Only the Pakistanis met their objectives though in ways unexpected. Part of the munitions and funds sent to Pakistan were redirected to the Taliban to combat US and British troops. It is a reality that defies 8 years of Pakistan's designation as a "US ally." It was like a hunter handing over his rifle to become the hunted a few clicks away. An estimated 1,100 coalition personnel have died in a campaign that is seeing neither victory nor an end in sight. Afghan casualties have accrued a collateral value in the extra digits.
There was a method and a Pakistani strategy to this madness. For years, it kept the war on the Af side of the Af-Pak theatre.
Af-Pak describes Pashtun lands straddling the colonial-era Durand Line -- the international boundary separating Afghanistan and Pakistan. Under the Taliban umbrella, ethnic Pashtun jihadis have effectively reversed previous coalition surges to restrict 47,000 U.S. and 33,000 non-U.S. troops to their bases, urban zones, and the occasional sortie.
The writ that runs in the Afghan hinterland is the one laid down by the Taliban. Forgotten is yesterday's trinity of terror: Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and Mullah Muhammad Omar.
Coalition forces may need up to 500,000 troops to pacify Afghanistan, and this number will never be forthcoming. With a semblance of an urban-rural détente in force, the Taliban has had enough wiggle room to train their guns on the Pak side of the Pashtun equation.
Their modus operandi is simple. It is a carrot, stick and Quran approach, perfected by the Pakistani Directorate for Inter Services Intelligence (ISI). First, sow dissatisfaction over pre-existing conditions such as poverty, lack of basic amenities, pandemic corruption and the proximity of "foreign infidels." Then demand Shariah law as the cure-all solution. Suicide bombings and attacks on government targets, including schools, will drive home the point.
With Shariah law in place, the Taliban appoint themselves as judge, jury and executioner to achieve total control. The Swat Valley came under Taliban control in this fashion after the Pakistani government capitulated to a deal on Feb 16, 2009.
According to the New York Times, "the Obama administration, (when) informed of the accord, 'showed understanding of our (Pakistani government) strategy.' "[1]
Appeasement never works. It is costly, retributive and encourages the enemy. The Taliban moved to replicate their success in neighboring areas. The current conflict in the Swat Valley began last month when the army attempted to roll back Taliban inroads into the Buner and Dir districts.
Around 4,000 Taliban militants are battling 15,000 Pakistani troops, just 60 miles from the Pakistani capital Islamabad. The Pakistani army is claiming success, with 1,000 militants killed within the last 48 hours. Neutral observers suspect this figure includes a disproportionate number of civilian casualties. If true, this will fuel the insurgency further.
If these militants succeed, Af-Pak might turn into a Terrorist Central for a future Islamic Caliphate. It will be a Taliban Afghanistan with nuclear weapons and a larger geographic depth, part of which lies on sovereign Pakistani soil.
In reality, these ethnic Pashtun Jihadis have a simple demand: Greater autonomy and virtual independence for Pashtun lands on the Pak side, and ultimately a unified Pashtun-stan unencumbered by international borders and foreign armies.
If these demands are not met, a grand prize of 60-120 Pakistani nukes awaits to be liberated. Any few of them might guarantee Pashtun aspirations across the Durand Line, until of course Pentagon takes stock and plots the next course of action.
Terrorist Central
Historically, the Pashtuns have had little inclination to expand their jihad abroad. They will, however, provide sanctuary and jihadi incubation centers to "Al Qaeda" and assorted Islamic terror groups. After the Soviet presence ended, foreign fighters from the Afghan theatre went on to inspire havoc in Bosnia, Kosovo, Dagestan, Chechnya, Somalia, Yemen, Bali, London, Mumbai and, most famously, New York on Sept 11.
Similar Nato dalliances with these jihadis ended up with the creation of two Balkan entities endowed with the freedom to traffic drugs, arms and white slaves throughout Europe.[2] These failed entities were the inspiration behind Liam Neeson's thriller Taken.
The media, however, had consistently portrayed Bosnian and Kosovo thugs as the "good guys" liberated by Nato. Heroin from Afghanistan routinely end up in the Balkans for redistribution throughout Europe and the United States.
Opium crops in the Helmand, Kandahar and Zabul provinces constitute a $300 million annual tax bonanza for the Taliban. The warlords profiting from this poppy revolution are in Kabul, in the "democratic" government of President Hamid Karzai. If Nato needs a fantasy that it brought "freedom" to Afghanistan, these gentlemen provide both the veneer and, needless to say, the opiate.
It is a known fact that "drugs are a multi-billion-dollar business in Afghanistan, accounting for a staggering half of the country's economic output. That is an export value of $3.4bn in 2008 alone." [3]
Coalition forces have neither the will, the manpower nor the funding to fight this war. If containers of drugs perennially sneak through NATO's eyes in the sky, on the ground and over ports, a few disassembled nuke components should escape detection.
Pakistan is doing its part.
"Without any public U.S. reproach, Pakistan is building two of the developing world's largest plutonium production reactors, which experts say could lead to improvements in the quantity and quality of the country's nuclear arsenal, now estimated at 60 to 80 (estimates vary) weapons." [4]
The French found this idea romantic. According to a Xinhua news report, French President Nicolas Sarkozy just agreed to a civilian nuclear cooperation with Islamabad. He was reportedly convinced that "what can be done for India can be done for Pakistan as well."[5]
Sarkozy was referring to the recent Indo-US nuclear accord. A nuke, however, is not a mistress. Both can be costly and incendiary, no doubt, but they are not the same.
He is due to clinch the deal with Pakistan in September, assuming for a moment that Pakistan remains intact until then.
Taliban's Potential Nukes
With militants rampaging closer to their comfort zones, the Pakistanis remain unfazed. They are on the verge of completing two nuclear facilities near the town of Khushab, 110 miles south of Islamabad.
If you look at the map, Khushab is closer to militant Pashtun strongholds to its west in the Northwest Frontier Province (NWFP).
The buffer zone happens to be the north-south contiguous Punjab districts of Mianwali and Bhakkar. That's it! If a Pashtun insurgency flares up all over the NWFP, and infiltration begins in the heavily militarized Khushab district, the Pakistanis might safely relocate its nukes by lobbing them over to India.
It was in Khushab that a notable meeting was held a month before Sept 11. Former head of the Khushab project Sultan Bashirrudan Mahmood and former head of the facility (bomb design) Chaudri Andul Majeed met Osama bin Laden and his deputy Ayman al-Zawahiri for a campfire tutorial on nuclear weapons assemblage. Tea was served!
This nugget was gleaned from the memoirs of former CIA director George Tenet. He, along with others, rewarded Pakistan nonetheless. The reactors at Khushab powered ahead, and they are speculated to begin producing tritium, a vital element for the development of thermonuclear weapons or Hydrogen bombs.
"There's been $11 billion in aid sent to Pakistan publicly since 2001 and perhaps as much again in covert aid." [6] So much for healthcare, poverty alleviation, and education aid in the United States. Some of the monies sent to Islamabad accelerated Pakistan's nuclear program. Spare change, amounting to tens of millions, was funneled to the Taliban.
The US-Israeli hysteria over the Iranian nuclear program took our eyes away from the 120 -- and counting - Hiroshimas being prepared by this great ally in the war on terror. Unless Israeli and US officials were present at the Khushab tête-à-tête, I see no reason why Tel Aviv should consider itself immune from a possible attack.
In a private warning to President Barack Obama, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh reportedly named the sites where the Talibans had gained control of Pakistan's nuclear weapons. [7] Will this tip-off be roundly ignored?
Maybe, nobody cares about the manifest dangers. In every dire situation, there are winners, collateral figures and grand prizes.
The Geopolitical Prize
In a replay of the 19th century Great Game played between Imperial Russia and Great Britain, the prize this time may be the lesser-known Pakistani province of Balochistan. If Pakistan spirals out of control, this sprawling province may level back the sagging war equation.
Writer Pepe Escobar states various reasons why this episode on the Global War on Terror (GWOT) centers on Balochistan. [8]
Balochistan is an "immense desert comprising almost 48% of Pakistan's area, rich in uranium and copper, potentially very rich in oil, and producing more than one-third of Pakistan's natural gas, it accounts for less than 4% of Pakistan's 173 million citizens."
Its Arabian seaport of Jiwani lies strategically close to the Straits of Hormuz, near the Iranian border, while the larger port of Gwadar was developed by China as part of its "String of Pearls" strategy. Gwadar is supposed to tap into the energy wealth of Balochistan, neighboring Iran, the Arab Middle East and possibly Central Asia, and relay them to China. Strategically, this will deny India the same privilege. A Chinese naval presence here will, in due time, challenge US predominance in the region, especially if a conflict erupts with Iran.
The Baloch's have long endured discrimination from Islamabad and complain that their lands have been reduced into a mining colony. They are no friend of China and their aspirations for either independence or autonomy is not inimical to US interests. An autonomous Balochistan has the added advantage of inspiring breakaway sentiments among their brethren in the Sistan-Balochistan province of eastern Iran.
Strategically, an independent Balochistan would restrict Terrorist Central to the Pashtun Af-Pak zone. It will also open up overland logistical routes to the embattled coalition forces in Afghanistan. Nato supplies offloaded in the port city of Karachi are trucked to depots at the Af-Pak border in Peshawar, where, they have been lately subjected to relentless militant attacks. Fewer and fewer trucks are passing through the famed Khyber Pass to reach Kabul.
Ironically, Nato now relies on airlifted supplies from Central Asia with Russian help.
Those who see a grand Pipelinestan conspiracy in Uncle Sam's presence here discount the viability, of lack thereof, of piping oil and gas from Central Asia to the Indian Ocean across Pashtun lands north of Balochistan.
That is, unless:
1) There are no Pashtuns left in Af-Pak.
2) A grand deal is struck with Iran. What better way to celebrate this newfound friendship than by laying a series of pipelines that will relay Central Asian, Iranian and Baloch oil and gas to Gwardar. The Balochs will enjoy their autonomy and economic windfall. The US will deny China of its rapacious regional intents. Iran will be content.
3) If (2) happens, India gets to join the party.
Alternately and sadly, there is caveat (4)
4) There are no Iranians left in Iran. The pipelines get shorter, cheaper and straighter to the Persian Gulf. Of course, the Talibans have to gift a nuke to Tehran for this to happen. Decisive action has to be taken, and it is of the kind not applicable to Pakistan
For these hypotheticals, you need a plan and fresh troops. An additional 21,000 troops are being readied for the Af-Pak theater, and they are sufficiently large enough to fulfill the autonomous aspirations of the Balochs.
Disaster Central
The Afghan phase of the Global War on Terror was a fiasco from the onset. The Soviet intervention at least brought widespread female rights, education and a degree of healthcare to Afghanistan. This was rolled back by US-sponsored Mujahideen forces, which operated out of the now familiar tribal belts in Pakistan. The Mujahideen later coalesced into the Taliban.
NATO, in spite of its earlier stated missions, has failed abysmally in almost every key developmental indicator.
Afghan literacy rate stands at an appalling 28 per cent and how much of this was achieved during the Soviet presence is left to the imagination. The Taliban, upon assuming power, would have hacked off children schooled under Soviet patronage.
The current infant mortality rate is, incidentally, 151.95 deaths/1,000 live births (CIA Factbook). It is a pitiful figure when you factor in the wealth and liberating potentials of the western world, represented as they are in military bases and charity organizations across Afghanistan.
The literacy level of course is heavily tilted towards males, as the Taliban does not countenance education and gender rights for females. Furthermore, if the literacy level of 28 per cent includes the semi-literate graduates of religious madrassas, you then have a young population schooled solely for jihad. Government schools are torched; school busses ferrying female students are routinely attacked.
Even the Taliban says it: Yes, we can!
Incidentally, funding for these madrassas pour in from another US ally - Saudi Arabia.
In Pakistan alone, the Saudis bankroll madrassas numbering between 12,000 and 15,000, having an estimated enrolment of 2 million students. The number of madrassas could perhaps be as high as 22,000. In contrast, there are approximately 15,000 government schools in Pakistan. [10]
One thing is clear. Af-Pak is regressing into a medieval theocracy. Militancy in the Swat Valley and neighboring areas may displace up to 2 million refugees until a deal is worked out. The Pakistani army has shown how serious it was in defending its territorial integrity by fielding an estimated 15,000 plus troops against the militants. With the generals in Kabul threatening to take matters into their own hands, this number has risen incrementally over the past 48 hours.
The remaining 500,000 Pakistani troops are bracing for an imaginary sneak attack from India.
Pakistani troops have little experience in counter-insurgency operations, though they have plenty of experience in teaching the art to jihadi insurgents in Indian Kashmir.
Success will not be swift. There are now Predators above, artillery below, and collateral damages strewn all around Af-Pak.
The time is near for a sweetheart deal, meaning more Shariah zones in the NWFP and a greater cut of the narcotics trade for the Taliban. If you are a heroin addict or a pusher, and you happen to be reading this, rush to sign a futures contract as prices will only go up.
Only a narco-Shariah deal can bring a temporary semblance of order into the Swat Valley. Islamic militancy has been likened to a terror-filled balloon -- when it is squashed in one spot, it immediately inflates in another. The brunt of this bulge will be felt in the eastern Pakistani provinces of Punjab and Sindh.
Refugee resentments are fertile recruitment ground for the Taliban. The best relief efforts conducted at refugee camps are those provided by the outlawed Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD), a charity front for the terrorist Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT). The LeT was responsible for the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks, and they can slip in among refugees to replicate this feat in Karachi, Rawalpindi, Islamabad and Lahore.
Interestingly, the US Army included a refugee-induced insurgency scenario during a recent war simulation exercise. The subject though was North Korea but is timely and applicable to Af-Pak. [10]
All the Af-Pak variables emerging now are force multipliers for additional terror down the line.
This war is un-winnable unless someone tries the unthinkable - extermination. It is a thought I have personally heard from neutral, non-US lips and remains unthinkable unless the "Talibs" pry out a nuke a or two during their current rampage in Pakistan. Anyway, it is an old thought.
Whatever happens, not all is lost.
The Prize is in Dollars
During a private forecast I made earlier in the year, the US dollar was expected to slide beginning June/July. It will be controlled slide, backed by unconventional fundamentals.
During a Great Recession, it is not the industries, brainpower, fiscal or trade surpluses that decisively chart a nation's future; it is the ability to bring order, to wage a strategic war and seize a strategic lifeline. Global trade and the fiscal health of nations are dependent on the dollar, and any slide has to be in measured degrees.
Enter the US Army, the greatest fundamental component of the US dollar. With such a fighting colossus, a nation can print its way out of a deficit, as they have real people doing real work, fighting and redirecting "strategic traffic" back to their nation.
Russia and China understand and fear this, and complained of the dollar hegemony during the recent G20 summit. No nation can replicate the dollar contradiction. The US has a currency hated but desirable for the foreseeable future, and an army whose boots are stomping new grounds.
The US deficit for the current budget year has now risen to $1.8 trillion, and it is getting worse. The US GDP is 14 trillion. According to some estimates, the US government borrows 50 cents for each dollar spent.
Moreover, never forget this: There is a one quadrillion dollar (one thousand trillion) derivatives bubble floating out there for a day of reckoning. It is only ballpark figure. Some calculate the figure to be as high as $1.4 quadrillion.
There is no balloon analogy for this one. If the derivatives bubble is squashed in one spot, it will explode all over the planet.
In a highly volatile market, you need real order with real assets, to produce real goods. Only an army can provide the backbone for that. A dollar depreciation of 30 per cent might make US manufacturing viable again in a highly volatile world, where, production processes can be wrecked by social instabilities.
External chaos does wonders for the US dollar. Safety is sought in the currency and safe investments in the United States itself.
Changing the World?
The continuity between the policies of Barrack Obama and George Bush is reflected in the familiar faces flanking the current president. Robert Gates was chosen by Obama to stay on as defense secretary after having served as Bush's Pentagon chief. He oversaw the military surge in Iraq. Then there is Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who competed against Obama in the 2008 Democratic primaries. While campaigning, Obama appealed to popular anti-war sentiments and criticized Clinton for her 2002 Senate vote in favor of the invasion of Iraq.
There was indeed a change here, a U-Turn by Obama.
Others prominent Bushies include General David Petraeus, commander in Iraq in 2007-2008, who, since autumn 2008, has directed the US Central Command. General Karl Eikenberry, a former corps commander in Afghanistan, has been named by Obama as the US ambassador to Kabul. Finally, there is General Stanley McChrystal who gained a dubious distinction for overseeing third-degree interrogation methods in Iraq. He is replacing General David D. McKiernan as Commander, International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) and Commander, U.S. Forces Afghanistan (USFOR-A), subject to senate confirmation.
The reasons given by Obama for the current Af-Pak escalation fly against an unpleasant reality. Its ally Pakistan is the chief purveyor of global Islamic terrorism and is an undisputed champion of nuclear proliferation.
Unless the Taliban, ISI and the Pakistani nuclear complexes are dismantled, this war will be seen as a cynical campaign for the domination of oil-rich Central Asia and pipeline routes, control of international commerce and an expansion of military hegemony.
US military engagements for the past 30 years show up a disturbing dissymmetry: A Nicaraguan leader who steps out of line is summarily punished with an invasion, while a Saudi Arabia which produced 15 out of the 19 Sept 11 hijackers gets off with a slap in the hand, and a license to reprint the jihad franchise.
Unless this credibility gap is addressed, Obama's call for "change" will be nothing but a political fraud and a tactical maneuver for imperial expansion. This administration is just a few steps away from triggering a wider conflagration throughout the Middle East and Central Asia. It is going to be costly in terms of human lives even if the dollar is printed at will to fund these wars.
The US House of Representatives just passed a $96.7 billion request for Obama's wars and foreign aid efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq. Congress largesse for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars has topped $900 billion since 9/11.
Achievements? Who gets credit for a nuclear bazaar run by turbaned puritans?
The Final Game
The current Taliban surge will inevitably lead to a break-up of Pakistan and a break up of its nuclear arsenal. Who ultimately gets to own them, and where they will be used is the apocalyptic question.
It is an old Pakistan wisdom to redirect internal turmoil to an external party, under the guise of jihad. Mujahideen brigades in the immediate post-Soviet era spilled into Afghanistan to become the Taliban while others fought in Indian Kashmir. The itch for jihad soon went global.
The Pakistani nation is speedily trifurcating into an independent Balochistan, a tribal "Pashtun-stan" and a rump state dominated by the provinces of Punjab and Sindh. At the point of precipice, Islamabad might salvage some pride through a military provocation with India.
The Indians will not stand this if a nuclear attack is involved. Since achieving independence in1947, it has endured three wars with Pakistan and countless terror attacks and insurgencies orchestrated by a prime recipient of US military aid.
There are tons of declassified documents, which reveal US bias and active support for Pakistan during its confrontations with India.
If an attack occurs, India will not sit back for US mediation. There will be no Indian collateral damage from any Af-Pak fallout. If some brasshead in Pentagon is banking on this -- and closer Indo-US cooperation in the aftermath -- they can forget it. You cannot create allies by allowing them to burn. It may work well in the Muslim World, where, fitna (treachery) is vehemently condemned ironically for its sleazy and universal adoption.
In the Af-Pak calculus of terror, the Pakistanis might just be tempted to try it, and see if a wedge can be driven between India and the United States.
On May 1, US Gen David Petraeus gave the Pakistanis two weeks to clean up their mess. It is already two minutes past midnight on the terror clock. Operation Enduring Failure is leaving Nato little choice.
The apocalyptic question is; is it time to move from surgical strikes to the sterilization and cauterization of Af-Pak?
Copyright 2009@Mathew Maavak
Most of Mathew Maavak's commentaries can be read here or visit the Panoptic World homepage.
References:
1) Pakistan Makes a Taliban Truce, Creating a Haven(New York Times, Feb 16, 2009)
2) NATO's War on Yugoslavia: Ten Years Later (Znet, April 22, 2009)
3) A bonfire of drugs in Kabul (Al Jazeera, May 4, 2009)
4) Pakistan expanding its nuclear capability (MSNBC, May 12, 2009)
5) France, Pakistan agree on civilian nuclear co-op (Xinhua, May 16, 2009)
6) Pakistan expanding its nuclear capability (MSNBC, May 12, 2009)
7) India thinks Pak N-sites already in radical hands: Report (Times of India, May 16, 2009)
8) Balochistan is the ultimate prize (Asia Times, May 9, 2009)
9) Book review: Madrassa versus enlightenment (Daily Times, May 10)
10) North Korea Invades! (And Other Pentagon War Games) (Time, May 9, 2009)
Collapse
