December 7, 2009
As President Obama announced a troop surge in the Af-Pak war, former leader of Pakistan General Musharraff weighed in with specifics a solution would require.
In the Wall Street Journal this week, he explained “quitting is not an option”, and “time limits” should not drive our exit strategy. Rather, in tandem with additional troops, a “political” surge is key. With firsthand military and political experience in the Af-Pak region and War on Terror, Musharraf gives us substance with which to understand the situation. He explains that when the United States “liberated Afghanistan from the tyranny of Al Qaeda and Taliban, they had unequivocal support of the majority of Afghans.” What we didn’t do though, is establish a “truly representative national government” giving proportional representation to Pashtun’s who are the ethnic majority. He says:
The political instability and ethnic imbalance in Afghanistan after 9/11 marginalized the majority Pashtuns and pushed them into the Taliban fold, even though they were not ideological supporters of the Taliban.
As a result, despite Pakistani efforts during Musharraf’s tenure where “600 Al Qaeda and Afghan Taliban leaders, some of them of very high value” were captured in tandem with the establishment of “1000 border check posts”, the Afghan government never gained legitimacy, and ultimately, sufficient authority. He further attributes insufficient NATO forces and the distraction of invading Iraq as leading causes to the Taliban’s capacity to gain ground, and reassert its center of gravity toward northern Pakistan.
With a grand strategy to destabilize the whole region, the Taliban and al Qaeda established links with extremists in Pakistani society on the one hand and with Muslim fundamentalists in India on the other.
It’s a complex situation, but Musharraff’s recommendations are rooted in a wealth of experience and offer details on a practical solution.
ORIGINALLY PIBLISHED @
Posted in Current Affairs, International Affairs, International Relations, Pakistan, US Pakistan relations | Tagged af-pak obama surge, af-pak obama troop, af-pak obama troops, af-pak pakistan, af-pak region, af-pak strategy, af-pak taliban, af-pak terrorism, af-pak troop surge, af-pak troops, af-pak war, af-pak war pakistan, afghan pak region, afghanistan pakistan war, america and pakistan war on terror, balochistan raw, cnn interview of musharraf, cnn pakistan, counterterrorism pakistan, development in pakistan, economic development pakistan, fareed zakaria gps pakistan, fareed zakaria pakistan, fareed zakaria show general musharraf, fareed zakaria war on terror pakistan, General Musharraf, general musharraf cnn, general musharraf politics, india and pakistan, india and pakistan policies, india and pakistan politics, india and pakistan terrorism, India Pakistan, india pakistan politics, India Pakistan relations, international affairs in pakistan, International Affairs Pakistan, international politics pakistan, international relations pakistan, isi india, isi pakistan, islamabad bombings islamabad attacks, military offensive pakistan, musharraf gps, musharraf interview cnn, musharraf interview fareed zakaria, musharraf on cnn, musharraf on fareed zakaria, musharraf on fareed zakaria cnn, musharraf on fareed zakaria show, musharraf on india, musharraf on intelligene, musharraf on the war on terror, musharraf on war on terror, musharraf war on terror, obama troop surge, obama troops afghanistan, obama troops in afghanistan, obama troops pakistan, obamas troop surge, pakistan affairs., pakistan army, pakistan army india, pakistan army war on terror, pakistan civil war, pakistan general musharraf politics, pakistan india political rivalry, pakistan isi, pakistan isi baluchistan, pakistan political affairs, pakistan politics, pakistan terrorism india, Pakistan war on terror, pakistan war on terror cnn, pakistan war on terror fareed zakaria, pakistan waziristan, pakistan waziristan war, pakistani military, pakistani policies, pakistani politics, pakistsan afghanistan war on terror, pervez musharraf india, pervez musharraf politics, political rivalry india pakistan, politics in pakistan, zainab jeewanjee, zainab politics, zainyjee | 1 Comment »
October 9, 2009
After months of consideration on how to deal with our escalating engagement in the AF-Pak region, Obama’s administration has decided:
“the Taliban cannot be eliminated as a political or military movement”
An article in the Washington Post today cites the administrations re-vamped goal of mitigating a Taliban capacity to interfere in the establishment of a stable Afghan government while assuring us that Al Qaeda is the primary threat, and our strategy will focus squarely on eradicating them.
It seemed news on Pakistan in the past year revolved around Islamabad not doing enough to eradicate the Taliban; equating the group to Al Qaeda in terms of importance in the War on Terror. But today marks a clear departure from such criticism. Distinguishing Al Qaeda from the Taliban is a huge step forward for the United States. Because connecting our goals to eliminate both immediate security threats and major elements of Afghan society that are unpalatable to our values, has proven counter productive. Having lived in Pakistan to experience the ill effects of hyper conservative religious factions, I know we mean well in trying to uproot extremism, but it just hasn’t worked in tandem with our military offensive. And I’ve mentioned the importance of a distinction between these groups previously:
The Taliban is historically distinct from militant groups like Al Qaeda. Unlike the Taliban, Al Qaeda is directly responsible for 9/11. Simply put, the Taliban was an ideologically fundamental group, while Al Qaeda is a militant, terrorist group. Both are dangerous as such, but the Taliban has national interests in controlling Afghanistan under strict ideological rules while Al Qaeda is a militant organization with international ambitions.
It’s not a novel contention, but only just being reflected in policy, and I think it has potential for success. As an ideological force, the Taliban foster an ultra conservative brand of Islam, but are not necessarily a threat to our security interests. Plus, if General McChrystal’s goal is defined as establishing a sustainable, democratic Afghan government, in order for it to be considered legitimate, it must be rooted in Afghan values and according to Afghan preferences. Such preferences might seem backward, or entirely unpleasant to us, but so long as our interests are being protected, impressing our brand of democratic values should take a back seat for the time being. I think the Obama administration has taken a wise step in revamping the Af-Pak strategy and hope it yields lasting success.
ORIGINALLY POSTED @
Posted in Current Affairs, Foreign Policy, International Affairs, International Relations, U.S. Politics, US Foreign Polciy | Tagged af-pak strategy, af-pak war, af-pak war on terror, Afghanistan, Afghanistan Pakistan, afghanistan pakistan politics, afghanistan taliban, afghanistan taliban politics, afghanistan war on terror, afpak, afpak war, Al Qaeda, al qaeda in pakistan, Al Qaeda Pakistan, al qaeda tailban, al qaeda taliban difference, al qaeda terrorism, al qaeda war on terror, alqaeda afghanistan, difference between al qaeda and talian, difference between al qaeda taliban, fighting al qaeda, fighting taliban, fighting the taliban in afghanistan, foreign policy to pakistan, general mcchrystal afghanistan, general mcchrystal afghanistan pakistan strategy, general mcchrystal military strategy, general mcchrystal obama strategy, general mcchrystal obama war on terror, general mcchrystal pakistan, general mcchrystal war on terror, International Affairs, International Affairs Pakistan, international politics, international politics in pakistan, international relations pakistan, mcchrystal af-pak, mcchrystal afghanistan, mcchrystal obama, mcchrystal on pakistan, mcchrystal pakistan, mcchrystal war on terror, obama afghanistan war on terror, obama led war on terror in afghanistan, obama troop surge, obama troops in afghanistan, obama us war on terror, obama war on terror, obama war on terror in afghanistan, obama war on terror in pakistan, obama war on terror pakistan, pakistan affairs., pakistan foreign policy, pakistan international relations, pakistan obama war on terror, pakistan political affairs, pakistan politics, pakistan taliban, pakistani, pakistani foreign policy, pakistani politics, pakistani taliban, pakistans foreign policy, political affairs of pakistan, politics in pakistan, politics of pakistan, politics pakistan, taliban afghanistan, taliban al qaeda, taliban eliminated, taliban in afghanistan, taliban in afghanistan and pakistan, taliban in pakistan, taliban in the war on terror, taliban pakistan, the difference between al qaeda and the taliban, US foreign policy to pakistan, us led war on terror afghanistan, us led war on terror pakistan, us troops in afghanistan, us troops war on terror, us war on terror taliban, war on terror, war on terror afghanistan, war on terror in pakistan, war on terror military strategy, war on terror obama, war on terror obama af-pak, war on terror pakistan, war on terror taliban, whats the difference with al qaeda and taliban, zainab jeewanjee, Zainab jeewanjee politics | 7 Comments »
Zainab B. Jeewanjee
Zainab Jeewanjee 