LOOMING THREAT TO PAKISTAN AND RESPONSE (June 2011)

On 2 May 2011, US Navy Seals sneaked into Pakistani territory in helicopters and launched a raid on one of the houses in Abbotabad where OBL was supposedly residing, killed him, took his body across to Afghanistan before the Pakistani forces could react and later dumped it in the sea in a dubious manner. While most of the Pakistanis felt betrayed and enraged by this display of unilateralism by the USA, for the latter it was a great occasion to celebrate as they not only snatched a prized trophy in the person of OBL but also provided with the long awaited opportunity to arm-twist Pakistan into ‘doing more’.  Pakistan’s leadership, stretched to the limit, has decided not to succumb to the pressure and accede to unjust US demands and, resultantly, relations between the two countries are, today, at the lowest ebb.   

Soon after the Abbotabad incident, Tehrik Taliban Pakistan (TTP) declared Pakistan as Enemy Number 1 and vowed to avenge OBL’s death. Since then, there has been a spate of terrorist attacks in Pakistan. The number of terrorist attacks against NATO / US forces by the Afghani Taliban have also increased manifold, nullifying the perception that Osama’s demise would weaken Al Qaeda or Taliban. This surely is extremely frustrating for the US leadership who, instead of acknowledging their failures, has started to blame Pakistan Army and ISI for abetting the Haqqani Net Work. Thus, within a span of four months, the so-called allies in ‘war on terror’ are at logger’s head with each other. Whether incidental or planned, the synergy of events is astounding and the inevitable has started to happen, as in the late eighties, giving credence to the widely held perception in Pakistan that, owing to divergence of interests, USA cannot be trusted as a long term partner.

Thus, thanks to the faulty strategy followed hitherto and inability to perform on ground, Pakistan, today, faces a serious threat, both from within (the Taliban), as well as, external (USA-India Nexus, covertly supported by Israel). As both threats, which may manifest in different ways, are extremely detrimental to Pakistan and cannot be dealt with simultaneously, the leadership is faced with the dilemma to choose which must be tackled first, especially when strong indicators exist about involvement of hostile foreign intelligence agencies in breeding internal dissent (collusion of internal threat by a group of Taliban, and external threat posed by USA-India Nexus). Thus, to seek solutions, we need to clearly understand the dynamics of threats posed by the Taliban and the above mentioned Nexus, both singly and in collaboration, our capability to counter these threats and implications, thereof, in the shaped environment, whereby, Pakistan, today, is seen as a threat to world peace.

As a premise, we need to acknowledge that (1)   Today, Pakistan faces a strategic decline in different spheres - political, military, economic- and the change can come only from within. (2)           The Pakistani leadership has exploited country’s negative potential ( ie Pakistan’s potential of instability, thereby, destabilization of the entire region) for quite some time and the world at large is now not willing to give further concessions on this account. (3)  Both USA and Pakistan have been playing double games with each other, using different Taliban groups, however, neither has benefited from the strategy followed hitherto. There is, thus, a need to revisit these strategies by both, more so, by the Pakistani leadership as failure on our part is more pronounced and the stakes are too high.(4) The Abbotabad incident and successful terrorist attacks by TPP have further compounded Pakistan’s problems as questions are being raised about her resolve, as well as, ability / capacity to tackle the multifarious challenges faced by the nation.(5)      The US leadership finds a commonality of interests with India for pursuance of their long term objectives in the region.(6)  After 11 September 2001, a new phenomenon has occurred in US politics i.e the incumbent President must show a substantive achievement for re-election. Bush attacked Iraq and diverted attention from ‘war on terror’ but won the elections (though Americans are still paying the price for the misadventure). President Obama may try to emulate his predecessor with Pakistan as the target country. However, this time the cost for the Americans in particular and the world at large would be beyond imagination.(7) By remaining in self-denial mode and sleeping over issues for years, the Pakistani nation, today, is on the death bed. To survive, we must put own house in order. But, if we must die, we still have a choice to die honourably and be counted in history, or die dishonourably, as we have lived as a nation.        

Threat Response  As highlighted earlier, because of the strategy hitherto followed, Pakistan, today, stands isolated internationally, weakened internally and faces serious threats to her existence, both from within (by Taliban), as well as, external (USA-India Nexus). While tackling both is beyond our capability and not an option, the policy makers have to decide which threat to be neutralized first. Logically, even this is not an option as to face external threat, a nation must be strong internally. As such, Pakistan must first deal with the threat from within (Talibanization and extremism) as once it is neutralized, external threat would automatically be marginalized. Manifestation of the threat, both internal and external, and suggested response, thereof, are discussed in the succeeding paragraphs.

USA-India Nexus (Covertly Supported by Israel)      There is no denying the fact that a commonality of interest exists between the USA, India and Israel for achievement of their long term objectives in the region. While USA’s Declared Objective is to stabilize the region and ensure that no 9/11 like incidents are planned and executed from Pakistan or Afghanistan. However their Covert Objectives are to gain and maintain foot-hold in Central Asia, for which Pakistan must be brought to a level of a pliant state. US presence in the region is imperative to deny China access to Indian Ocean / mouth of Gulf, as well as, energy resources of Central Asia, encirclement of Iran, prevent this region from becoming a political bloc in the future comprising major countries including Iran, Pakistan, India, China and Russian Federation. This bloc, when ever formed, would become the most potent power to counter the USA as it would control the Indian Ocean, as well as, mouth of the Persian Gulf. This bloc, however, cannot be formed without Pakistan as she enjoys a pivotal location. As such, it’s a strategic compulsion for the USA Administration to maintain her control over Pakistan which may manifest as physical presence or control over Pakistan’s leadership or both. In the long term, they would like to gain control over Pakistan’s nuclear program.

India’s perceived objectives could be access to Central Asian markets and ultimately become a regional and super power for which Pakistan must be removed as a nuclear irritant / reduced to a pliant state and, secondly, gain complete control of Indian Ocean (by implication denying the same to China).

As far as Israel is concerned, at the time of her creation as a state, the Zionist leadership had rightly concluded that for such a small state it would be difficult to survive unless backed by a super power. As such, they heavily invested in USA in banking sector, communications and media/press. By doing so, they are now virtually in control of the US Administration who have no option but to look after Israel’s interests. Now, the Zionist elders see India as a future super power which could serve their interests, at least in the regional context, and are, as such, investing in her. Thus, to meet the prerequisites             for India to become a super power, as mentioned earlier, India and Israel find commonality of interests as far as weakening Pakistan is concerned, including her denuclearization.

Conclusions that can be drawn after analyzing the objectives of different stake holders could be (1) Commonality of interests between USA, India and Israel to reduce Pakistan to a pliant state, by implication a denuclearized Pakistan.      (2)       USA will maintain her presence in Central Asia, even if it means break up of Pakistan for ensuring availability of a corridor through Balochistan (pattern being rehearsed in Libya). Being their strategic partner, India can be given this role in Afghanistan, if presence of a large size US force becomes untenable. (3)       Geo-strategic location as gate-way to Central Asia and emergence as a nuclear Islamic state, have made Pakistan extremely vulnerable to power games of many stake holders,  with USA in the lead.(4)            As we learn from the dismemberment of erstwhile USSR, use of Low Intensity Conflict as an instrument is the best strategy to subdue a nuclear state. Today, Pakistan faces a similar situation and the way she is being bled internally, through effective covert operations conducted by hostile intelligence agencies, she would not even know when the threshold was reached and crossed. As such, if Pakistan is to survive, she must face this onslaught upfront and put own house in order.

Manifestation of Threat / Implementation of Strategies  For pursuance of USA’s objectives in the region, former US President Bush, under the influence of anti-Pakistan lobbies, in 2006 started to adopt a strategy for Pakistan replicating the one followed against the erstwhile USSR in the early nineties, whereby, the country was internally destabilized, made economically unviable and when the situation was ripe, she was asked to hand over all nuclear warheads deployed outside Russian Federation in Central Asia, against payment of negligible amount. For implementation of similar strategy against Pakistan, CIA-RAW-MOSSAD Nexus found commonality of interests with a group of Taliban – instability in Pakistan suited both for different reasons. While for the former, to achieve their strategic objectives in the region, Pakistan had to be destabilized to a level or even balkanized, and de-nuclearized. Instability in Pakistan suited Taliban / militants as, movements such as Talibanization gain strength in the environment of weakened central authority and thrive when there is lack of governance, deprivation, poverty and disillusionment in masses, which provide them with the opportunity of recruitment. Policy makers in USA, India and Israel were of the view that normalcy in Pakistan and Afghanistan could be achieved after achievement of their objectives vis-à-vis Pakistan. Since President Bush, started to play a double game, Pakistan responded in the similar manner.           Resultantly, as the ‘war on terror’ suffered in Iraq due to pursuance of conflicting       objectives by the USA, the history was repeated in our region also.

President Bush’s strategy might have suited Israelis but extremely detrimental for the region, even India, and the world at large as there were no            guarantees that Pakistan would regain stability after achievement of their objectives. As such, President Obama, after taking over, introduced a new strategy vis-à-vis Pakistan and Afghanistan. For Pakistan, Obama’s strategy envisages a comparatively stable but economically dependent Pakistan. The long term objectives would be achieved by gaining control over Pakistan’s leadership through incentives and coercion i.e entice Pakistani leadership through incentives and simultaneously coerce them into submission by generating instability through use of a group of Taliban. Insurgency in Balochistan would also be fanned for the purpose, as well as, to keep other options open. A direct confrontation is also contemplated with Pakistan in case of failure of above strategy by shaping environment i.e generating internal destabilization and assisting separatist movement in Balochistan. Possibility of even getting a UN mandate for the purpose cannot be ruled out.

Similar strategy i.e ‘carrot and stick’ would also be applied in Afghanistan,       manifested in the shape of punitive strikes against the non-compromising Taliban leadership and incentives, such as monetary, share in government and deletion of their names from the list of terrorists maintained by the UN, for those willing to cooperate. The compromised ‘Group of Taliban’ would be used, in collaboration with India, for achievement of long term objectives against Pakistan and China, enabling USA to reduce their forces in the region.     

Obama was hopeful of successful of his strategy because of Pakistan’s economic dependence on USA and rampant corruption in political and bureaucratic hierarchy. However he failed to comprehend the possible implications of such a strategy. (1) As the success of Obama Strategy hinges on having a sold out and compromised leadership at the helm of affairs in Pakistan, such a leadership would mean more extremism, ultimately jeopardizing security of the entire region, as well as, the world at large. (2)            To maintain presence of US forces in Central Asia, simmering militancy in Afghanistan and Pakistan is imperative. Continuous state of instability, or lack of stability, has negative implications for both countries, as well as for the region. (3) Greater ingress by the Americans into Pakistan’s decision making hierarchy would impinge on her sovereignty having negative fallout. (4)     Since USA is aiming at long term presence in the region, peace would remain elusive and the region would continue to remain embroiled. 

Pursuance of Objectives by India  Though India remains central in Pakistan’s threat perception, yet she must remain cognizant of the ways the threat may manifest / is manifesting.  While India has embarked upon modernization of her Armed Forces with developments / inductions which are apparently Pakistan specific, especially with regard to her Army, use of military instrument by India for achievement of her objectives vis-à-vis Pakistan is not likely. She would continue to adopt indirect approach as hitherto in collaboration with her Allies - USA and Israel. The factors which substantiate this argument are (1)            In the obtaining environment, space for traditional application of military instrument is gradually shrinking and non-traditional security threats are taking centre stage.  (2)       Chances of a conventional war between two STABLE nuclear states are remote, biggest threats to any nuclear power is internal instability and unviable economic conditions eg dismemberment of former USSR. (3)   India is progressing at a fast pace, for her the stakes are too high to opt for a conventional war, especially when other viable options are available to undermine Pakistan. (4)       In any case, achievement of India’s perceived politico military aim i.e. “Military and economic degradation of Pakistan”, is neither in the interest of India nor the world at large. (5)            Failure to achieve her war objectives in case Indians opt for a conventional war, would be disastrous and may result into their break up. Why should India adopt such a course? (6)         India can and is achieving her war objectives through Low Intensity Conflict and the way she is bleeding Pakistan in collaboration with her allies, nuclear deterrence is becoming irrelevant. If it continues for an indefinite period, Pakistani leadership would not even know when threshold was reached and crossed - safest option for India. (7)         India is aspiring to become a super power and for power projection, greater investment is required in Air Force and Navy, while maintaining a comparatively smaller, but well equipped, Army. As such, Indian Army leadership is looking for justification to maintain a big Army by asserting that a conventional war is still possible with Pakistan and by exaggerating bogey of Chinese threat. While they look for relevance, Pakistan need not follow the suit. 

From the above it can be concluded that (1)        INTERNAL STABILITY and economic viability for Pakistan assume greater significance. (2)    India is unlikely to venture a conventional war with Pakistan, however, maintaining balance in the conventional plane, without entering into arms race, is imperative for Pakistan to keep the nuclear threshold at required level. (3)  Low Intensity Conflict emanating from Pakistan’s Western borders is extremely detrimental to her security as being effectively used by our adversary to achieve her war objectives. As such, Pakistan’s strategy must aim at neutralizing the above mentioned indirect threat at priority.

Pursuance of Objectives by Israel While remaining in the background, the Israelis would only provide indirect support to her allies - USA and India - through covert operations conducted by MOSSAD.

Response to USA-India Nexus                       Whatever strategies may be conceived by Pakistan’s adversaries (or so-called friends), any direct confrontation between Pakistan and USA-India Nexus would have serious ramifications for both. While in the short term the latter may achieve a major military victory, in the long term it would become their greatest disaster as the depleted Pakistan would be nibbled away by the Taliban. Even any attempt by the USA-India Nexus to denuclearize Pakistan would result into a strong backlash, paving way for the Taliban to make inroads into Pakistani public, an extremely dangerous proposition. If any lessons can be learnt from history, Indians must know the consequences of sharing borders with Taliban led Pakistan-Afghanistan. As such, Pakistani leadership is left with no option but to put own house in order and the USA – India Nexus with no other choice but to ensure Pakistan’s stability. Stakes are too high to consider otherwise. This being the only factor forming the basis for commonality of interest between the stake holders, Pakistan’s policy vis-à-vis USA-India Nexus must focus on (1).     Reduce economic dependence on USA by putting own house in order. (2)    Pakistan must recognize its geo-strategic importance as gate-way to Central Asia and deal with USA, accordingly. The situation can be exploited to Pakistan’s advantage. While USA is seeking Pakistan’s help for implementation of its exit strategy from Afghanistan (though they are likely to retain substantial forces), Pakistan must, in turn, seek guarantees that the future dispensation in Afghanistan is not inimical to Pakistan‘s interests.

Since trust deficit exists between Pakistan and USA due to double games played hitherto by both, it would be prudent to involve other international players or even UN to ensure sincerity of purpose. While as a responsible nation state, Pakistan must fulfill her international obligations by ensuring a halt to cross border actions by the Pakistani Tribals / ‘jehadis’, the US leadership must also reciprocate by allaying Pakistan’s under mentioned concerns  (1)        The USA strategy for the region must aim at seeking peace, and not anarchy, in the region. (Simmering militancy in Afghanistan may provide them with an excuse to maintain their presence in the country, but extremely detrimental for Pakistan). (2)    Though as a long term strategy, USA envisages a role for India in Afghanistan, at no cost such a proposition would be acceptable to Pakistan. As such, the USA must strike a balance in this regard. (While Pakistan must remain relevant to international community in the obtaining scenario, it has to also remain relevant to the Afghan people as an end state). (3)       Anti-Pakistan activities of CIA-RAW-MOSSAD nexus must be curtailed in the region as their actions to undermine Pakistan’s interests would be effectively countered at all cost. (For the purpose, Pakistan must provide sufficient proof).         (4)       Any support (both physical and moral) to dissident elements of Balochistan is unacceptable. Indian and Afghan leadership must be ‘persuaded’ not to involve in such activities. (5) It must be emphasized on USA Administration that the strategy to totally bank on India as a counterweight to China, may ultimately backfire as India has a record of changing loyalties for achievement of their perceived objectives. Even if, the USA Administration is seeking stabilization of the region, as vehemently proclaimed, they must know that India has always been a factor in destabilization, rather than stabilization, of the region. (Exposing India and breaking anti-Pakistan synergy between USA, India and Israel, is the best strategy to counter India’s indirect threat to Pakistan).  (6)            USA’s strategic interests in the region can only be achieved if meaningful strategic partnership is developed with Pakistan and this long term partnership can only be evolved through winning over the Pakistani people with tangible actions, and not by controlling / benefiting few leaders. In this regard, mere utterances or commitments would not suffice. Recognition of Pakistan as a nuclear state, meaningful role for solution of Kashmir dispute, acceptance of Pakistan’s role in any future       dispensation in Afghanistan and substantial economic assistance would go a long way in building required trust between the peoples of the two countries.

A Comment on US Strategy in the Region          In the eighties, the then US Administration spent billions of US $ to oust Soviet forces from Afghanistan and now after spending over 450 billion US $ and suffering heavy loss of life, they have installed Northern Alliance in power who have remained the proxy of Iran-Russia-India for years. What guarantees the USA has that in future Indians would not collaborate with Russia and China to oust any US remnants from Afghanistan, if left, and may be the USA once again requires Taliban support to oust the Northern Alliance from power?  Unfortunately, Pakistan was US Ally in the eighties and now when reverse strategy is being applied, we are again allies on some commonality of interest which the majority of Pakistani people fail to comprehend, and resent. One is, however, perplexed by the naivety of the American public. Is there nobody to ask the leadership about the logic of paying a very heavy price to achieve something and then paying many times the spent cost to return the same. In fact, RAND Corporation has alluded to this concept when they say that every now and then, USA must go to war to boost economy. Same is necessitated because USA’s main industry is Defense Production based and for this industry to run, wars are imperative. As such, as long as this concept is there, necessitated by the US War Industry, their policy makers would continue to create threats and then wage wars to quell these so called threats. Thus, peace would remain elusive in the world unless the Americans diversify their industry.      

Tackling Threat from Taliban                     To correctly understand and deal with the threat posed by Taliban, we need to learn from the history which reveals that, through the centuries, warriors from the North (Afghanistan and beyond) have been invading the fertile lands of the Punjab and further south on one pretext or another, mostly using religion as an instrument, carried out plundering, ruled and ultimately merged with the society. Talibanization is another manifestation of the same phenomenon. Again, by using religion, they are spreading like a wild fire and the people of the region, as always, are becoming hostage to their ideology and would ultimately succumb, unless effective and all encompassing under mentioned counter measures are undertaken at a fast pace. (1)        Talibanization like movements take advantage of vacuum in leadership. Only a dynamic, sincere and bold leadership with vision and capability to deliver can check their onslaught. Due to fear of reprisal or lack of vision, the present political leadership is reluctant to effectively counter the Taliban. If Pakistan is to survive the onslaught from the North and the nation, as always, doomed to slavery under the Taliban, the political leadership must rise above pursuance of self agendas and prepare the nation to face the threat upfront.  (2)       A comprehensive strategy be formulated and implemented to improve literacy rate, achieve internal cohesion, stability and economic viability, the surest ways to counter internal / external threat. (3) Anarchy, disillusionment, poverty, illiteracy, general discontent and lack of governance provide environment for breeding and recruitment for extremist groups like Taliban. As such, to check Talibanization, misgivings of the masses must be removed and major emphasis be laid on education. Assistance by the international community for the purpose and its proper utilization would go a long way in achieving these objectives. (4)            To effectively counter TTP, they must be isolated from the other militant groups, especially Kashmiri Jehadi organizations, through well conceived covert operations, and from the other tribesmen by undertaking massive rebuilding and political measures. (5)         Hitherto, the media has played a very negative role by making heroes out of those bent upon undermining Pakistan’s sovereignty. Instead of painting a true picture and making people aware of the looming threat posed by the Taliban, most of the anchor persons / panelists either refrain from discussing them or try to justify their actions by putting blame on the policies of the government. This trend would, surely, lead to disaster as Talibanization can best be checked through AWARENESS. People must be educated, rather than agitated, about the threat for which electronic media can play an effective role. (6)    All avenues facilitating inroads for Taliban, such as some “Madrassas”, must be effectively checked and controlled. Lukewarm actions and display of indifference in this regard would be extremely detrimental to Pakistan’s security.

(7)       Taliban pose threat not only to Pakistan but also to the region and the world at large, and, as such, the international community must fully back Pakistan in countering the threat. Playing double games in this regard would be extremely counter-productive. (8)         Since Talibanization like movements adopt an indirect approach, military response is normally counter-productive. As such, military operation must only be undertaken against Taliban if absolutely warranted and that also after shaping required environment. Effective covert operations are the best solution, for which our intelligence agencies must be revamped and geared up to face the challenge upfront. If by compulsion, a military operation is required to be undertaken in a particular area, it must be conducted after fulfilling following prerequisites. (a)            The operation should be legitimized by the parliament unequivocally, taking full ownership. (b)      The operation should be out rightly supported by the masses in general, media, political leadership and, in our case, religious clergy also.

Army as a Major Player in Thwarting Internal and External Threats

Army is an institution which has intake from the middle class, lower middle class and the lowest middle class, it picks people from the roads, streets or even slums and irrespective of caste, creed, religion, sect or ethnicity, elevates these individuals from nothing to a level where they have everything - financial independence, status, honour, dignity and all that in one generation. In return, at the individual level, each individual in uniform is expected to perform and the nation at large, which has invested and continues to invest a lot in the Armed Forces, expects results.

Having high expectations, the nation was jolted by the intelligence, operational and security related failures as manifested in 2^nd and 22^nd May incidents, having serious ramifications for the country. As the ensuing developments indicate, the strategy supposedly being followed by the military has apparently back fired and the Armed Forces have failed (at least in perception) in what the media calls ‘performance audit’. And, on top of that, in the obtaining environment, the military leadership decided to take the back seat (for the time being), causing a paralysis in the political leadership and leaving a vacuum for other power centers to fill. Unfortunately, besides undermining each other, these aspirant power centers opted for the easiest way to climb the ladder i.e by undermining the Army. Thus, in the last two months, the  nation witnessed the worst kind of Army bashing, as never before.

While no sane person in Pakistan would oppose the idea of dilution of Army’s authority and status hitherto enjoyed. This dilution, however, should span over a period of time with the other power centers behaving in a manner that the process does not turn into or give impression of a clash of institutions. Such a state would be extremely detrimental to Pakistan’s security as the Army still is very relevant to the security of this country and if this institution is undermined, nothing would stand in the way of those bent upon undermining Pakistan. Thus, the ongoing process to degrade Army must be reversed, perceptions are needed to be changed and conspiracies in this regard are to be effectively responded as such, and not as individual events. The Army, notwithstanding its remarkable performance in Swat and South Waziristan, also needs to undertake certain measures to revive its diminishing image. (1)Improve performance, deliver and shun weaknesses that impinge on her abilities to do so (2) Ensure transparency in accountability for failings, both professional and moral.(3)Ensure smooth dilution of its status as the only center of gravity, but from higher moral grounds.(4) While in the obtaining environment, Pakistan must remain relevant to the international             community, the Army’s actions must be a manifestation of national aspirations. As such, the political leadership must take ownership and prepare public opinion before any military operation is launched against own people, or perceived to be own people, involved in militancy.(5) Perception that Armed Forces have gradually turned into a corporate entity also, must be allayed by taking practical remedial measures.(6) Besides performance on ground, fight on the intellectual plane is imperative to thwart the designs of conspirators, both internal and external, who are mostly using media as an instrument.

Conclusion To meet external threat, a country must be strong internally. An economically unviable, internally destabilized, religiously polarized and ethnically divided nation, led by inapt leadership can not meet the internal and external challenges faced by Pakistan today. We need to put own house in order for which each institution must play its due role, within their respective domains, instead of power games to undermine each other. Stakes are too high to play such games. 

While USA-India Nexus (covertly supported by Israel) may be considering neutralization of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal as one of their long term objectives, materialization of Taliban related threat from within would surely provide them with the excuse to get UN mandate for achieving the same. Moreover, for threats, like the one posed by Taliban, nuclear deterrence becomes irrelevant, and, therefore, more dangerous. As such, the Pakistani leadership, while remaining cognizant of and taking effective safeguards against the threats posed by the external forces, must never have any ambiguity about tackling the internal threat first. If we can overcome the threat posed by Talibanization and become internally strong, the external threat would automatically recede with no weakness to be exploited and our nuclear deterrence intact.