Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has been in Pakistan this week, and, in a meeting with editors in Lahore, she essentially accused Pakistan's government of knowing where al-Qaeda leaders are and choosing, of their own volition, not to go after them. From Bloomberg:
"Al-Qaeda has had safe haven in Pakistan since 2002," Clinton told a group of editors in the eastern Pakistani city of Lahore. "I find it hard to believe that nobody in your government knows where they are and couldn't get them if they really wanted to. Maybe that's the case; maybe they're not gettable. I don't know."
Clinton has been in Pakistan since Tuesday, on the heels of President Obama's Oct. 15 signing of the Kerry-Lugar bill tripling non-military U.S. aid to Pakistan to $7.5 billion over the next five years--a bill that was met with controversy in Pakistan because of the conditions it set for that aid to be delivered.
One of those conditions is that Pakistan make progress in preventing al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and other extremist groups from operating within its borders, along with stipulations that Pakistan's military not support any extremist or terrorist groups, and that the military not "substantially subver[t] the political or judicial processes of Pakistan."
So Clinton's comment sounds like a warning: we know you can do a better job of rooting out al-Qaeda, so do it, or you won't get the money.
So Pakistan learns how to put on a $7.5 billion dollar dog and pony show. "We're trying" "We could do better with more money" "Look, we got one" "We could do better with more money"
"So Clinton's comment sounds like a warning: we know you can do a better job of rooting out al-Qaeda, so do it, or you won't get the money."
You should have printed Islamabad's response to this pseudo-ultimatum: "we have nukes, and if you don't help us do everything we can to protect them you will have a nightmare on your hands."
Our dole to Pakistan will not be reduced any time soon.
If we don't see any real movement from Islamabad on this, will our govt publicly say 'we gave you a chance' and resume cross-border raids/drone attacks? Not saying that we should - it seems like our intel is spotty and non-combatants get killed in the process (and might even if we had better intel) - but do you think we will?
I doubt it. The CIA is already using drones heavily in Pakistan as it is, and they seem to be targeting more people more often - which says to me either there are a lot of "terrorist leaders" or that there are rather weak standards for shooting missiles from drones. Drone usage has soared under Obama (and in the waning years of W). Why? A drone never comes home dead in an American flag covered coffin.
My point is that I think drones will only become more widely used over the next decade.
I doubt there will be any sort of US troop presence in Pakistan beyond the black ops/special forces groups that operate there now.
Drones are politically easy (unfortunately), and they are becoming more and more accurate, I think we are seeing the beginning of what will be the new war...it's almost like Terminator, except the machines are still controlled by humans (so far).
Clinton's "ultimatum" ignores the fact that Pakistan is crushing the Taliban in Waziristan, with the enthusiastic support of its people.
When are our foreign policy geniuses going to figure out that what Pakistan wants in Afghanistan is a government that's not friendly to India? As the current puppet government is.
Until we agree to make peace with a government that's allied with Pakistan, we will continue to bleed. Pakistan can arrange for the new government to not harbor people who will attack us.
What would we do if that fails?
Any Afghan government will be very vulnerable to well-financed insurgencies, and rather than trying to occupy the country we can retaliate with a Contra-like insurgency.
Another observation that should be obvious. Nation building in Afghanistan is impossible -- there's simple not enough economy or popular will for such a venture. Maybe there was, once, but that's been destroyed by the Russian invasion and our own "counter-insurgency" efforts.
Who's going to invest in this place? Without capital and a stable environment -- forget it. Maybe after a decade or two.
Clinton's "ultimatum" ignores the fact that Pakistan is crushing the Taliban in Waziristan, with the enthusiastic support of its people.
When are our foreign policy geniuses going to figure out that what Pakistan wants in Afghanistan is a government that's not friendly to India? As the current puppet government is.
Until we agree to make peace with a government that's allied with Pakistan, we will continue to bleed. Pakistan can arrange for the new government to not harbor people who will attack us.
What would we do if that fails?
Any Afghan government will be very vulnerable to well-financed insurgencies, and rather than trying to occupy the country we can retaliate with a Contra-like insurgency.
Another observation that should be obvious. Nation building in Afghanistan is impossible -- there's simple not enough economy or popular will for such a venture. Maybe there was, once, but that's been destroyed by the Russian invasion and our own "counter-insurgency" efforts.
Who's going to invest in this place? Without capital and a stable environment -- forget it. Maybe after a decade or two.