this nation and they are extremely busy filling their own pockets with stolen poor people’s money. I pray to God that the injustice vanishes soon and we see a real and authentic leader who can lead us through prosperity and happiness. I believe the leaders of Pakistan have failed to look after their country and they have failed to show care. We as a nation should unite together and raise against the ignorance we face today. Thank you
Tariq,
A super good post.
With this post of yours, this site and the discussions from so many, the time is already now changing with greater speed for Pakistan and Pakistanis 🙂
When establishment has failed for 60years, then only open and soul looking discussions by ordinary citizens of Pakistan is the real prelude to any betterness 🙂
The history is the proof.
Well I agree with anjum, i think the best we can do is spread.
As the article suggest, “With great power comes great responsibility”. The power mad mullah’s could not realize this simple fact and tried to impose their will on people. We must all strive for “freedom of speech and expresison” in our society.
After reading the article and the comments, I am optimistic about our future togather just like as defferent nationalities in EU……..The people here are much better equiped ( mentally) and quite capable to give direction.
Regards.
good article. However who are the takers for it. Still pakistan army is in the control of the administration directly or indirectly. Democractic forces are equally corrupt whether it is zardari or otherwise.
Resources are scarces. It can be used for the development or for the dissipation of the other development. This choice is required to be taken by every individual and nation. When we are individual we take the earlier one and take the latter if we are country in the name of strategic decision.
Current state of affairs of pakistan is nothign but the result of these strategic decision taken for the last four decades.
More than changing the institution, what is more important is to change the society comprising of individual. Every pakistani in majority feels that the west is un-islamic and taliban are islamic. Next thought is that the un-islamic west and india needs to be won over [ tribal thought as the preaching and practice are still of 700 ad ]. rationality has been taken over by the wishful thinking or brainwashing. the muslim countries put to gather could not move an inch out of isreal is the current reality. However pakistan and islamic countries love to feel that they can win the world and all are reasily winnable.