US secretary of state Hillary Clinton's post-AfPak visit statements indicate that the new US approach had evolved further and much of the credit goes to Pakistan's Gen Kayani-led security establishment. The US focus has so far remained to garner success through hostility but Pakistan's argument had centered on engaging the Taliban with the reconciliation process involving the regional stakeholders, including Pakistan. The observers have termed it a real victory on part of Pakistan as they believe that Pakistan has rightly and timely played with patience its cards when there was huge pressure to go for an all-encompassing operation in North Waziristan, with a salt of allegations that it is harboring terrorists especially the Haqqani network.
This is the success on Pakistan government's side that Ms Clinton told a congressional panel on October 27 that any Afghan-led peace process would have to include the Quetta Shura and its leader Mullah Omar. "There is no solution in the region without Pakistan and no stable future in the region without a partnership." The US needs to negotiate with the Haqqani network while continuing to work with Pakistan to destroy the safe havens it has inside FATA. The recent diatribe against the ISI by the top US military official General Michael Mullen and Secretary of Defence Leon Panetta, and in the series the BBC Hub's October 26 report, alleging that the Pakistan army and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) supplied and protected the Afghan Taliban has severely undermined the prospects of rapprochement in already strained Pak-US relations, though the confusion remained whether or not the high-powered Hillary-led US delegation could help push forward the process towards peace.
Pakistan has also expressed reservations over the proposed draft of the declaration of the upcoming Istanbul Conference on Afghanistan, which may complicate international efforts for evolving a consensus on the document. The conference slated for November 2 is expected to discuss transition in Afghanistan, reconciliation with Afghan insurgent groups and regional economic cooperation. Major General Athar Abbas, director-general ISPR said in an interview with BBC that Pakistan has not been taken into confidence on the initiation of the reconciliation process in Afghanistan, nor the Pakistan government had been informed about the objectives of the reconciliation process or who is taking part in it. He said the Afghan issue was heading towards a settlement and there was a need to determine the role of every stakeholder in the conflict and how the reconciliation process would be pushed forward and what would be role of Pakistan in this situation, only in that case Pakistan would be able to decide whether it could persuade one group or the other to take part in the process.
The allegations of attack on the US embassy and military base in Afghanistan by the Haqqani network supported by the ISI clearly shows the distrust two countries carry in their so-called strategic partnership. Even more disturbing is the unprecedented gamut of threats emanating from Washington against Pakistan that warrant careful examination and needed to be explicitly answered. Pakistan's political and military leadership has severely criticized US blame-game and projected it as the outcome of US failure in Afghanistan. The ISPR Director-General considered the Oct 26 BBC report as highly biased, one-sided and factually incorrect. The head of ISI has already said that not even a single bullet in terms of financial support has been given to groups named in the BBC report. About 300 ISI officials have been killed in Pakistani Taliban attacks and it is a proof that the ISI did not support militants. Such reports and propaganda, in conflict with what Hillary Clinton is saying in public, there is possibility of severing the ties further. This renewed phase of tension in Pakistan-US relations needed to be seen in a larger regional context. This development has coincided with a recently published report by a joint study of Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) US and the Aspen Institute of India. The first ever study of its kind gives a shared Indo-U.S. strategic vision with particular reference to Pakistan, Afghanistan and China. The US endorses India as key regional player strengthening U.S. interests in the regional especially after the withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan. Therefore, the change in U.S. tone against Pakistan coupled with augmented Indo-US convergence on major strategic issues vehemently support changing course in South Asian region.
Past couples of years have remained extremely hard for the ISAF forces in Afghanistan. The so-called COIN strategy of General Patreaus proved to be unsuccessful against the fierce Taliban fighters and the American version to end the WOT on its own terms in Afghanistan don't seem to be materializing. At present the war in Afghanistan has apparently turned into an Afghan liberation movement heart of which is antiforeigner as the ISAF forces have virtually lost control of all the Afghan provinces. Therefore, amid growing domestic public pressure to bring the US troops back to the country, the US on one hand is shifting it own failures by making Pakistan scapegoat and on the other marginalize Pakistan's role and bringing in India as key player in Afghan affairs in post-US Afghanistan. In fact U.S. has decided to replace Pakistan with India as major influence in Afghan affairs. Along with other options Indian Influence in Afghanistan could be materialized by initiating the training of Afghan forces by Indian military in Afghanistan or in India as shared by Indo-US joint study.
In this scenario India is more than ready to play active role in Afghan affairs but not unconditionally. India could never fill the vacuum of US and NATO forces rather would avoid bringing in active troops in the war ravaged Afghanistan. Only what could bring in India to Afghanistan is instable or weaker Pakistan that has no say in Afghan affairs. Thus India has most likely put two conditions to jump in the afghan imbroglio. Firstly, before withdrawing the U.S. has to curtail Pakistan influence in Afghanistan by forcing Pakistan to act against Haqqani Group or unilaterally takes military measures against Haqqani's in Pakistan's tribal area. According to the CFR-Aspin report "the United States should heavily condition all military aid to Pakistan on sustained concrete antiterrorist measures by the Pakistan military against groups targeting India and the United States, including in Afghanistan". Giving support to this theme the U.S. antiterrorism experts are exploring similarities between the 2008 Mumbai attack and that on U.S. embassy in Afghanistan. Such theme shows obliviousness to Pakistan staunch opposition to terrorism and decade long ISI-CIA active collaboration against the Taliban and al-Qaeda operatives in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Secondly, Pakistan's nuclear program has always remained a sour in Indian eyes and a real stymie in dictating Pakistan as a secondary neighbour. This perception is largely supported by the joint Indo-U.S. study that states, "the United States and India should begin classified exchanges on multiple Pakistan contingencies, including the collapse of the Pakistan state and the specter of the Pakistan military losing control of its nuclear arsenal." India is actively endeavoring to exploit the tattering Pak-U.S. relations to its advantage by developing correlation between the failing of Pakistan as a state and nuclear weapon eventually slipping into the hands of militants. Quite astonishing and rankling is how keen both India and U.S. are in anticipating Pakistan as a failed state.
In this emerging scenario the prospects of peace in Afghanistan could face a severe blow whereas, U.S. confrontation with Pakistan would bring unimaginable anarchy in the region. Now has U.S. calculated the implications of such scenario and could U.S. achieve peace in the Afghanistan by marginalizing Pakistan from the peace process? Have the Americans concluded the war in Afghanistan is unwinnable, therefore Pakistan and ISI is to be blame for the U.S. failures and permanently replace Pakistan with India as strategic partner in the region.
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment