The accusation by the United States that the Haqqani network is “a veritable arm” of the Inter-Services Intelligence seems to have hardly embarrassed Pakistan. Instead, following the pattern of defiance that it has shown since Osama bin Laden's killing, the Pakistan Army has made clear it will not subordinate its strategic interests to those of the U.S. But this new crisis in a rocky marriage may yet pass. The U.S. blames the Haqqani network, a faction of militants allied to the Afghan Taliban and based in the North Waziristan frontier region of Pakistan, for the recent attacks in Kabul. This includes the killing of former Afghan President Burhanuddin Rabbani and the attack on the U.S. Embassy some days before that. The July 2008 attack on the Indian Embassy in Kabul was also traced to the Haqqani network. Islamabad is correct in saying it was the CIA that nurtured Jalaluddin Haqqani — the leader from whom the group takes its name — during the anti-Soviet war in Afghanistan. But that is half the story. The Pakistan military's embrace of the CIA-Saudi-funded jihadists for its own goals in Afghanistan and against India is of no less relevance to the unending tragedy in the region. As the Pakistan security establishment prepares for the so-called end game in Afghanistan, it sees the Haqqani group as its best insurance policy against being sidelined — and importantly, against the rise of Indian influence over its western neighbour. The generals in Rawalpindi are confident that the superpower has no choice but to remain dependent on Pakistan to ensure a semblance of peace in Afghanistan and, by extension, in the whole region.
Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar's articulation of the message that the U.S. risks losing an ally with its allegations shows that even if the civilian dispensation is at variance with the security establishment, its political space is limited. Rightfully, the All Parties' Conference called by Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani should question the army's continuing links with militants and the internal risk this poses. But the track record of such initiatives, undertaken each time the Pakistan Army finds itself in hot water, shows that they end up endorsing the security establishment and its misguided strategies. Pakistan's ability to stand up to a superpower patron would have been admirable were its agenda clean. All this might be a source of anxiety to India, which depends to an extent on Pakistan's influential allies to force it to rein in groups such as Lashkar-e-Taiba. Even so, New Delhi must work to discourage any precipitate action by Washington against Pakistan that may put the entire region at risk.
Keywords: U.S.-Pakistan ties, ISI
The Pakistani's show of bravado against a super-power is admirable, were it not for its fool hardiness. Firstly, it conveniently tries to gloss over embarrassing facts brought out into the open by the Americans. Secondly, if the Pakistani's think that they can continue to play with the hares and run with the hounds, they are sadly mistaken. That trick works only as far as their dealings with India are concerned. An India that stands helpless in the face of Pakistani blackmail. The Americans have taken the gloves off now, and when they do that, they usually mean business! The Osama operation will be a side show when compared to what is likley to happen now.
The "precipitate" action will happen sometime, if now today or tomorrow. Pakistan is playing two sides of the same coin too many times. Unless they change their "strategic interests" the region is hurtling into a mess!! We had better be prepared for it!
How can one call these countries allies? US had been scouring the person in mountain of Tora-Bora for Osama who had gotten safe heaven in Pakistan .
And again this country has given home to most devilish person in world next to ISI's compound . I don't this there is smidgen of meaning in this relationship.
The Indian outcry over the huge financial assistance by US to Pakistan was never listened upon, when we said the US assistance is being diverted to elements hostile to Indian as well as the world peace, US was apathetic. by supporting Pakistan, they are creating a second Taliban like situation for them. i could never understand, why could they not been enjoy their richness ? why are they so concerned with situation worldwide ? but in the midst of this entire issue , i will praise the bold Pakistan FM who could still muster the courage to challenge American claim, which is so uncharacteristic of current Pakistan leadership.
I don't agree with your argument that "New Delhi must work to discourage any precipitate action by Washington against Pakistan". Pakistan has since it's creation in 1947 has worked to destroy India. After realizing that it would not be able to destroy India militarily, it has used terrorism to further its goals. It is in India's interest that the US take steps to defeat the Pakistan military.
This editorial supports the pathetically weak policy of the Indian Government which is based on pious "hope" that Pakistan will take aggressive action against terrorists, and that the US will not punish Pakistan and thus "destabilize" the region.
The region is already destabilized by Pakistani terrorism and Indian interests are dangerously threatened. The only efffective policy is to destabilize Pakistan to the point that it breaks up into manageable components. A good example is Serbia, which after the break up of Yugoslavia, is now defanged and well behaved. A truncated Pakistan would add to, not detract from, regional stability.
While we Indians are usually happy about Pakistan's self-made misfortune especially when it is aggravated by the USA, as in recent times by Adm. Mullen's blistering remarks on the ISI, we need to react cautiously this time round. Any vindictive attack on the Pakistani soil by the USA could result in serious unrest in the region and could well tilt the balance in favour of those extremists we have been struggling to defeat. The closing sentence in this article has summarized what the Indian response should be like and it comes at a time when there is lot of confusion over it.
What you suggest doesn't look convincing.If india will not expose and call for action against Pakistan then what is the relevance of soft diplomacy she adopted since the start of the terror in kashmir.If India go through what you suggest then it will be clearly succumbing under blackmail and then pakistan will be relived from this pressure and their generals will use militancy tactics more freely.It is need of the hour that allround pressure should be build on pakistan to stop the path of terror.
US-Pakistan relationship is very old and despite all accusations and counter arguments, situation may not be out of control as we Indians feel. It is better to wait and watch. There are a number of senior officials in the US administration who usually support Pakistan’s establishment at all costs. They know how to steer clear out of tense situations in the relationship between two countries. But let us also not forget that it is the US administration only which has created a ‘failing’ State in the form of Pakistan. Unless very stern measures are taken to free Pakistan from the pro-Taliban groups, such situations will crop up again and again.
Ms Khar needs to be commended for her upright comment.Problem in Pakistan is taht it has all along banked on others.The indigenous development of Pakistan is in the interest of all Local stakeholders in Asia.Keeping in view the strategic importance af the South Asian regions, the leadres of this region must not allow it to be made a playground for external power rivalry.The problem faced by a post colonial nation is what Pakistan is facing.Military there has in fact been pampered by America only.It's their fault.What is of utmost importance at this point of time is the strenghthening of Civilian Administartion in Pakistan.
This refers to the edit "Crisis in U.S.-Pakistan ties" (September 29). India needs to handle the matter with care and sensitivity as any further escalation in the tension between the two countries is bound to adversely impact India and the region as a whole. It is true that monsters like the late Osama and Haqqani network were at one time nutured by U.S. as the same suited its interest at that point of time.
Balanced and fairly accurate analysis on the Pakistani situation.
Time is running out for President Obama, who will be seeking re-election in 2012. He has to establish two things to convince American voters to re-elect him : firstly, the war in Afganistan has been won and its objectives achieved and secondly, therefore, the withdrawal of American troops has been initiated and will be completed as scheduled. However, considering the performance of President Obama on domestic front, his re-election appears to be doubtful. In such a scenario, his successor would not like to carry the Afganistan baggage with him. Thus, the Afganistan end-game ends with US presidential elections in 2012. All the players including Pakistan military establishment are, therefore, planning for post-withdrawal scenario. India should also do the same.
Rigid and inhospitable comments,by the foreign minister of a country against the present superpower may prove disastrous. It is exhorted that Ms. Rabbani should have weighed the consequences for both- herself and Pakistan before her unexpected comments.
I have one concern with this statement. Isn't this suggestive of succumbing to blackmail, which is what India has been expousing US and others not to fall into? Preventing an escalation is good, but not the reasons for which it is stated below. All this might be a source of anxiety to India, which depends to an extent on Pakistan's influential allies to force it to rein in groups such as Lashkar-e-Taiba. Even so, New Delhi must work to discourage any precipitate action by Washington against Pakistan that may put the entire region at risk.
Please Email the Editor