|
 What is the myth and what is the reality of the much talked about North Waziristan operations? Is Pakistan being coerced into taking action against the Taliban in this region?
Pakistan Army is being cajoled, arm twisted and even blackmailed by the U.S. to commence operations against the Taliban/Al-Qaeda reportedly holed up in North Waziristan. A number of recent developments merit visiting the question of whether an operation is being planned by Pakistan Army. The unprecedented protocol accorded to Pakistan's Chief of Army Staff, General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani at the Strategic Dialogue between Pakistan and U.S.A. at Washington, D.C. indicated the importance being attached to the Army Chief. At the January 28, 2010 London Conference on Afghanistan, Afghanistan was cleared to negotiate with the Taliban through a Jirga. Since then, Mr. Karzai did convene a Jirga in June but it was boycotted by the Taliban and an attempt was made to disrupt the proceedings through a bomb and rockets attack. Aspersions were cast on Pakistan for having sponsored the attack. The proceedings of the Jirga, offering employment to middle and lower tier Taliban and sanctuary to the commanders, reportedly in Saudi Arabia was rejected by the Taliban.
In the last week of April, it was revealed that Hakimullah Mehsud, who had been allegedly killed in a Drone attack, was miraculously alive and now threatened to move the terror operation to U.S.A. Consequently, on May Day, a botched bombing attempt at New York's Times Square by Faisal Shahzad, a U.S. citizen of Pakistani origin brought considerable pressure on Pakistan as it was being maliciously implied that Pakistani Taliban had recruited and trained Mr. Shahzad. General James Jones, the U.S. National Security Advisor and Leon Panetta, the CIA Director were promptly dispatched to coerce Pakistan into taking action against the Taliban in NWA. The story was deliberately leaked to the U.S. daily, Los Angeles Times that the high level officials of the Obama administration, who visited Islamabad, had in fact delivered a dossier on Times Square plot of May Day 2010 to Pakistan's President Asif Zardari along with stern warnings of action.
On May 30, Washington Post's staff writer Greg Miller's Op-Ed titled ‘Options studied for a possible Pakistan strike' shockingly revealed that the U.S. military is reviewing options for a unilateral strike in Pakistan in the event that a successful attack on American soil is traced to the country's tribal areas, quoting senior military officials. Simultaneously, U.S. news wire service AP disclosed that the U.S. military has already completed ‘dry exercises' for a unilateral strike in Pakistan. Obviously such tactics were meant to browbeat Pakistan into rethinking its earlier reluctance to commence the NWA operation.
The question here arises, why the U.S. is so keen for Pakistan to attack NWA? There are numerous reasons: Firstly, the U.S. has announced its exit plans to commence in July 2011. It would like to depart from a position of strength. Its much touted Operation Moshtarak launched in February this year in the Taliban dominated town of Marjah in Helmand province did not receive the desired results. Secondly, now the ISAF forces are contemplating an attack on the Taliban stronghold of Kandahar. Any operation on Kandahar is doomed for failure if the alleged logistic line from NWA is not blocked. To achieve Pakistan's assent towards the NWA operation a number of other rabbits have been pulled out of the Washington based mandarin's hats. The number of terrorist attacks has suddenly been accelerated to prompt Pakistan Army to take retaliatory action. It has already been alleged that the Tehrik-e-Taliban (Pakistan) are being sponsored by the Indo-U.S. nexus. Thirdly, in a malicious bid to twist the arm of Pakistani military to commence the NWA operations, another macabre plot was hatched. Independent media reported that Indian spy agency RAW carried away 1300 Taliban and Pakistani prisoners from Bagram air base jail to be able to brainwash them and subsequently use them as Pakistani Taliban against Pakistan Army. At the heels of this disclosure, a document prepared by the London School of Economics (LSE) was released to the media alleging Pakistan's double game in Afghanistan. The report's author, Matt Waldman, a Harvard analyst, argued that Pakistan's ISI exerts considerable influence over the Taliban, basing his claims on "interviews" of Taliban commanders. The LSE report contended that the ISI provides sanctuary and substantial financial, military and logistical support to the insurgency, orchestrating, sustaining and shaping the overall insurgent campaign. The report also alleged that Asif Ali Zardari, the president of Pakistan, recently met captured Taliban leaders to assure them that the Taliban had his government's full support. The report was vehemently denied by the Presidential and Army spokespersons.
To further tighten the screws, despite the fact that the U.S. had expressed a tacit approval to the nascent Pak-China nuclear energy accord, U.S. State Department, has now, after raising reservations to the proposed deal, referred it to the meeting in New Zealand of the 46-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), where the U.S. has unusual clout and a result may be engineered by U.S. depending upon Pakistan's "conduct."
The coercions may have had some effect since Pakistan's stance that it will choose the timing itself may be construed as agreeing to carry out the operation. Let us examine some of Pakistan's constraints towards launching an attack on NWA. Pakistan Army, which has safely conducted operations in Swat and South Waziristan, has not yet consolidated its position in the two theatres of war to withdraw troops from there and launch a fresh operation in North Waziristan Agency (NWA). Despite U.S. assurances that Pakistan need not fear from India, the arms-build up of Pakistan's erstwhile hostile neighbor, its belligerent posture and Pakistan-centric new Cold-Start doctrine point to the contrary. Moreover, the U.S. is likely to depart from the region, leaving the reins of control in the hands of pro-U.S. Northern Alliance, Mr. Hamid Karzai, Blackwater and India. Being left to fend for itself, Pakistan would need the services of Gul Bahadur and Sirajuddin Haqqani, who have to-date, not harmed Pakistan. So why Pakistan would stir a hornet's nest and turn potential allies into foes? Moreover, the disclosure of massive Lithium deposits in Afghanistan changes the equation drastically. Apparently the U.S. has had this information since 2001. This and the alleged oil pipeline from the Caspian Sea through Afghanistan were the reasons for attacking the defenseless country. David DeGraw's June 19 Op-Ed ‘The U.S. war addiction: funding enemies to maintain trillion dollar racket' and New York Times ‘Raw Story' of June 7, 2010, the date the U.S.-Afghan war became the longest ever war disclose that U.S. Security agencies (without naming Blackwater) have been funding the Taliban to extend the war and boost their business. It also reveals that until 9/11, U.S. oil companies, with the help of the Bush administration, were desperately trying to work out a deal with the Taliban to build an oil pipeline through Afghanistan. One of the world's richest oil fields is on the eastern shore of the Caspian Sea just north of Afghanistan. The Caspian oil reserves are of top strategic importance in the quest to control the earth's remaining oil supply. The U.S. government developed a policy called "The Strategy of the Silk Route." The policy was designed to lock out Russia, China and Iran from the oil in this region. This called for U.S. corporations to construct an oil pipeline running through Afghanistan. Since the mid 1990s, a consortium of U.S. companies led by Unocal have been pursuing this goal. A feasibility study of the Central Asian pipeline project was performed by Enron that U.S. $4.5 billion project would require control of Afghanistan and Baluchistan to reach the Indian Ocean. Under the circumstances, Pakistan being sucked into the war to serve the ends of others makes an attack on NWA meaningless and an imprudent decision. Pakistan must weigh its options carefully; confront the U.S. with the information disclosing its hidden agenda. Taking aid from the U.S. and spurning its request is a difficult proposition but Pakistan must take decisions which merit respect of its sovereignty and conform to its national interest. 
S. M. Hali is a film producer and a practicing journalist. He has contributed over 2000 articles, produced 125 documentaries and hosts a TV talk show. He is currently based in Islamabad.
|
Show/hide comments
Show/hide comment form
