Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditThings are iffy in Pakistan, with the new civilian coalition getting shakier and the future of Pakistan uncertain after the resignation of Pervez Musharraf, the military president who'd seized power in 1999. The country's leading journalist, Ahmed Rashid, is predicting greater instability in the immediate future, and a Taliban-linked bomb killed dozens in the northwest. So yesterday I went to see Husain Haqqani, the ambassador of Pakistan to the United States, who spoke at a packed noontime meeting of the New America Foundation.
Haqqani is a friend, who I got to know during research for my book, Devil's Game and in reading his wonderful book, Pakistan: Between Mosque and Military. Last year, when he was chairman of the international relations department at Boston University, he invited me to Boston to speak about political Islam.
Yesterday Haqqani delivered an erudite, balanced, optimistic report on Pakistan so far, under the civilian government. Its earlier military rulers, he said -- including Ayub Khan in the 1950s, Zia ul-Haq from 1977-1988, and Musharraf -- provided on an "illusion of stability." The task now is develop government and civil society institutions to create true stability. "The parties have to learn how to work things out," he said. "And they are learning."
The problems are huge, and there are many unanswered questions: Can the parties hold the government together? Who will the next president? How much power will the president have? Who will control the military and the often rogue ISI, Pakstan's military intelligence unit that has close ties to the Taliban? In the Q&A, Haqqani tried to answer all of these.
In regard to controlling the army and the ISI, he said that Pakistan's "praetorian tradition" won't change overnight, and he predicted a long-term struggle over control of the armed forces. "It's not going to happen overnight," he said. An earlier effort to bring the ISI under the control of the interior ministry was flawed, but eventually the office of the prime minister will assume full control of Pakistan's national security apparatus and the system will be "reconfigured" to deprive the president of many powers, he said.
The biggest problem Pakistan may face is not from the Taliban and Al Qaeda, but pressure from the United States to crack down on those groups faster than might be reasonably possible. Haqqani was strongly opposed to unilateral US strikes on Taliban and Al Qaeda targets inside Pakistan, which he said would be "provocative," cause much "collateral damage," and "do not serve any purpose." (Are you listening, Senator Obama?) Gradually, he said, Islamabad will seek to reassert control over the lawless Northwest Frontier Provinces, where the Taliban and AQ are hunkered down. But even there, said Haqqani, public support for the radicals is weak, and the religious parties that ran in the recent elections were "trounced." (He wrylt noted that it was the United States itself, in the 1980s, that built up jihadist momentum in that part of Pakistan, during the war against the USSR in Afghanistan.) What will make the situation better, he said, are improved services and economic growth.
He urged patience on the United States, saying that "democracy has to run its course." The American attitude is not exactly patient. Too often Washington seems to want instant democracy (just add cruise missiles)--my words, not Haqqani's.
Above all, the United States needs to butt out. The very worst option would be for the Pakistani army to jump back into politics by seizing control if the civilian coalition falters. The thing is, it's not likely that the military would act without American support, so the Bush administration ought to make it quite clear that it won't tolerate any more coups d'etat in Pakistan.
RSS
Anybody noticed that almost all the foreign leaders that Bush buddied-up with....came to bad ends?
Blair?....run out of PM office, replaced with Brown.
Musharref?....gone.
Putin?....(who Bush looked "into his soul") turned into Ivan the Terrible.
It's like Bush is a perfect reverse barometer on how to handle foreign relations.
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 2:18pm
Fairly reliable reports have it that Al Qaeda is now out of Afghanistan and in Pakistan - which led one pundit to ask then why are we in Afghanistan - which leads me to envision our military 'chasing' Al Qaeda from one country to another for McCain's next 100 years.
To quote George Will of all people, terrorism cannot be eradicated solely through the use of military force. Rather the 'war of terror' is primarily an intelligence and law enforcement operation that requires cooperation around the world.
Hopefully we can expect 'cooperation' from the next Pakistani ruling regime?
Posted by felicity at 08/20/2008 @ 3:32pm
only Obama has proposed one on one talks with other world leaders, even ones whom might not bend over and kiss our imperialist ass....mcbush on the other hand couldn't find pakistan on a map.....
that being said, hypocritical current idiot in charge bush now calls out russia after US backed aggressor separatist georgia began threatening russia...
bush/mcbush are both embarrassed and humilitated and humbled...and are both neocon stooges, puppets and hypocrites.....god fear american idiots who would vote for more of the same; more of the same means more countries reestablishing their sovereignty in the face of unrelenting american empire building and failed overseas utopian social experiments and outright greed for oil to further enrich the few at the expense of the many...if you are poor, you will be drafted if mcbush gets elected..poor meaning middle class.....mcbush has over 100 million and a dozen mansions, he isn't worried but has never been called "elitist" by neocon mainstream media...try posting something positive about obama on cnn!!! see what happens....if there are too many posting positive obama, they stop the comments!!!!! try it for yourself and see if there is neutral media....cnn is about as neutral as fox blaring in walmart and then saying they are neutral...while mcbush gets his backing and most campaign staff are lobbyists...americans are ignorant and will get fooled again.....
Posted by jrs112 at 08/20/2008 @ 3:48pm
Posted by jrs112 at 08/20/2008 @ 3:48pm
Been researching your past posts.
CONSHAME?
Posted by Benchrest at 08/20/2008 @ 5:29pm
Posted by RedRiver_. at 08/20/2008 @ 5:28pm
No. The author is asking that instead of stepping into this ham-handed like we did into Iraq that we stop and THINK before we invade.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/20/2008 @ 7:16pm
CONSHAME?
Posted by Benchrest at 08/20/2008 @ 5:29pm
i highly doubt that.
Posted by frosty zoom at 08/20/2008 @ 9:30pm
Anybody noticed that almost all the foreign leaders that Bush buddied-up with....came to bad ends?
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 2:18pm
it seems our harper won't quite fit that mould.
Posted by frosty zoom at 08/20/2008 @ 9:33pm
which led one pundit to ask then why are we in Afghanistan
Posted by felicity at 08/20/2008 @ 3:32pm
gas pipeline.
Posted by frosty zoom at 08/20/2008 @ 9:34pm
especially Bin Laden's Al Quaeda or the Taliban and dismisses their power in the region. This thread must be the basis for a comedy skit in disguise!
Posted by RedRiver_. at 08/20/2008 @ 5:28pm
May 22, 2001
That's the message sent with the recent gift of $43 million to the Taliban rulers of Afghanistan, the most virulent anti-American violators of human rights in the world today. The gift, announced last Thursday by Secretary of State Colin Powell, in addition to other recent aid, makes the United States the main sponsor of the Taliban and rewards that "rogue regime" for declaring that opium growing is against the will of God. So, too, by the Taliban's estimation, are most human activities, but it's the ban on drugs that catches this administration's attention.
Never mind that Osama bin Laden still operates the leading anti-American terror operation from his base in Afghanistan, from which, among other crimes, he launched two bloody attacks on American embassies in Africa in 1998.
Sadly, the Bush Administration is cozying up to the Taliban regime at a time when the United Nations, at US insistence, imposes sanctions on Afghanistan because the Kabul government will not turn over Bin Laden.
Posted by frosty zoom at 08/20/2008 @ 9:39pm
Record Opium Crop Funding Resurgent Taliban Going on seven years since U.S. troops invaded Afghanistan and sent the Taliban running, opium production in that country--the primary source of funding for Islamist fighters--has grown beyond anyone's imagination. During its reign, the Taliban regulated the heroin trade, strictly enforcing production quotas and making certain that they got a cut of every ounce sold. Oddly enough, the existence of a narco-state kept the size of the crop under control, relatively speaking. Now that the bearded clerics are gone (at least temporarily), market forces have taken over and poppy cultivation has exploded.
According to a report released today by the National Security Network (NSN), Afghanistan's poppy crop, in terms of the acreage of land used for its cultivation, goes beyond anything Colombia's cocaine kings would dare to dream. It's the country's largest export, worth more than $4 billion per year and employing some 3.3 million Afghans. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime reported that last year's harvest was of "unprecedented size in modern times and unseen since the opium boom in China during the nineteenth century." So much for the War on Drugs.
Posted by frosty zoom at 08/20/2008 @ 9:43pm
Thursday, December 4, 1997
Published at 19:27 GMT
Taleban in Texas for talks on gas pipeline
The 1,300km pipeline will carry gas across Afghanistan's harsh terrain A senior delegation from the Taleban movement in Afghanistan is in the United States for talks with an international energy company that wants to construct a gas pipeline from Turkmenistan across Afghanistan to Pakistan.
Posted by frosty zoom at 08/20/2008 @ 9:54pm
but now the russian have sealed up turkmenistan gas:
Russia To Boost Gas Imports from Turkmenistan - Gazprom by AFX News Limited Sunday, July 06, 2008
ASHGABAT (Thomson Financial) - Russia is boosting its gas imports from Turkmenistan, the CEO of gas giant Gazprom said on Friday, amid growing competition with the West and China for access to the ex-Soviet country's gas.
Alexei Miller made the comments in the Turkmen capital Ashgabat during a visit by Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, who on Friday discussed the country's energy relations with President Gurbanguly Berdymukhamedov.
"We are in the process of increasing the volume of deliveries of Turkmen gas," said Miller. "This year they will be greater than last year," he said.
Russia is also planning a pipeline from Turkmenistan through Kazakhstan that would consolidate its grip on gas supplies from Central Asia to Europe.
Its success would undermine a Western-backed bid to reduce dependence on Moscow by pumping Turkmen gas through the planned Nabucco pipeline linking Turkey to European customers, who rely on Russia for a quarter of their gas.
After Friday's meeting Medvedev said an agreement on the pipeline "would come into force soon".
Amid increased competition for Turkmenistan's vast gas reserves, Moscow has already agreed to a hike in prices it pays to Turkmenistan to $150, up from $100 last year.
However, the price remains far lower than the price charged to European customers of almost $400 per cubic meter. The Russian delegation was to discuss further price increases on Friday, Miller said.
While Russia holds the world's largest gas reserves, lack of development means it is forced to help meet rising internal demand for Russia's growing economy by supplementing its supplies with imports
Posted by frosty zoom at 08/20/2008 @ 9:58pm
Two good reasons for NOT electing another clueless Undemocratic candidate in 2008 just like the oblivious one of the 1990s!
Posted by RedRiver_. at 08/20/2008 @ 10:49pm
rio,
are you blind?
the u.s. gave $43 million TO THE TALIBAN IN 2001!
are you blind?
Posted by frosty zoom at 08/20/2008 @ 11:15pm
In fiscal year 2001, Afghanistan was the United States' top recipient of humanitarian aid, receiving $174 million before September 11.
and i'm sure the taliban never touched a cent.
Posted by frosty zoom at 08/21/2008 @ 12:05am
Why is that anytime someone mentions fighting people like Red start drooling looking for trouble. Do the fringe right really enjoy running into battle with no plan whatsoever. I was under the impression that wars go better when you have a plan and you think before you enter. Maybe if they did that we wouldn't still be in Iraq. Hell maybe we wouldn't have gone because they would have gotten the intelligence, or should I say listened to the intelligence they already ready had from the NIE, that Iraq didn't have WMDs.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/21/2008 @ 12:26pm
Who runs Pakistan is the business of the Pakistani people. Our only business is al-Qaida, because al-Qaida made themselves our business. We cannot fix Pakistan or Afghanistan. Solutions to their problems must be local, because, they know the ground and people. We cannot walk in their shoes.
Posted by P. J. Casey at 08/21/2008 @ 1:18pm