Pakistan:
To what extent is Pakistan our ally? How powerful are theTaliban in Pakistan? What should we know about Pakistani politics? What has changed under President Obama?

We learned in January 2004 that Pakistan's nuclear scientist had sold secrets to Libya, North Korea, and Iran.  The Pakistan government claims that this was done in the '90s, without their knowledge.

Robert Sheer's commentary in the LA Times was concerned with consistency in US foreign policy.  Pakistan's AQ Khan, after selling nuclear secrets. was "overlooked by successive US administration.  Apparently, it was deemed too awkward to irritate our "allies' in Islamabad who helped us arm the mujahedin in Afghanistan against the Soviet, and, after 9/11, were enlisted to bring some of those same mujahedin to justice, including Osama bin Laden...Even after the appalling extend of Khan's sales ring was exposed in 2003, little was done. the Pakistan government pardoned Kahn and won't allow him to be interviewed by outsiders."

Pakistan was also in the news on January 13, 2006 when a CIA drone bombed homes in Pakistan near the border with Afghanistan.  The target was al-Qaeda #2 al-Zawahiri

Large protests in Pakistan followed the bombings when top al-Qaeda figures were not there but 8 children were killed. They chanted "Death to America" and "Stop bombing innocent people"   

With  two other noted exception known to the public, (one on Jan. 7) the US had previously stopped chasing suspects when they left Afghanistan and entered Pakistan.  About one week later Pakistan authorities announced that some al Qaeda figures had been killed by the bombing. 

As the civilian death toll rose to 18, Pakistani authorities said 4-5 foreign militants were killed, but their bodies were taken away before the government investigated. One was alleged to be the son-in-law of Zawahiri. Another is believed to be on the US's "most wanted list", with a $5 million reward. US authorities could not confirm this report. 

Reaction to the January 2006 bombing in Pakistan came from, among others, the lead editorial in the Chicago Tribune of Jan. 18.  Trying to somehow balance civilians deaths with US security, "When missiles kill innocents" wonders if the intelligence was bogus.  What role did Musharraf have?  Is he a "US puppet or was the attack a fair, and effective strike that eliminated some of this country' Al Qaeda foes?  Every war death is unfortunate, and none more so than that of a noncombatant...A war against terror groups creates frightful confluences that defy our attempts to neatly define 'collateral damage.'"  Just as Arafat's forces used to hide in civilian areas in the 1980s in Lebanon, so the paper continues, "But when terrorists infiltrate a civilian population, and when that population shelters them in its midst, then the killing of innocent become as inevitable as it is unfortunate."  John McCain said on Face The Nation, "We have to do what we think is necessary to take out Al Qaeda, particularly the top operatives." 

"In keeping with his double game," editorialized the Washington Post, "Gen. Musharraf's government publicly criticized the latest attack even though his intelligence serve reportedly coopered with it... Mr. Bush must take every available measure to eliminate the al Qaeda and Taliban operation in Pakistan.  If targets can be located, they should be attacked--with or without Gen. Musharraf's cooperation." (1/25/06). 

Other reaction to the Pakistan bombings came from Zawahiri himself, in a tape released to Al Jazeera on Jan. 30. His harsh words toward President Bush were:  "Butcher of Washington, you are not only defeated and a liar, but also a failure.  You are a curse on your own nation and you have brought and will bring them only catastrophes and tragedies."

"Democracy Under Arrest", describes Pakistan by a Post editorial at the fourth anniversary of the Iraq War, March 2007.

Barack Obama brought up Pakistan in August 2007 and said he would attack leading al Qaeda targets in Pakistan if the government of Pakistan refused to do so. The Illinois Senator "found it amusing that those who helped engineer the biggest foreign policy disaster in our generation are now criticizing me for making sure that we are on the right battlefield and not the wrong battlefield in the war against terrorism."

Musharraf declared martial law in early November 2007. Former Prime Minister and political rival Benazer Bhutto (at left) had just returned from years of exile. Her father, also a former leader, was executed by the military.

General Musharraf spoke for the necessity of going against the constitution by arguing, "I cannot allow this county to commit suicide". Hundreds of arrests were made, including lawyers. Protests were banned, TV stations and newspapers were closed. The Supreme Court was eliminated. Why the timing? One the one hand, there had been an increase of suicide bombings in recent weeks. The General did not call his actions martial law. On the other hand, the Supreme Court was about to decide whether the re-election of Musharraf was legitimate or not. The US was stuck. A nuclear ally who says he is fighting al Qaeda, but a dictator who doesn't seem to care about democracy.

The Tribune headline was "Musharraf puts US in a bind." The US has given Pakistan $11 billion in aid since 2001. Secretary Rice was now busy trying to work out peace deals between Turkey and Kurds (see "Allies" FAQ) and between Israelis and Palestinians. The Tribune editorial feels that Musharraf is still an important ally. "Unpleasant as if is to help prop us a panicked autocracy, the US should quietly continue financial support as Musharraf attempts to corral the extremists' growing clout...If Al Qaeda isn't kept at bay, we risk nuclearizing an already potent foe." We should pressure the General to roll back the emergency power. "Once the county is stabilized" we should insist on elections. The Chicago paper does not suggest threatening to withhold any aid.

The Washington Post editorial, "Working With a Dictator" suggested a strong response than did the Tribune. It opens: "...Musharraf claims that he suspended the constitution and imposed de facto [in fact] martial law...to save his country from Islamic extremists. But his crackdown has been directed almost entirely at Pakistani' moderate, secular, and pro-democracy opposition--the very people who could offer a political alternative to the Taliban [of Afghanistan] and al-Qaeda...Musharraf is waging war not against extremism but against democracy" as the Supreme Court was preparing to likely rule that his recent re-election was unconstitutional Bush, the piece continues, "has rights said that democracy is the biggest antidote to the totalitarianism of Islamic extremists. Mr. Musharraf's own record is proof that autocratic governments only make extremism stronger..The general probably will regard" a US stance up weak criticism "as an acquiescence to his coup--as will most Pakistanis and the millions of other muslims around the world who are watching the US response." The Post concludes, "The US should explicitly and fully support Pakistan's civilian politicians and judges. Such stance need not cause the downfall of Mr. Musharraf; he still has the option to back down, restore the constitution and schedule elections."

A Times editorial that week, "The Pakistan Mess" expresses Musharraf's actions as "desperate and reprehensible." The actions will "embolden extremists". His election victory last month was "a sham" and these new actions show a pattern of "broken promises" since he took over in a coup in 1999. What should the US do? We are "increasingly left with bad options."

"The General Must Go" urged a Post editorial over Veterans Day weekend. The paper is not satisfied with Musharraf's promises to hold elections and to end the state of emergency within a month.

Sen. Biden, a presidential candidate, is not so sure we should be supportive of Musharraf. "This administration has a Musharraf policy, not a Pakistani policy. He feels Musharraf has not spent US money well and is not doing enough to fight terrorists.

Protesting lawyers were beaten and arrested by the hundreds. . Pleaded one lawyer from Islamabad, angry, prominent, and Harvard educated: "How do you function as a lawyer when the law is what the general says it is?"

Benazir Bhutto's op-ed in the New York Times opened, "November 3, 2007 will be remembered as the blackest day in the history of Pakistan. Let us be perfectly clear; Pakistan is a military dictatortship...General Musharraf's ruling party understood that it would be trounced in any free election." The opposition leader wonders if the US will "support democracy or a dictatorship in Pakistan?" She concludes her piece, "It is dangerous to stand up to a military dictatorship, but more dangerous not to. The moment has come for the Western democracies to show us in their actions, and not just in their rhetoric, which side they are on."

By Nov. 12, Bhutto was calling on Musharraf to leave office, not just step down as General. She was in and out of house arrest, with thousands of troops/police surrounding her house. Bhutto penned a second op-ed, this time in the Washington Post, on Nov. 14, called "Musharraf's Election Farce."

Might history repeat itself in Pakistan? David Ignatius sees echoes of Iran in 1979. Today, as then, we are supported an ever unpopular dictator, because we fear the alternative might be force than him. But in 1979, our long-term support of the dictator led to a strongly anti-American government appearing, which is still in power. Could the same occur in nuclear-armed Pakistan, or could democracy take root there.

Charles Krauthammer also looks at history to guide us in "Marcos...Pinochet...Musharraf?" All three were long allies of the US and became or were dictators. He wonders if the alternative to Musharraf will be better.

The Chicago Tribune's lead editorial of Nov. 15 was "Musharraf's fictions." The paper wondered how Pakistan "can have an election [in January] when your opponents are in jail or under house arrest...Voting is not the sum of democracy. Voting is just one element of the many-layered process that makes up any genuine democracy."

We learned on Nov. 18 that the US had been secretly aiding Pakistan in guarding its nuclear weapons. The program, costing about $100 million, began after 9/11 and was highly classified. One of the concerns of those who suggest supporting Musharraf is that if the country becomes unstable, some of the nuclear material might fall into the hands of extremists.

Can Musharraf survive? This question was more frequently asked in mid-November. The answer came on November 28, when Musharraf resigns as army chief. He will remain as President.

Suicide bombers have become much more common in Pakistan. One killed 48 and wounded 100 during an Islamic celebration. A top politician was nearly killed.

In mid-December, just weeks before the elections, Musharraf declared an end to martial law. Yet, the Supreme Court was still packed with his hand-picked cronies. Who would boycott and who would participate in the elections?

A Times editorial, reacting to the ending of martial law after six weeks, feels the decision was "long overdue, as was [Musharraf's] decision to quit his army post...Any hope that he was nudging the country toward a genuine democracy was quashed when he also moved to exempt his own most controversial actions from any court challenges...Mr Musharraf sized power in a 1999 coup, so his rule lacks legitimacy no matter how he manipulates the country's legal undpinnings...67% of Pakistanis" want Musharraf to resign. "As ever, criticism from the Bush administration has been unacceptably muted." The paper is also concerned that Parliamentary elections has barred Nawaz Sharif.

On December 27, 2007 we learned the shocking and sad news that Benazir Bhutto was assassinated. A suicide bomber killed her in her car, just after a speech. Who supported this bomber? What will be the future of Bhutto's party? Will elections be delayed? Violence and outrage followed throughout Pakistan. Will Musharraf be at least partially blamed? Musharraf immediately pointed the blame on Al Qaeda.

A huge front page story, the Times feels her assasination highlights, "in spectacular fashion, the failure of two of President Bush's main objectives in the region: his quest to bring democracy to the Muslim world, and his drive to force out the Islamic militants who have hung on tenacity in Pakistan."

Reaction to Bhutto's assassination came in numerous editorials and op-eds. For example, Times columnist Roger Cohen feels that the "absence of engagement with Iran leaves the US overdependent on Pakistan for influence in Afghanistan...Bhutto's loss is devastating, comparable with Yitzhak Rabin's" of Israel.

The issue quickly became political when the campaign manager for Obama criticized Clinton. Clinton was " as strong supporter of the war in Iraq, which we would submit was one of the reasons why we were diverted from Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Al Qaeda, who many have been players in this event today."

After a week of violence, and stop-start investigations into Bhutto's murder, Parliamentary elections were delayed until mid-February. In those elections, Musharraf's party lost badly. Yet, he clung to power, with US support.

Suicide bombers continued just about weekly in Pakistan. For example, on one February day, 37 were killed and nearly 100 injured.

100 Americans will train Pakistan military, the Pentagon announced in early March. The Americans will work with paramilitary forces. A month earlier Pakistan shuns a CIA buildup in the area or joint operations. It was not clear how long the training would be or if the 100 number could grow. Shades of early involvement in Vietnam, some might think.

Critics of the Bush administration's policy of continued support for Musharraf point out that the political mood is being badly misjudged. The US is "squandering an opportunity to win support for its fight against terrorism" The opposition parties describe themselves as moderate and pro-US. Yet, Washington, in not working with them, is not gaining an ally. (NYTimes, 2/29/08)

Attacks inside Pakistan by the US were common from August to October, with about 2-3 per month reported. Most were from pilotless drones.

On the day before Thanksgiving, 2008, Mumbai was attacked by at least 10 militants, heavily armed. Hostages were taken and dozens of civilians were shot. Westerns seemed to be especially targatted. The death toll approached 200. Initial reports centered on Kashmiri Pakistanis, which would lead to an increase in tensions between India and Pakistan.

Pakistan freed AQ Khan from house arrest in February 2009. He had publicly confessed to profiting from nuclear sales to North Korea, Libya, and Iran. Khan is revered by many Pakistanis as the father of the "Muslim nuke" which was developed to counter India, their rival. President Asif Ali Zardari has been criticized in Pakistan for being to close to the US. US officials condemned the release.

Also in February, the Pakistani government made a peace deal with the Taliban in the Swat region. Swat is part of Pakistan proper and not known as a tribla region. Sharia law will be allowed there and the Taliban are supposed to give up their weapons. Laws include "un Islamic activities" such as DVD's, watching cable TV, singing, and dancing. Girls are not allowed to attend school and it is a crime to shave a beard. The Taliban began ddstorying 170 girls schools in the region. The Taliban are so violence that often no one dares oppose them. Clearly, the Taliban are controlling more territory in both Pakistan and Afghanistan.

We are "playing with fire in Pakistan", according to the lead Times editorial of Feb. 28. "Almost no one wants to say in out loud. But between the threats from extremists, an unraveling economy battling civilian leaders and tensions with nuclear rival India, Pakistan is edging ever close to the abyss."

Secret US units inside Pakistan are now public, adding to the drones which fly over the country and make bombing raids. 70 US military are in the country. The US continued to be frustrated with the Pakistan government. Drones called Predators and Reapers fly 34 patrols each day in Iraq and Afghanistan, up from 12 in 2006. They trasmit 16,000 hours of video each month, circling at 16,000 feet. Of the 70 Predator crashes, 13 have occured in the past 18 months.

In April, violence continued, with suicide bombings and attacks in Islamabad and other areas. For example, a bombing in Lahore in late May killed 25 and inejured 250. The Taliban took more territory within Pakistan. Into May, President Obama became more concerned about Taliban advances, especially considering Pakistan's nuclear weapons.

One June drone killed 60 in South Waziristan, the deadliest attack yet. It is the 23rd known drone attack of the year, an intensified level since the Bush adminstration. The UN wants to investigate the US use of drones. The US needs to demonstrate that it is not randomly killing people in violation of international law. In October, it seemed that the US was not yet cooperating with the UN rights investigator.

Over the summer of 2009, US drones continued to target (or assininate) suspected Taliban leaders inside Pakistan. It seemed that the government of Pakistan complained less often, since they were finally launching their own military offensives against Taliban held areas. With Musharaff's power reduced, new President Zardari gained "points" from the US. One such areas was the Swat Valley. More dangerous still was South Warziristan. We hear little of top Taliban commanders being killed or captured. Of the Taliban not killed in these offenses, where will they go? Perhaps to Afghanistan?

However, the news changed on August 7, as the Pakistan Taliban leader was allegedly killed by a US drone. Maitullah Mehsud is suspect in the September Marriot explosion in Islamabad (killing over 50) and even the assasination of Prime Minister Bhutto (see above). The Times editorial supports "removing him from the picture" but is concerned that Congress is not acting quickly to provide Pakistan with non-military aid. "Force alone will not be enough to defeat the extremists." Civil society must also be built up, including "schools, courts, hospitlas, and roads" which "are essential" for stability. The editorial concludes by quoting Obama that "'Al Qaeda offers the people of Pakistan nothing but destruction. We stand for something different.' It is time to show the Pakistani people that the US has more to offer than missile strikes and empty promises."

The new Pakistan Taliban leader was announced in late August. He is known as the "brash young commander with a reputation for pitiless violence". Some suspect he is already dead or badly injured.

Blackwater employees helped assasinate al Qaeda leaders, we learned in August. Not before made public was that the drones operated not only from Afghanistan ( and into Pakistan) but used a base within Pakistan, taking off and landing almost hourly. See much more on Blackwater at PZViolenceJune06

US aid to Pakistan worked its way through Congress. Billions over 5 years was discussed. With a corrupt government, perhaps the graft will only be fed, warned US officials.

Suicide attacks and bombings continued in October. The latest bombings were in Islamabad. Also, there was a 20 hour seige at army headquarter in Rawalpindi, showing the increased sophistication of Taliban and militant groups. The Pakistan government launched an attack on the tribal area of South Waziristan. Would this lead to more or fewer suicide attacks? Most Taliban fled ahead of the Pakistani army. Locals and militants knew of the attacks ahead of time. Obama contemplated more troops to Afghanistan, which will surely have a ripple effect on Pakistan. See much more on Afghanistan. After a University was attacked, Schools closed all over the country in the wake of the largest attacks.

Sec. of State Clinton's trip to Pakistan involved tough questioning at sessions with students and the press. One time, she shot back: "I find it hard to believe that nobody in your government knows where [Taliban or al Qaeda] are, and couldn't get to them if they really wanted to." Her hosts were upset. As Clinton arrived more than 100 were killed in twin attacks in Peshwar Pakistan and a secret Kabul guesthouse. . Many killed in Peshwar were women and children. The Sec. of State was interviewed on the PBS Newshourduring her trip.

A Taliban leader, Siraj Haqqani, is thought to be in North Waziristan, but US officials say Pakistan refuses to go after him. He is said to be commanding 4000-12000 Taliban troops. The top Taliban leader is still the former leader of Afghanistan on 9/11, Mullah Omar. Haqqani's father attended Madrassas in the 70s, and fought against the Soviets in Afghanistan during the 1980s, receiving money from the CIA. Later, the father became a provincial governor. If Pakistan announces the offense in advance, I feel, Taliban which simply move to another area rather than stay and fight. Taliban leadership is based in Quetta.

After Obama's December 1 speech on escalation in Afghanistan, the US seemed to put more pressure on Pakistan. We learned that drone attacks inside Pakistan, publicly condemned by the Pakistan government, were over 80 since January 2008. Estimates of militants killed since 2006 range from 500 to 900, while estimates of civilians killed range from 94-250. Based on my readings, I highly doubt that only 94 civilians have been killed.

How many US special forces are in Pakistan? This is rarely reported on or surmised. The number as doubled in the past eight months, says an American adviser, to as many as 150. Do they order drone attacks from Pakistan?

Are US troops in Pakistan? Three GIs died in February, 2010. US and Pakistan leaders would like to keep this quiet. But 60-100 Special Operations forces quietly train Pakistan's paramilitary Frontier Corps for the last 18 months.

What role will drones play in 2010? "Should Old Artilces Be Forgot" is the op-ed from the editor of The Week magazine. Of enduring significance, feels William Falk, is the developement of mini-drones or nano drones. They are the size of hummingbirds and can pursue targets into homes and buildings.

President Zardari's op-ed in the Times of December 10, recalled the assassination of his wife, Benazir Bhutto. "It is so much easier," she wrote, "to blame others for our problems than to accept responsibility ourselves." He suggests various ways to mend fences with Pakistan. After 9/11, he feels, the US "closed its eyes to the abuses of the dictatorship of [Musharraf], providing support to the regime while doing little to help with social needs or encourage the restoration of democracy. For Pakistanis, it is a bitter memory.

Pakistan is very concerned about India, as they have been since the 1940s. India is pouring over $1 billiion in aid into Afghanistan.

Five Virginians will be tried in Pakistan. Ages 19-25, they even made a farewell video, which is typically done before a suicide attack. Allegedly, the men confessed to wanted to commit jihad. Outside the courtroom, they alleged that they have been tortured in Pakistan.

There was increasing pressure on Musharraf and some of Zardari's poltiical allies, when the Pakistani Supreme Court decided in December to re-open corruption cases against hundreds of policicians, including Zardari.

Another suicide bomber near South Waziristan attacked a volleyball game. His large truck full of explosives killed nearly 100 and wounded hundreds more, on New Years Day, 2010. The target was likely a group of villagers meeting to unite against the Taliban. Those making these weekly bombings in Pakistan, which have now killed over 600 since October, allege that it is in response to the Pakistani government offensive in South Waziristan.

The 2009 death stats are not encouraging. More Pakistani civilians were killed, over 3000, in militant attacks than were Afghans. Over 7300 were injured. This was triple the number of Pakistanis killed in 2006. Attacks began to rise in 2005, and have gone up every year since. The majority of violence is in the North-West Frontier Province. About 600 were killed in US drone attacks. Insurgent attacks increased during the year and US aid increased. The percentage of Pakistanis believing that al Qaeda was a major threat increased to 94%. Back in the 1990s, recruiters for jihad in Kashmir (border conflicts and wars with India) were holding rallies on public universtiy campuses. Militants are now loosely organzied. 24 militants were in a study, 1/3 of whom attended college. Explaining his motivation, one miltant said, "Out there I'm a useless guy, unemployed and cursed by my family. Here I'm a commander. My words have weight." Perhaps American urban gang experts could learn a lesson from this man.

In mid-January Pakistan officials alleged that a US drone killed up to 15. The leader of the Pakistani Taliban, Hakimullah Mehsud, was wounded. Mehsud claimed credit for the suicide bomber who killed 8 people at a CIA base in Afghanistan. He had taken over for the Taliban leader killed in August. As Pakistani forces moved into South Wziristan, many Taliban fighters moved to North Waziristan.

"Pakistan Hesitates, Again", opined the lead Times editorial of Jan. 23. After years of denying that extremists posed a threat, the Pakistani Taliban got within 60 miles of the capital Islamabad last April. But their responses have stopped at the border. Gates's pressing for a new front was rebuffed. There will be no offensive in North Waziristan for at least six months. The paper commends Pakistan for their offensives in South Waziristan and Swat Valley, where they lost 2000 soldiers. "Pakistan's Army and spy services helped create the Afghan Taliban, and even now they see the group as a proxy force to limit India's influence in Afghanistan once the Americans leave. That is truly playing with fire." Gates should not repeat the mistakes of history, when the US abandoned Pakistan after the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan. Charlie Wilson, the Congressman who urged military aid to enemies of the Soviets, died in February, 2010. He was the subject of the film Charlie Wilson's War.

The US agreed to supply drones to Pakistan in January, 2010. Sec. Gates, in his first visit in three years, made the announcement. The spy planes will be unarmed but have video. Pakistan planned no new military offenses, despite urging from the US. Why does Pakistan hesitate? One reason is that they want to counter India's interests in Afghanistan, with proxies, after the US leaves.

US drones fired at 17 missiles in North Waziristan in one day in early February. Could this be in retaliation for the CIA suicide bomber?

In mid-February US and Pakistani forces captured Taliban second in command Mullah Baradar. The raid was kept secret for a few days. The authorities might not even have known that Baradar was in the Karachi, Pakistan house. The New York Times learned of the arrest but waited five days to announce it, at the urging of the US government. Baradar's allies might be caught if they did not know of his capture. Baradar has worked closely with Mullah Omar, who led the Taliban up until September 11 and still leads them now. This arrest will only help Pakistan, in three ways. They have eliminated a Taliban commandor, enhanced cooperation with the US, and ensured "a place for itself when parties explose a negotiated end to the war." Baradar ran the Taliban's leadership council. The US has alleged that Pakistan could have picked up Baradar long ago if they had wanted to. With Pakistanis knows for harsh interrogation, could Baradar be tortured?