On his first Afghan visit, Pakistan’s newly elected Prime Minister Raja Pervez Ashraf met leaders of the opposition alliance, the Afghan National Front (ANF), on Thursday in Kabul. He assured them of friendly ties with all Afghan ethnic groups.

“We want to work closely with Tajik, Hazara and Uzbek leaders to strengthen our relations with these communities for stability in Afghanistan,” Ashraf commented.
The meeting points to a new direction in Pakistan’s policy towards Afghanistan that has traditionally been based on supporting ethnic Pashtuns.

Before leaving for Kabul, he told journalists talks with Afghan officials would involve political and trade relations including the peace process. He added that he will also raise the issue of cross border attacks on Pakistani territory. These attacks are on the increase and have caused military causalities. The Pakistani Taliban led by Mowlana Fazlullah have admitted to carrying out the attacks from suspected sanctuaries in Konar province of Afghanistan.

On his visit, the Prime Minister also attended the first trilateral summit between Afghanistan, Pakistan and United Kingdom.

The post Pakistan Premier Holds Talks With Opposition Alliance In Kabul appeared first on Politact.

Context

Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) recently issued a threat to the three main political parties of Pakistan, warning them that their candidates will be targeted in the elections to be held in May. These parties are Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), Muttahida Quami Movement (MQM) and Awami National Party (ANP). Furthermore, TTP alerted people to stay away from political gatherings linked to these political groups.

Analysis

The question is how lightly or seriously should these threats be taken. Moreover, what would be the likely impact of these warnings on the election process of Pakistan?
Pakistan’s military is certainly not taking the threat lightly. Reportedly the operations being carried on in Khyber and Orakzai Agencies, including those in Karachi, are directly linked with preempting any serious attempts by TTP to disrupt the elections. It should be noted that in the period leading up to the last elections, the assassination of Benazir Bhutto in December 2007, allegedly carried out by Baitullah Mehsud, swung the sympathy vote in favor of PPP.

Despite large attacks carried out by TTP during the previous elections, it was unable to interrupt the democratic process from working its way through. However, to claim outright that they were unable to influence the election outcome would not be fully correct.

Thus, the current threat cannot be taken lightly. Despite doubts about their capability, TTP has proven through attacks on the nation’s most sensitive military bases that they have the ability to instill devastating blows. Just last December; senior minister of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Bashir Ahmad Bilour was assassinated in Peshawar during a political event. At the time, TTP spokesperson had claimed the attack was just a beginning and they would intensify over time. TTP has also threatened to kill former president Pervez Musharraf, who recently returned to take part in the elections.

Because of the serious risk, PPP has already cancelled some political gatherings. According to media reports, one of the reasons Bilawal Bhutto suddenly left the country in March was also linked to threats from the extremists.

While TTP might fail once more from stopping the elections altogether, it can still impact the election results. One of the major influences TTP can force, this time, will be to scare the liberal vote away. This will by default benefit the conservative, nationalist and religious elements in the coming elections. And, consequentially, this may also influence the dynamics of political reconciliation in Afghanistan and Pakistan’s ties with India, Iran, and the US.

The post Can TTP Threats Impact Elections In Pakistan And Regional Dynamics? appeared first on Politact.

Context

Predicting the future is never easy. Major corporations and nations devote substantial efforts towards devising processes and technologies that assist in managing information and knowledge, and to help understand the future. The more accurately one can grasp the emerging world; the better one can plan and choose the course.

A related debate has to with if deductive or inductive reasoning better for this task. Furthermore, whether the right or left-brain people more suited at seeing patterns and trends and provide the clues about what is coming. One of the key shortcoming in this regard is that humanly operates from what is known. While new discoveries give further credence to the fact that there is a lot we do not know. Even the best-developed models can be thrown off by a single anomaly, as the proponents of chaos theory would claim.

A lot also depends on the assumptions and frame of reference being used to grasp a given reality. Now a day’s, media plays an important role in framing peoples’ perceptions about what that may be. Despite the limitations, the worse mistake is not to have predicted wrongly, but to have not even made indigenous attempts to understand the future. In the absence of this effort, one is prone in believing what others may conceive.

With this in mind, what would be the best way to predict the results of Pakistan’s elections, especially in a region marred by years of conflict and economic uncertainty?

Analysis

Pakistan And War And Terror

For more than a decade now, the politics of Pakistan has been disproportionately impacted by the war on terror. In addition, widespread corruption and poor governance has resulted in economic stagnation and the energy crisis. In other words, the internal and external problems of the country have become linked. The nation cannot walk away from the war on terror, and the more it stays involved; its economic and security situation worsens.

For example, two prominent thoughts have emerged about where Pakistan is heading in the US. One of them presents a pessimistic and damning view that the nation is gradually spinning out of control, extremism is spreading, and the point of no return is approaching quickly. The scholars with this view are often older and have been dealing with affairs of Pakistan for an extended period of time. One senses exasperation in their demeanor. It appears to be an after effect of having dealt with the complex Afghanistan situation and the difficult Pakistan-India relations and to make sense of it in the context of the war on terror.

A little bit optimistic version usually comes from the relatively younger intellectual community of the think tanks. The hopefulness is premised on the economic prospects the region, manifesting in the form regional trade and energy dealings. Generally, there is an emphasis on promoting the civilian government as oppose to depending a whole lot on its military.

What Else?

On the other hand, it is equally critical to understand the trends impacting the surrounding region where nationalism, conservatism and security concerns are resurgent. The developing global competition between China and the US, the impact of BRICS, and the traditional tussles between the Arabs, Persian, and the Turks, are all equally important considerations.

The consequences of climatic changes, especially the frequent flooding and predicted an acute shortage of water will have no less impact on the region as the population continues to explode.

Pakistan’s Future And Elections

The political dynamics of Pakistan, and many other places for that matter are stuck in a vicious cycle. The past and present political mistakes result in a reactionary cycle. And, the reactionary politics may not be what is required to deal with the emerging world. For example, nationalistic, conservative and religious forces are on the rise in Pakistan as well as in the Middle East. This may have to do with the war on terror, change in the global balance of power and associated economic influence. Although it is important to understand the deeper reasons producing this change, more critical is to understand where this dynamics may lead to if left unchecked.

Consider the example of Egypt. After years of Mubarak rule, Muslim Brotherhood-led government came into power. While the uprising there was spearheaded by younger liberal elements, they were not organized enough to benefit from what transpired as a result of their efforts. Now, faced with economic constraints, Mursi government is being forced to take some of the same steps Mubarak was blamed for, and in the end may also cause its decay. American economic assistance to Egypt is linked with continuing the peace treaty with Israel. The big question in these circumstances is what will follow if Mursi fails, and will the pendulum shift to liberal forces or even more radical elements.

The Demise Of Liberals

The disconnect between what the people want and the external expectations of it, if not properly managed, could prove to be devastating in the long run. And, this holds true for not only Egypt and Pakistan but for any other nation of the world. In this regard, PoliTact has noted in early analyses that the liberal space is continuously shrinking in Pakistan.

As is happening in the region, the conservative, nationalist and moderate religious elements are likely to win in Pakistan’s elections. However, they may require the help of liberals to form the government. Such a divisive polity is unlikely to be highly decisive and the governance will obviously suffer once more. In the long run, continued failure to deliver will result in more support for hard-line elements and against dealing with the west. This is not very difficult to forecast.

Predicting the results of Pakistan’s elections is thus not that hard. How to avert the expected paralysis is where most of the focus is needed. After having identified a pattern, the job of whoever is in charge is to make changes to the present course, so as to mitigate a potential risk.

The key question is how much of Pakistan’s leadership, of all shapes and forms, preparing the nation for these trends and challenges. Within this inquiry, lies another major dilemma that the leaders of both developed and developing the world are facing. Is the job of a leader to educate their voters about the most serious issues and provide them with a new vision, direction, and solution to what is not working? Or, do they just simply represent popular voices in the short term to win votes, while leading the citizens towards oblivion in the long run.

While it is important to make changes within the country, equally critical will be the transformation of Pakistan’s external environment. Other than the immediate neighborhood, the nation has little influence to change international politics. A strong ship can survive a brewing storm, but a whole lot also depends on its intensity and scale. The key is to be preparing for a storm while knowing that there always will be unknowns.

The post Predicting The Results Of Pakistan’s Elections appeared first on Politact.

Context

Pakistan conducted an international naval exercise AMAN-13 in the North Arabian Sea from March 4 to 8. It was the fourth drill in this series that began in 2007. Reportedly, 24 countries attended the opening ceremony. The American destroyer USS William P. Lawrence was amongst the ships taking part along with vessels from Australia, China, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Turkey, UAE, Britain, and Italy.

On the other hand, countries participating as observers were: Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Brazil, Canada, Egypt, Germany, Italy, Jordan, Maldives, Myanmar, Nigeria, North Sudan, Oman, Poland, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Tanzania, Turkmenistan, and Ukraine.

Speaking at the opening ceremony of this multinational exercise, Pakistan Fleet Commander Rear Admiral Hasham bin Siddique stated, “AMAN-13 will be instrumental in enhancing tactical and operational readiness amongst its participating navies.”

AMAN-13 was projected to be a routine exercise focused on combating piracy, terrorism, and the protection of shipping lanes and trade flows. However, a deeper look reveals a newfound assertiveness, momentum, and significance behind these drills. AMAN-13 and similar exercises being conducted by other states are reflective of the broader tensions around Iran’s nuclear program, a situation of Syria, and island disputes in the South China Sea.

Analysis

Regional and Global Maritime Tensions

Underneath the island disputes in the South China Sea are the tussles for the balance of naval power in the Pacific Ocean. While the defense budgets of European nations and the US are decreasing, that of China is only increasing. Furthermore, the naval forces of states like India and Japan are rapidly growing.

Pakistan’s neighbor Iran regularly conducts naval drills to showcase its preparedness and to counter any plans to attack its nuclear installations. Moreover, the country has threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz if there is such a strike. In December 2012, the alarm was raised when Israeli media reported on the presence of a Pakistan’s nuclear-armed naval ship Shamsheer at Port Sudan. According to news, the vessel was to rendezvous with two Iranian vessels and conduct maneuvers on the Red Sea.

However, the joint operation was reportedly averted under pressure from US, Saudi Arabia, and Israel. Iranian and Pakistani ships had shown up in Sudan after the October 2012 attack on an arms depot in Port Khartoum. The strike was allegedly carried out by Israel, claiming the depot was being used to store Iranian arms that were being shipped onwards to Gaza via Sinai in Egypt.

Soon afterward, in January 2013 Naval Special Forces from Pakistan and Saudi Arabia participated in a tenth joint naval exercise under Naseem Al Bahr. Earlier, in November 2012, Pakistan Navy Ship Shamsheer and P-3C Orion aircraft participated in a Turkish exercise Mavi Baline-12.

While Pakistan was busy with AMAN-13, Pakistan’s neighbor to the east, India concluded its largest naval exercise TROPEX 13 on March 1. In the recent past, India has carried out a number of such drills with the naval forces of other states that included US, Japan, and Australia. One does not have to be much creative to imagine some of the scenarios being practiced, especially in the post-Mumbai incident environment.

A Balancing Act

The recent controversy in Pakistan over the setting up of US ‘Tactical Command and Operations Center’ at the Jinnah International Airport Karachi may be linked to this lingering risk. As Pakistan-India ties improve, the extremist groups may attempt to pull-off another Mumbai style event. A US based website has claimed the tactical command center is meant to monitor Karachi and the entire coastal belt to control smuggling. The center may also be linked to the withdrawal of coalition equipment from Afghanistan.

Iran may be equally worried about this development. The downing of RQ-170 Sentinel drone in December 2011 had demonstrated the multiple purposes such assets can play. The drone reportedly flew out of Pakistan or Afghanistan to conduct surveillance over Iran. The Sentinel was also used in the operation to go after Osama bin Laden.

The increasing assertiveness of Pakistan Navy has ironically been matched by growing targeting of its assets that deal with surveillance and maritime security. This lends further proof to the fact that the agenda of TTP is more sophisticated than a rag-tag group of mercenaries can intellectually come up with or financially back. For example, in the 2011 assault on Mehran naval aviation base in Karachi, 2 P-3C Orion anti-submarine, and maritime surveillance aircrafts were destroyed. However, it should be noted that after the incident, US had offered to replace the destroyed planes. In the August 2012 strike at the Minhas airbase in Kamra, TTP targeted one of the key components of Pakistan’s airborne early warning system, Saab 2000. The advanced plane is capable of detecting high and low flying objects over a long range of about 450 kilometers, to include on the surface of the sea. On the other hand, Pakistan’s coastal line stretches about 960 kilometers.

Conclusion

While the schedules for such drills are decided much in advance, the timing of AMAN-13 was peculiar. It took place when Pakistan just handed over the Gwadar port to a Chinese government-owned firm. The country has also decided to move ahead with the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline project, while Iran announced its plans to develop an oil refinery at the Gwadar port. These developments are deeply worrisome moves for India and US.

On the other hand, the presence of China, US, and other pacific nations in the exercise, serve to calm the waters of mistrust between these countries. Through these naval maneuvers, Pakistan is playing an instrumental role in reducing tensions between China and other nations of the Orient. At the same time, such drills reduce apprehensions regarding Pakistan-China cooperation.

Moreover, it signals that while India regularly conducts naval exercises with Japan, US, and Australia, it does not necessarily mean Pakistan is isolated. Pakistan’s Navy has its role to play in the region because of its strategic location. Nonetheless, as it relates to economic and security cooperation with Iran, Pakistan will continue to confront pressure from the West as well as the Arab nations.

The post Growing Assertiveness Of Pakistan Navy And Regional Maritime Tensions appeared first on Politact.

Context

To gauge where the Afghan reconciliation presently stands has become a complex task. The process itself is quite confusing and there is no clear narrative on its various tangents. President Obama’s 2013 State of the Union focused more on the withdrawal timeline than the reconciliation itself. Similarly, at the recent meeting of NATO ministers of defense the emphasis was on how the alliance will support the Afghan mission post 2014. For all intents and purposes, the political solution part has mostly been relegated to the regional players, with other stakeholders assisting and facilitating.

In essence, there are three interconnected elements of the unfolding political settlement. One of them has to do with the American security and economic assistance to Afghanistan and Pakistan after the withdrawal. The other components focus on the tense relations between Afghanistan and Pakistan and how it impacts the talks with various factions of Taliban.

Analysis

Trilateral Talks

Different tracks of trilateral talks are underway to tackle the challenge of Afghanistan. The earlier attempts to sideline Pakistan have now been corrected. In the adjusted approach US, UK, Turkey and other NATO members are aiding talks between Pakistan and Afghanistan. For this purpose, recently a number of meetings have taken place in Paris, London and Ankara. Then there are the Gulf heavyweights of Qatar and Saudi Arabia that have also been facilitating talks with the Taliban with their own strategic interests in mind. Meanwhile, India and Iran are pushing their initiatives. However, Iran lacks Western backing, while in the case of India, Pakistan has been cautious.

Talking to Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan

As far as the talks with Taliban are concerned, Afghanistan is leading talks with the Afghan factions, while Pakistan is now gearing up politically to tackle the Taliban on its side. There is also the Afghan Taliban political office in Doha that has been a source of more confusion than clarity, when it comes to presenting Taliban position.

The Karzai government tasked the Afghan Ulema Council to spearhead dialogue with Afghan Taliban. However, the Council has an inherent challenge, the Afghan Taliban does not consider the Western backed Afghan government as legitimate. There are also reports that Afghan Taliban have adopted delaying tactics as it considers itself to have the upper hand on the ground. The dynamics of the upcoming Afghan elections and Karzai’s fate is also at play.

The delegation of the Afghan Ulema Council that visited Pakistan in early February immediately ran in to trouble with its counterpart in Pakistan. Pakistan’s Ulema, especially Maulana Tahirul Ashrafi and Sami-ul-Haq demanded the inclusion of Afghan Taliban in the upcoming joint conference of Pak-Afghan Ulemas. Furthermore, Pakistan’s Ulema were reluctant to criticize the Afghan Taliban or to issue any Fatwa concerning this. The joint Ulema conference scheduled for early March has now reportedly been delayed.

The arrest of TTP commander Maulvi Faqir on February 19 and the refusal of Afghan authorities to hand him over to Pakistan, has clearly established another thorny challenge between Pakistan and Afghanistan. His arrest from eastern Afghanistan validates the claim that TTP is operating against Pakistan from Afghan territory and the authorities there have now established a dangerous leverage against Pakistan. This tactics is not much different than how Pakistan has used Afghan Taliban.

“Islamabad says that there is no bilateral agreement on exchange of prisoners. Basing on this if you refuse to hand over Mulla Baradar (the Taliban deputy) then Maulvi Faqir should remain in Afghanistan”, commented Afghan Ambassador to Pakistan Umer Daudzai after the reported arrest. This statement also negates the impression that Pakistan and Afghan authorities cooperated in apprehending Maulvi Faqir.

Pakistan’s Domestic Politics and Taliban

Since the initiation of the war on terror, Pakistan has floated between political and military solution to the problem of Taliban. To deal with the various factions of Taliban that operate across the loosely controlled Durand line, Pakistan remained under tremendous US pressure to act sternly against such groups, especially against Haqqani network that maneuvered from FATA. To deal with the issue, the country adopted a framework of good vs. bad Taliban.

Now that US and NATO have turned around to a political approach, Pakistan is going all out to deal politically with the bad Taliban, the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). On the other hand, as noted by PoliTact in an earlier article, TTP recognizes the sea change in the political and security landscape of the region, which makes its prospects shaky. If Afghan Taliban reconcile and become part of the future political dispensation of the country, TTP will be isolated to face the military pressure. With the involvement of regional players in the Afghan political solution, TTP faces even more seclusion. This stark reality has perhaps pushed TTP to offer a peace gauntlet. The proposition offered by TTP requires Pakistan’s leading politicians to act as guarantors. Stakes are high for politicians in Pakistan as the TTP triggered violence can disrupt the upcoming elections

Thus, favorable global political atmosphere, including election prospects, are pushing leading Pakistani politicians and mainstream religious parties to move towards political reconciliation with TTP. War against terror has remained largely unpopular in Pakistan and has been conducted for the most part covertly far from public buy-in. Moreover, the politicians in the country, as in other places, are prone to voice popular voices during election times.

The Future of FATA

This, however, does not mean TTP is without options. In absence of political understanding, it may move closer to other sectarian and jihadi groups operating in Pakistan. In essence, the political reconciliation in Afghanistan provides an opportunity to prevent this from taking place. Tied to the TTP issue is the enduring challenge of how FATA constitutionally exists with in Pakistan. This may also have to be worked out in the larger frame of things, and good ties with Afghanistan and India may be a prerequisite to sort this out. On the other hand, surfacing of the comment made by none other than the new US secretary of defense has further validated Pakistan’s claims on Indian role in Afghanistan and FATA.

Conclusion

With Al Qaeda diminished in the region and compelled by its fiscal pressures, US appears to be extracting itself from the regional tussles for the time being, while moving more towards behind the scenes role. As it does this, it is increasingly clear that Pakistan has a central role, and a lot at stake, in making the Afghan reconciliation a success.

The post The Path to Great Reconciliation In Afghanistan appeared first on Politact.

Context

Pakistan certainly seems to be passing through one of it toughest phases, with turmoil internally and in the neighborhood. Since the dismemberment of the country in 1971, the region has gone through four decades of continuous warfare. This has included the Iranian revolution of 1979, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and the Iran-Iraq War of the 80s, the Afghan civil war of the 90s, and the present phase that began since 9/11.

It appears more than a simple coincidence that two of Pakistan’s immediate neighbors to the west, Iran, and Afghanistan, were invaded at about the same time. In any event, in both conflicts religion got interjected. The repercussions of this are still playing out in the region and beyond. There was also a concern that after Afghanistan, Pakistan might become the next victim of the dreaded Domino Theory. Moreover, US also wanted to check the religious influence emanating from Iran to spread any further. That apprehension continues to bedevil the region.

Analysis

Soviet Invasion Of Afghanistan And Iranian Revolution

While a lot is heard about the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, most accounts fail to mention the Iranian revolution started almost simultaneously. The Khomeini led rebellion effectively transformed the nature of the pro-American regime and this change impacted the politics of the Islamic world to this day. Only a year later, in 1980, Iran-Iraq war commenced and lasted until 1988, almost up to the time when Soviets started to withdraw from Afghanistan.

During this phase, while Iran was moving out from the American influence, Pakistan was getting fully embedded into it. The nation helped facilitate the Jihad against the Soviets with the assistance of the Arabs and the US. The role of Pakistan in the Iran-Iraq war, however, was based more on maintaining a delicate balance.

Pakistan went out of its way in helping protect the Gulf States against the Iranian threat, and according to some estimates, Zia-ul-Haq placed close to 40,000 military personnel in Saudi Arabia for security and training purposes. This, however, did not occur at the cost of Iran. Reportedly, Pakistan also supplied weapons to Iran, and both neighbors supported the Afghan Jihad, albeit different factions.

Global Power Politics

The global powers were playing a similar game. For example, while Russians were intermittently supplying weapons to Iraq, the Iran-Contra affair proved that the US was also equipping the Iranians. Iraq had earlier broken relations with the US over the Arab-Israeli war of 1967, which were not restored until 1986. Nonetheless, shady dealing had continued between Saddam and the US.

What ended the Iran-Iraq war according to many analysts was increased the volatility of the sea-lanes, plus a fear that Iran was beginning to have an upper hand in the conflict. This would have had reverberations throughout the Middle East, including Afghanistan and Pakistan.

While Saddam’s decision to invade Iran in 1980 is believed to be a miscalculation, he also feared that a strong religious Iran would disturb the Shia-Sunni balance of Iraq. Saddam repeated his misjudgment when he invaded Kuwait in August 1990 but was met with a different response than his earlier mistake. Ever since Iraq has come under American-led intervention twice, and despite all past attempts to contain Iran, its sway has grown. In the end, it was the US that disturbed the ethnic balance of Iraq and Afghanistan. And, at the same time, the fear of Iran has helped in moving the Arabs even closer to US and Pakistan.

In this sense, there is continuity in the western policy of both propping Iran’s influence, and at the same time preventing it from becoming a dominant power in the Middle East. In Afghanistan, this has translated into checking any single player, whether Iran or Pakistan, to overshadow. And, lately, Indian influence has been introduced as a balancing factor.

What To Expect In Pakistan-Iran Ties

This historical context only raises the importance of Pakistan-Iran ties. While the US lost Iran in 1979, the importance of Pakistan has only increased. 1979 proved to be a crucial year as far as Pakistan’s relations with Iran are concerned. With the introduction of religion in both the Iranian revolution and Afghan jihad, secularism took a back seat. To this date, the two events have transformed and divided the politics of the region and also resulted in the birth of Al Qaeda.

Between the period of 1947 to 1971, Pakistan and Iran enjoyed very closely ties. In both 1965 and 1971 wars against India, Iran supported Pakistan diplomatically, militarily and financially. The country also offered military equipment, training, and intelligence to Pakistan in quashing the Baloch insurgency in mid-70s.

Now, almost a decade after 9/11, Pakistan-Iran ties stand at a crucial juncture, as do the US-Pakistan ties. President Obama’s reelection presents a hope that he may now take a different approach towards Iran. If an alternative route is indeed chosen, there is an opportunity for tremendous regional cooperation and economic boom, and the vision for the ‘New Silk Road’ can really blossom. There remain apprehensions that Russia and China may benefit more from this boom than the Europeans and the Americans.

However, if fear plays a major role, it would bring even more conflict and bust. The new sanctions connected to the Iran Freedom and Counter-Proliferation Act (IFCPA) are expected to go into effect from July 2013. Under the provisions of this act, US would impose sanctions against any entity conducting energy, shipping and shipbuilding dealings, and port operations with Iran. Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline project and the development of Chabahar port are most likely to be impacted by the new sanctions.

Such acts will impede regional cooperation and will hurt the economies of Afghanistan, India and Pakistan. Moreover, they will challenge President Obama’s claim made during his inaugural address that ‘ A decade of war is now ending,’ and that “We (Americans), the people, still believe that enduring security and lasting peace do not require perpetual war.”

As these choices loom on the horizon, Pakistan may end up invoking the paradigm it has consistently followed in its foreign policy; good ties with the US should not be at the cost of friendly neighbors and elements.

The post Outlook For Pakistan-Iran Ties appeared first on Politact.

By Brigadier (Rtd.) Imran Malik

The strategic environment in Pakistan is evolving at a frenetic pace. There are multiple scenarios that could unfold. Is Pakistan re-assessing the multifarious threats it faces and repositioning itself accordingly? Is it choosing its enemies anew? Is the Pakistan Army in the throes of a strategic re-orientation? Or is it the subtle but sure consummation of an Indo-US grand strategic design for South Asia?

The chapter on Sub-Conventional Warfare in the Green Book appears to have generated a great deal of discussion and debate. The general perception is that the Pakistan Army may have initiated a basic paradigm shift in its strategic orientation. Its doctrine now apparently implies that the militants within pose a greater threat than India. The implication then would be that its enemy number one has ostensibly changed, that India is no longer the primary existentialist threat to Pakistan; that the internal threat posed by the militants has acquired greater dimensions than the one posed by nuclear India!

And that would make for a massive paradigm shift in our strategic orientation by any standards!

Analysis

The quantum and quality of threats posed by our enemies are assessed by their respective intents and capabilities. It is always prudent to base the threat perceptions on their capabilities rather than their intents, which can change very quickly. India holds strong well equipped nuclear capable armed forces; anywhere between eighty to ninety percent of which are either deployed or poised against Pakistan. To date there has been no discernible paradigm shift in India’s strategic orientation away from Pakistan. There has been no mitigation of threat from India whatsoever. And there appears to be little reason for Pakistan to volunteer to do so.  Thus far Pakistan Army’s strategic orientation has been rightly focused on the more ominous threat – India. And that is where it should stay.

Of the two major threats to Pakistan, India poses the clearer and more potent one; it has the nuclear and conventional capability to back it up and the political will and intent to do so. The militants on the other hand could match India in the ferocity of intent but certainly not in capability. The issue then boils down to both threats being real with one (militants) being the present, immediate and tangible one and the other (Indian) being the clearer, more potent yet latent one.

So, a threat with matching intent but a far inferior capability is emerging as the primary one. Will it be prudent and justifiable for a nuclear Pakistan (with more than half a million strong army) to go in for a massive strategic re-orientation just because of the threat posed by a few thousand rag tag heretics? At best they could be considered a more immediate threat and dealt with accordingly.

However, it is critically imperative for Pakistan to retain strategic balance at all times.

As a matter of fact the Pakistan Armed Forces have the intent and capability to squash this militant threat as they have so valiantly demonstrated in Swat, South Waziristan Agency, Malakand, Dir, Khyber Orakzai, Kurram Agencies and elsewhere in Pakistan. Only the Pakistan Government must continue to demonstrate a matching political will.

If this strategic re-orientation is manifested in letter and spirit then it may have other enormous and far reaching implications for the Pakistan Armed Forces. It could well be the first step towards Pakistan’s capitulation to the US grand strategic design for South Asia.  If India were not deemed to be the primary threat then Pakistan may find it difficult to justify maintaining such large conventional and nuclear forces! It may be pressurized by the vested western interests to “right size” them to match the declared primary threats! It would certainly raise questions on the necessity of a nuclear arsenal. That will tantamount to attacking Pakistan’s center of gravity, its bedrock! And that in effect will be the manifestation of the real, the strongest existentialist threat to Pakistan!

It could also be the consummation of a deep strategic maneuver by the Indo-US Combine. If a change in Pakistan Army’s doctrine forces it to take its eyes off India and start looking inwards it would be exactly in line with what the US has always demanded of Pakistan. It was and is in the US’ larger interest that Pakistan should concentrate its total energies in combating the militant threat within even at the cost of denuding its eastern borders. This would free up India to concentrate on counter balancing China and not be distracted by Pakistan who in turn would be kept embroiled with the militants. Pakistan Army’s balance will shift westwards and away from India. And that will be to the abiding benefit of India and the US.

A reduction in Pakistan’s conventional and nuclear prowess will also confer upon India the unchallenged leadership of the South Asian region and may eventually reduce Pakistan to the status of a vassal state of India. This will then create the conditions for implementing further US designs like the New Silk Road Project (NSRP) – which is already practically operational though in a disjointed manner.  The Afghans are already trading (exporting only) with India through Torkham and Wagah, while India is exporting to Afghanistan and beyond from Karachi and Torkham/Chaman. All that needs to be done now or soon is to allow India to export goods through Wagah instead of Karachi and it will have its and the US’ dream of manifesting the NSRP fulfilled – out maneuvering Pakistan clinically without any matching quid pro quo!

COAS General Kiyani has done well to clear the air by declaring that the armed forces will cater for the full threat spectrum – India as well as the militancy. A balanced approach in our strategic orientation is the order of the day. The militants may be the more immediate and bothersome threat but India is certainly the more potent and genuinely existentialist one.

Sure as the sun rises from the East so does our primary threat!

The author is a retired Brigadier and Pakistan’s former Defence Attache’ to Australia and New Zealand and currently a Faculty Member at National University of Sciences and Technology (NUST) – NUST Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies (NIPCONS). This is article was previously published in The Nation, Pakistan. Reprinted with permission.

The post Pakistan’s Strategic Environment And Its Threat Perception appeared first on Politact.

Context

With the carnage of Quetta and Swat in perspective, a question to ponder over is: at a time when the US is withdrawing from Afghanistan, why is Pakistan setting off? At a juncture, when elections are just around the corner, why has Tahirul Qadri decided to launch a long march? Most importantly, what has caused Pakistan’s military to change its threat perception after more than a decade fighting the war on terror?

There are two prevalent views on what will happen in Pakistan once the US withdraws from Afghanistan. These two differing outlooks complicate the politics of the nation and will very well define its future course.

Analysis

Two Schools Of Thought

One of these schools proclaims that once NATO forces pull out, the motivation for Afghan Taliban will wither away, and things will move back to normal. The same holds true for the Pakistani and Punjabi Taliban residing in FATA and other parts of Pakistan. This has been a key position of nationalists and conservative elements (Salafi and Deobandi) in Pakistan. Political parties such as the Pakistan’s Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) has consistently favored a political solution to the Afghan quagmire that has spilled over into the country. This approach and conceptualization to Pakistan’s present political, economic and security challenges also a hold that the threat Pakistan faces is primarily external that desires to trigger a civil war with in the country.

The other school believes that once NATO troops depart from Afghanistan, Islamist forces will get stronger, and this will reinforce similar elements on the Pakistan side of the border. These groups include TTP and other loosely affiliated sectarian militants, including Indian-focused jihadists. This stance is popular among the liberal elements and ethnic minorities of Pakistan that have repeatedly felt the brunt of deadly and brutal extremist onslaught. Just like the US, India, and Afghanistan, this construct stipulates the threat Pakistan is facing mostly internal not external.

Afghan Reconciliation And Pakistan’s Threat Perception

While Afghanistan reconciliation is in the works, NATO efforts are also underway to counter the risk posed by Pakistan-based extremists to the region and beyond. For these efforts to work, however, has required the acquiescence of Pakistan’s military. In this regard, US has carried out a long campaign convincing the nation the danger it faces is not from outside, but from elements within the country that also targeting NATO forces in Afghanistan. The unrelenting lobbying has now produced results, with Pakistan assured of its role in the Afghan reconciliation, and Pakistan-India ties normalizing, its military announced a change in its threat perception. Barely a week later, however, Pakistan-India tensions are on the rise due to incidents on the LOC.

Coincidentally, shift in Pakistan’s threat perception is accompanied by an increase in drone strikes in FATA against both good and bad Taliban. Another evidence of the policy shift was the elimination of Mullah Nazir for which, other than the customary, there was no strong reaction from the Pakistan’s side. During his meeting with Karzai in Washington, President Obama stated that there is growing recognition of the risk posed by the extremists in Pakistan. Obviously, the extremists sense this transformation and will attempt to preempt it. The upsurge of deadly attacks across Pakistan, especially in Peshawar, Swat and Quetta, appear to be a part of this. Far from public awareness and media attention, a dangerous stage in Pakistan’s history may have commenced.

Pakistan’s Politics And Role In The War On Terror

With the war on terror transitioning to a smarter and economical phase, President Obama also declared recently the Afghan dilemma could not be resolved without Pakistan’s cooperation. One cannot overlook the link between the next phase in Afghanistan and who comes to power in Pakistan.

The design of Tahirul Qadri’s long march may be to circumvent the nationalists from significantly impacting the politics of Pakistan after the elections. In PoliTact’s assessment, a coalition of nationalist and conservative Islamic elements, otherwise, is highly probable in the coming elections. These forces are strongly opposed to Pakistan’s involvement in the war against terror and drone strikes. Qadri’s long march could change this scenario and move the election results towards an alliance of liberal and moderate Islamists (Sufi-Barelvi) as the country takes on the groups posing the internal threat.

The thrust of this maneuver may have been to prevent an Egypt like scenario playing out in nuclear-armed Pakistan. In Egypt, and in other Arab Spring impacted countries, it is feared that the extreme Islamists will eventually outmaneuver the moderate Islamists to take on the helms of power, the ultimate nightmare for the security perception of Israel. The lesson from Egypt is once such elements get a hold of power, it is extremely difficult to dislodge them. The Gulf States are also weary of Muslim Brotherhood’s attempt to export Arab Spring to their countries. The risk of such a scenario playing out in Pakistan is too high to be ignored.

Consider, for example, the leaders of Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) traveled to Egypt in June 2011 for a four-day visit at the invitation of the chief of Ikhwannul Muslimoon, Dr. Muhammad Badei. According to media reports, both sides agreed to closer cooperation between Islamic movements in different parts of the world. Such linkages and contacts are probably being closely watched.

For a long-time, Western policies have been driven by the threat of Islamists taking over Pakistan’s nuclear weapons. Moreover, if Pakistan was to distance itself from the war on terror, NATO’s emerging strategy would be endangered at a delicate stage; when the alliance is eager to exit Afghanistan. In a nutshell, as NATO withdraws, it wants Pakistan to take on the fight against extremist and militant elements with in the country. Without political and public consensus, however, this scenario can lead to increased polarization and towards a dreadful and deadly prospect of a civil war.

The post Afghan Reconciliation, War On Terror And Future Politics of Pakistan appeared first on Politact.

Context

The brazen attack on Peshawar Air Base on December 15 and the assassination of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s Senior Minister Bashir Ahmed Bilour on December 22 has initiated another round of media debate in Pakistan. The discussion is revolving around the intentions of Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). A dominant theme emerging in Pakistan’ s media is that these attacks are to create enough upheaval in the country to make it impossible to hold elections, scheduled for early next year. On the international side, the concern is that such attacks raise the specter of extremists taking over Pakistan’s nukes, the ultimate nightmare for the West. The same apprehensions are playing out in other parts of the Muslim world; such as, preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and stopping the extremists in Syria from taking over its chemical weapons. Not to forget similar fears led to the first Iraq war.

There is, however, a need for a fresh look at TTP’s strategic goals, especially as US shifts to a lighter footprint in Afghanistan beyond 2014. While Pakistan and US have changed their strategies to match the ground realities, one should not expect anything less from the much adept Taliban. Moreover, It’s critical to understand the nature of TTP’s ties with Afghan Taliban. If the Afghan reconciliation goes well, TTP has the most to loose, and it’s in fact now struggling to remain relevant.

Analysis

 What Is TTP Up To?

The aims and objectives of TTP need to be first understood through the prism of their worldview. Secondly, as a reaction to the counter strategies adopted by Pakistan and US. And, at a third level, its plans are also impacted by the nature of Pak-US, Pak-India, and Pak-Iran ties.

The ebb and flow of TTP terror activities appear to be related to the level of cooperation between Pakistan and US on the War on Terror. For example, a period of calm prevailed after the country suspended the Afghan-NATO supply lines.

In the present atmosphere, the uptick in TTP activities may be related to the following reasons:

• TTP may have received inside information on a possible deal between Pakistan and US, regarding conducting military operations against the extremists. The early December meeting of Khar and General Kiyani with Hillary Clinton and other senior NATO officials in Brussels, may have been read as an indication of this. Moreover, the get together of Pak-US Defense Consultative Group was held in Rawalpindi from December 3 to 4. These meetings led US government to reimburse $688 million to Pakistan for keeping its military in the tribal areas.
• The attack on Mullah Nazir on November 29 may have been seen by TTP as an attempt by Pakistan and US to divide various factions of Taliban. Therefore, TTP has launched a counter offensive.
• Improving Pakistan-India ties, without any visible shift on India’s part regarding the Kashmir issue. Pakistan’s interior minister Rehman Malik visited India on December 14 to signal the go-ahead for the new visa regime, signed with India back in September.
• Most importantly, to dent the fast smoothening Afghan reconciliation process. The 7th trilateral meeting between Afghanistan, Pakistan and Turkey, held from Dec 11 and 12, was impacted by the attack on the Afghan intelligence chief on December 6th. Afghan president alleged the planning of the attack took place in Quetta.

TTP, Afghan Taliban And Afghan Reconciliation

The Afghan reconciliation will most directly be impacted by the ambiguous nature of ties between TTP and Afghan Taliban. The general understanding is that the focus of Afghan Taliban attention is in the fight against coalition forces across the border, and they want nothing to do with attacks with in Pakistan. On the other hand, TTP not only assists Afghan Taliban but also aggressively targets the Pakistani state. This difference in approach has been a hurdle in the proper functioning of Shura-e-Muraqabah, composed of delegates from Pakistani Taliban (good and bad), Afghan Taliban, and Al Qaeda.

In their ties, the confusing part relates to the kind of strategic support Pakistani Taliban provides to Afghan Taliban. A pattern repeatedly observed is whenever there is the talk of the military operation in North Waziristan against Haqqani network and other extremists, cross-border attacks from Nuristan and Konar into Swat increase, especially targeting Pakistan army. So while Afghan Taliban might not get directly involved in going after targets in Pakistan, it may be using TTP for that purpose and to distract and cajole Pakistan from going overboard in its cooperation with NATO and US.

This is somewhat similar to the role Pakistan Army gets blamed for its stance towards Afghan Taliban. Pakistan has been accused of turning a blind eye towards Afghan Taliban that has sanctuaries in FATA. The Afghan government and NATO are now blamed for a similar attitude towards Fazlullah faction of Swat Taliban that have taken refuge in the North East Afghanistan.

What To Expect Next?

Thus, it can be presumed that if Afghan reconciliation and US withdrawal are not managed well, TTP might become a tool in containing Pakistan’s influence. Any semblance of unity between Afghan Taliban and TTP represents a bad omen for both Afghanistan and Pakistan. In this regard, how the TTP and Afghan Taliban ties evolve will have a key impact on the Afghan reconciliation. No wonder, General Kayani and other senior and military and intelligence officials have reportedly emphasized facilitating a grand reconciliation between various Afghan factions is now the top priority of Pakistan.

On the other hand, if the Afghan peace process goes well and Afghan Taliban put their arms down, TTP is likely to end in a tough spot. In such an eventuality, it is likely to gravitate more towards Al Qaeda and other Jihadists. To remain relevant, TTP will do whatever it can to disrupt the Afghan reconciliation and to destabilize Pakistan. How the Pakistan-India ties unfold will, in turn, determine the fate of Indian-centric jihadist and their collaboration with TTP and Al Qaeda.

The post Afghan Reconciliation And The Perilous Outlook For TTP appeared first on Politact.

Context
From early indications, new wave of terror attacks is underway in Pakistan. The high profile attack on Peshawar Air Base took place on Saturday December 15, leaving around 15 dead. This was followed up by a deadly bomb blast in Jamrud on Monday December 17 that left about 21 dead and 80 wounded. Today grenades were launched in front of the army recruitment center in Risalpur, wounding 10. Reportedly, 3 soldiers also died in an ambush in Laki Marwat. Meanwhile, a total of 5 woman health workers administering polio drops were gunned down, 4 in Karachi and 1 in Peshawar.

Clearly, in the aftermath of the opening of NATO’s supply line, something has changed in Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan’s (TTP) calculus that has caused them to initiate a fresh onslaught. The reasoning could be:

• TTP may have received information on a possible deal between Pakistan and US, regarding conducting military operations against the extremists. The meeting of Khar and General Kiyani with Hillary Clinton and other senior NATO officials in Brussels, in early December, was an evidenced of this. Moreover, the get together of Pak-US Defense Consultative Group was held in Rawalpindi from December 3 to 4. These meetings led US government to reimburse $700 million to Pakistan for keeping its military in the tribal areas.
• The attack on Mullah Nazir on November 29 may have been seen by TTP as an attempt by Pakistan and US to divide various factions of Taliban. Therefore, TTP decided to launch a counter attack.
• Improving Pakistan-India ties, without any visible shift on India’s part regarding the Kashmir issue. Pakistan’s interior minister Rehman Malik visited India on December 14 to signal the go ahead for the new visa regime, signed with India back in September.
• To dent the fast smoothening Afghan reconciliation process. The 7th trilateral meeting between Afghanistan, Pakistan and Turkey, held from Dec 11 and 12, was impacted by the attack on the Afghan intelligence chief on December 6th. Afghan president alleged the planning of the attack took place in Quetta.

The post What’s Behind The Attack On Peshawar Airport And The New Terror Wave? appeared first on Politact.