Pakistan and its role in war against terror!

[yess]

since 2002 pakistan has deployed over 80,000 troops in its eastern border to fight taliban and a-qaida hidden under one of the most rugged terrains on earth!

as commented by pakistani foreign minster.
“We are committed to controlling terrorism, and people in Pakistan get very upset when despite all the sacrifices that Pakistan has been making you get all these criticisms” in the press, he said in an interview from Lahore, Pakistan.
“What I don’t like is the tone that I am now hearing and that I am now reading in the American media,” said Kasuri.

now that i would like to know views of pakistan epically from westerns who have made a bad image of pakistan and accuse every single of them for harboring terrorist in their country.

 

[eckherl]

since 2002 pakistan has deployed over 80,000 troops in its eastern border to fight taliban and a-qaida hidden under one of the most rugged terrains on earth!

as commented by pakistani foreign minster.
“We are committed to controlling terrorism, and people in Pakistan get very upset when despite all the sacrifices that Pakistan has been making you get all these criticisms” in the press, he said in an interview from Lahore, Pakistan.
“What I don’t like is the tone that I am now hearing and that I am now reading in the American media,” said Kasuri.

now that i would like to know views of pakistan epically from westerns who have made a bad image of pakistan and accuse every single of them for harboring terrorist in their country.

Man I hope this doesn`t turn into a slug fest with fellow defence talkers, please do not get wrapped up into everything that comes out of the press, this is not a popular war and they tend to focus on all the negatives versus some of the positives. I think that Pakistan is walking on a thin wire, especially with some of the turmoil that is currently going on in Pakistan. I think that the cooperation is getting better than what people may realize, could it be better, I think it could in terms of closing down more of the Taliban hide outs in Pakistan.

 

[max78]

From what i understand (being a rookie to this forum), a military forum is probably not the best place for such a topic as it is practically impossible to not get into the politics of the matter. However, I do think that beyond the strategy and political issues involved, it would be hard to deny that Pakistan does in fact have a border control problem. Many believe (and I do too) that many people belonging to OMFs (Opposing Militant Forces) gain entry into Afghanistan via its border with Pakistan. It’s a fact that the "hottest" part of the AO is namely that part of Afghanistan that shares its border with Pakistan.
Having said that though, as i mentioned above, I don't think this is the most appropriate forum to address why this border control problem exists.

 

[CodE]

Pakistan most certainly has a responsibility in the war on terror, as all powerful nations of the world do. But can we win the war on terror? But heres something geared more towards the topic. Does Pakistan want to fight the war on terror? Have they commited themselves to the coalition to defeat al-Qaeda and the Taliban? I'm very curious to know what their stand is on this war. Does anyone know?

 

[radiosilence]

Pakistan most certainly has a responsibility in the war on terror, as all powerful nations of the world do. But can we win the war on terror? But heres something geared more towards the topic. Does Pakistan want to fight the war on terror? Have they commited themselves to the coalition to defeat al-Qaeda and the Taliban? I'm very curious to know what their stand is on this war. Does anyone know?

They have lost over 600 troops, suffer from suicide attacks regularly, and their president has survived at least 3 assassination attempts on his life because of their efforts to fight terrorism. Just yesterday the under secretary of state Nicholas Burns, said that Pakistan is Indispensable in the Global Anti-Terrorism Fight. So to question their commitment is very naive.

 

[CodE]

They have lost over 600 troops, suffer from suicide attacks regularly, and their president has survived at least 3 assassination attempts on his life because of their efforts to fight terrorism. Just yesterday the under secretary of state said that Pakistan is Indispensable in the Global Anti-Terrorism Fight. So to question their commitment is very naive.

My apologies then, I couldn't find anything about Pakistans involvement in the war, and my question was one of curiousity not judgment. I realise that Pakistan is stuck between and rock and a hard place right now, they have their long time tension with India on one side, and the war on terror on the other. They suffer more than the rest of us do in the war on terror surely because of their geographical location! We at least are seperated by thousands of miles. So heres another question, should we perhaps help Pakistan out? Have we already? What sort of help do you envision being useful to them?

 

[radiosilence]

My apologies then, I couldn't find anything about Pakistans involvement in the war, and my question was one of curiousity not judgment. I realise that Pakistan is stuck between and rock and a hard place right now, they have their long time tension with India on one side, and the war on terror on the other. They suffer more than the rest of us do in the war on terror surely because of their geographical location! We at least are seperated by thousands of miles. So heres another question, should we perhaps help Pakistan out? Have we already? What sort of help do you envision being useful to them?

We have done a lot but a lot more needs to be done. For example, the recent talk of US troops operating in Pakistan which is very unhelpful to them. It will make the regime look like a US puppet and might bring down the regime if we were to send our troops in there. IMO, this will be the most friendly regime the West will have in Pakistan. Instead we should provide them with intelligence on where these safe havens are and have pakistani special forces go in and clean it out. Over the weekend it was reported that Pakistani troop killed over 40 taliban in the tribal areas. They have send in 2 additional division in the tribal areas within the past two weeks and it starting to pay divident. We can provide them with better equiptment( night vison goggles, helicopter with night fighting capability, and better surveillance equiptment etc. There is a plan(750 million over 5 year to build infrastructure in the tribal areas ) awaiting congressional approval which if approved will be very helpful.

 

[CodE]

We have done a lot but a lot more needs to be done. For example, the recent talk of US troops operating in Pakistan which is very unhelpful to them. It will make the regime look like a US puppet and might bring down the regime if we were to send our troops in there. IMO, this will be the most friendly regime the West will have in Pakistan. Instead we should provide them with intelligence on where these safe havens are and have pakistani special forces go in and clean it out. Over the weekend it was reported that Pakistani troop killed over 40 taliban in the tribal areas. They have send in 2 additional division in the tribal areas within the past two weeks and it starting to pay divident. We can provide them with better equiptment( night vison goggles, helicopter with night fighting capability, and better surveillance equiptment etc. There is a plan(750 million over 5 year to build infrastructure in the tribal areas ) awaiting congressional approval which if approved will be very helpful.

Definatley good points, but also I think it would be useful for them to greatly patrol their borders, to prevent terrorists from entering the country. Not just focus on the insurgents inside the country but also ones that are wishing to enter the country and continue their war against Pakistan. Any nation in the Middle East can be damaged by being a U.S. 'puppet' but not only that if the U.S. puts troops in the country perhaps Pakistans government will see this as the U.S. not letting them deal with their own problems. Making them feel inadequate will not help them win their fight. I completely agree with the U.S. exporting better gear to the Pakistanis, and providing intel on terrorist 'hides.'
Good discussing this will ya. Cheers.

 

[Shaffiq]

***** Role In Terror

The reality is the Pakistani establishment has a fear at the back of their minds, that one day the Americans will go after Pakistan - either directly or via India / Israel. As a western born Pakistani, I can see this happening in the next 5-10 years. Hence Pakistan whilst will be part of war on terror, it does need to keep some friends in Afghanistan in reserve for future events, being talked about and shaped by the American establishment, think tanks, policy institutes.

 

[CodE]

The reality is the Pakistani establishment has a fear at the back of their minds, that one day the Americans will go after Pakistan - either directly or via India / Israel. As a western born Pakistani, I can see this happening in the next 5-10 years. Hence Pakistan whilst will be part of war on terror, it does need to keep some friends in Afghanistan in reserve for future events, being talked about and shaped by the American establishment, think tanks, policy institutes.

What would the Americans have to gain by 'going after' Pakistan, that doesn't seem like a rational fear. Is 'going after' war?

Just yesterday the under secretary of state Nicholas Burns, said that Pakistan is Indispensable in the Global Anti-Terrorism Fight

An American attack against Pakistan doesn't fit for me, can you elaborate more on what you meant?

 

[ejaz007]

Pakistan and its role in war against terror! in General Military Defence

The position of Pakistan on war on terror is perhaps most difficult. It physically borders Afghanistan and therefore is the direct target of retaliation. If proper logs are maintained then perhaps Pakistan has suffered most casualties both military and civilian. On the other hand most of the think tanks in the west and some in the USA does not understand the ground realities and their analysis are based on their thinking which they wish to see implemented in an entirely different environment. The kind of impression that has been imposed on Pakistan thanks to years of anti Pakistan campaing by some countries has also created more problems than solutions. Another interesting point worth mentioning is the sudden US reversal of policies in the past. First on the eve of the 1965 war when an ally suddenyl found out that his military partner has not only stopped military support and imposed sanctions but has also militarily supported the enemy. Then after Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan Pakistan suddenly found Americans had vanished in the thin air and left Pakistan in most auckward position. With limited resources they not only had to fight this changed scenario on their own but also had to bear over 3 miilion Afghans for nearly 2 decandes from 1988 onwards. This surely is in the back of the minds of Pakistani policy makers and they do not want to end up in the same situation that is why they want to make sure that they have some friends left in Afghanistan just in case. Then there are the traditional foes it has to keep watch. Pakistan can not allocate to many resources both in manpower and funds for fight on terror alone. It has to maintain credible defense and keep enough military force available to cater any unfriendly moves by its traditional enemy. Another point is that in the present age where information can not be kept hidden from the people no government can keep only following policies that its people think are not in their best interest. One example USA keeps on praising Musharraf but actually it is the India that is economically and militarily benefiting from the war on terror. What Pakistan has received so far is perhaps 4-5 billion dollars in economic help and if I am correct around 1.5 biilion in military aid since 2001. Correct me if I am wrong. On the other hand India has been offered every thing from F-16, F-18 to now F-35, Naval ships, Patriots, Civil Nuclear Technology and the list continues. What do you think a common person in Pakistan thinks about it. So my friends the situation for Pakistan is most complicated and US, EU and rest of world needs to understand this. If US is really fighting a war or terror only and no hidden agenda is involved than it should help countries really sufefring from this war and not those making a lot of sound but doing nothing.

 

[CodE]

You are completely right. Pakistan has a very unfortunate and unique position in the war on terror. Do you think this will greatly hinder their offenseive effectiveness and capabilities in this war?

 

[falcon2k7]

I would say instead of a thin wire more of a rock and a hard place. The Taliban was a creation of the ISI and their pet project up until six years ago. I have a good friend that is Pakastani, but she spent most of her life in London as her father was a Doctor. They moved back to Pakistan in 2001 and last year they moved back to the UK because of the situation in the country.

While the fundamentalists are still a minority outside of the tribal area, they have enough sympathies from within the ISI and military means that a coup is never out of the question.

Whatever Bush and Co. want to say about Iraq being the front line on the war on terror, I'd argue that it's really Pakistan. Somewhere along the line you have to figure that Bin Laden & Co. thought the easiest way to acquire nuclear devices is from a country like Pakistan.

 

[webmaster]

I would say instead of a thin wire more of a rock and a hard place. The Taliban was a creation of the ISI and their pet project up until six years ago. I have a good friend that is Pakastani, but she spent most of her life in London as her father was a Doctor. They moved back to Pakistan in 2001 and last year they moved back to the UK because of the situation in the country.

How would you or other neighboring countries would have dealt with Afghan issue after the Russian left? Say, it was Bangladesh or India in place of Pakistan, what could have been done to put a stop to the 20 years of war and civil war in Afghanistan?

While the fundamentalists are still a minority outside of the tribal area, they have enough sympathies from within the ISI and military means that a coup is never out of the question.

You are stating something that may have been true before 911. Its been almost 10 years since Musharraf came to power and a lot of things have happened that made the "fundamentalist" elements mad and if coup was to happen, it would have happened already.

Whatever Bush and Co. want to say about Iraq being the front line on the war on terror, I'd argue that it's really Pakistan. Somewhere along the line you have to figure that Bin Laden & Co. thought the easiest way to acquire nuclear devices is from a country like Pakistan.

How is it the "easiest" way to get nuclear devices from country like Pakistan? What would you do and how would you get one? In recent years which country has had nuclear devices and mini nukes missing from its inventory?

 

[CodE]

How is it the "easiest" way to get nuclear devices from country like Pakistan? What would you do and how would you get one? In recent years which country has had nuclear devices and mini nukes missing from its inventory?

Exactly, and even if the nearly impossible happened and the Taliban somehow acquired a nuke from Pakistan would they be able to get away with it? Would they have the expertise necessary to make the weapon effective? If they ever tried to use it as a missile it wouldn't last longer than a few minutes before someone shot it right out of the sky. No Pakistan's nuclear weapons are safe from terrorists.

 

[yess]

i think it is not american policy which is harsh but president's. personally i think Ronald Reagan was very pro pakistan, in fact he made it possible for pakistan to acquire latest weapons back in 80s when he took office. where as the Afghan war is not as important to US as today's war on terror and considering the most important role pakistan has played must be much more appreciated by US policy makers and the president him self. the US is getting what the want from Pakistan and with little concern and interest in pakistan's security. where as back in 80s thanks to Ronald Reagan "god bless him" made it possible for pakistan to equip PAF with the latest fighter F-16, missiles, radars, etc etc.
at lest US must help pakistan to get out of the mess which they have gotten them in and modernize, improve border security.

 

[Shaffiq]

The US will not tolerate a Muslim nation with nuclear weapons - whether now or in 20 years - the US does not see it in its interests.

Some 5-6 years, policy thinks talked about toppling Saddam Hussain - those think tanks contained members of the 1st GW Bush administration. Now think tanks are talking about Pakistan with less land mass, takeover by extremists etc - make no mistake, after Iran it is Pakistan. The strategic nexus lies in having energy flow from Central Asia through Afghanistan to Pakistan bypassing Iran, then onwards through Pakistans coast. This needs a controllable Pakistan and Iran. The US sees India as its strategic ally in South Asia - read counterweight to China and Chinese access to the Indian Ocean via Pakistan. Pakistan with nuclear weapons is a threat to India / US strategy. Pakistan politicians have a habit of misleading themselves and public when the talk of US strategic interests in Pakistan - US strategic interests not mutual. The relationship is all military - not economic or political. Once Musharraf goes, the US will change it tune - see what is happening as Musharraf is under domestic pressure - the US is starting to change its tune, and wag its finger as in the days of Pressler.

Pakistan needs to play 2 cards - 1 - let China expand and militarise Gwadar allowing access to the Straights of Hormuz to the Chinese energy and trade routes. 2 Allow the Russians and Chinese to build the energy corridor from Central Asia through to Gwadar - and 3 place a little more distance between themselves and Yanks - the Yanks will want a share of the action and will have to work with Pakistan on a more mutual basis.

The present US strategy is based on the time tested military theme - give them a few obsolete weapons and the idiots in the Pak Armed forces think they have a strategic relationship.

What would the Americans have to gain by 'going after' Pakistan, that doesn't seem like a rational fear. Is 'going after' war?

An American attack against Pakistan doesn't fit for me, can you elaborate more on what you meant?

 

[ejaz007]

Pakistan and its role in war against terror! in General Military Defence

Yes Pakistan's effectiveness is hampered by continued accusations from USA and Afghanistan. To understand how it is hampered one needs to visit the area. If one is familiar with the landscape then he or she knows that blocking such a terrain is almost impossible. It’s highly rugged and rocky area where vehicular movement is difficult if not impossible. Secondly the other part in our case the allied forces and afghan forces themselves do nothing and then have an easy scapegoat Pakistan. I would like to put one question here how many high value targets have Afghans and allied troops captures in Afghanistan. None. While Pakistan has captured hundreds. This means we are more sincere and serious then the country who started this war on terror. The only excuse the allied and Afghans has it that all of them are in Pakistan including Ossama Bin Laden. If this is the case then pass on the intelligence to Pakistan. Why don’t they because they know he is not in Pakistan. I believe whatever high value targets or second or third level targets were in Pakistan have been either captured or killed. Now whatever fighting is going on in Afghanistan is indigenous and against the occupying forces. The element of alqaeda is now not a part of it. Another question that was raised was that ISI created Taliban. This has been openly accepted by some ISI Ex-chiefs. To understand what led to taliban we need to go back and have a look at Afghanistan before taliban. What was their civil war, anarchy, destruction and illicit trade of narcotics. Pakistan had a genuine worry about a country on its border without proper government and on the verge of collapse. The worst worry was what would happen if millions more Afghans entered Pakistan. Its own economy shall collapse. To evade this Pakistan formed a strategy and the result was taliban. They took over 90% of country restored peace and formed a strong central government. Under taliban heroin and other narcotics vanished. You might be surprised to know but the fact is that around two dozen taliban armed with klashinkove only used to guard Pakistan Afghanistan border. Now there are around 100,000 Pakistani and perhaps similar number of allied and Afghan troops unsuccessfully guarding the border. To best understand the situation in Afghanistan one needs to understand one simple fact. In Afghanistan tribal and ethnic grouping is most important. If you need to control Afghanistan you need to take all ethnic groups with you. This has not happened. The largest group feels that it has been left out in the cold. Things would start to improve once this group The Pashtuns also feel they are part of the government and have been entrusted with responsibility.

 

[ejaz007]

Pakistan and its role in war against terror! in General Military Defence

Two more issued have come across in this thread. The possibility of nuclear weapons going into alqaeda hands from Pakistan and US military action against Pakistan. The simple answer to first is that the chances are nonexistent. The weapons are well guarded by military and a special strategic force has been created to safe guard them. The force is highly trained and well equipped. It is headed by a three star general the most senior after chief of army staff. Further as far as I understand not all components of the nuclear weapons are placed at one place. Then our security record is far better than other countries. There have been no reported incidents of nuclear breach. These weapons are much easily available in some other parts of the world then Pakistan. The other matter regarding possible US military action against Pakistan. Well the only thing I can say is that we need to watch all countries including USA and our planning should include such an eventuality. We also need to form a strategy for a scenario where India and USA join together for such a strike to eliminate our nuclear weapons.

 

[Andrew_W]

There is another perspective to all these. The recent change of tune from Washington hinting possible military intervention in Pakistan is a card they are playing at the same time to show what they can do to pressure the Russians.