Afghanistan - News and Discussion

[ramana]

Can be x-posted in many threads...



Pioneer op-ed:

EDITS | Thursday, July 8, 2010 | Email | Print | | Back

Kayani roots for Haqqani

G Parthasarathy



There now appears to be recognition in New Delhi that direct allegations against Pakistan of sponsoring terrorism only invite bland and self-righteous denials. But the tone of India’s approach has changed after Daood Gilani aka James Headley spoke candidly to Indian investigators in the presence of ISI officials and revealed substantive details of how the plot to attack Mumbai was hatched and about the role of Hafiz Mohammed Saeed, other senior members of the Lashkar-e-Tayyeba and serving and retired Army officials, some of whom hid their true identity.



Confronted with these details during the visit of Home Minister P Chidambaram to Islamabad, the Pakistanis have promised thorough investigations. It would be naïve to believe that given Hafiz Saeed’s close links with the ISI, Mr Nawaz Sharif’s Pakistan Muslim League and virtually all major Islamic parties, the Pakistani Government would have the will or the inclination to act against the real masterminds of the 26/11 Mumbai terrorist outrage.



Rather than accuse Pakistan directly of complicity in the Mumbai carnage, Mr Chidambaram said, “Nobody is questioning anybody’s intentions. It is the outcome to become visible. We have agreed that there are certain outcomes we are looking forward to.”Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, normally upbeat on India-Pakistan relations, remarked, “In dealing with Pakistan our attitude should be trust, but verify. So only time will tell which way the animal will turn.”



Minister for External Affairs SM Krishna told visiting Pakistani journalists, “Mumbai is a deep scar. Pakistan must pursue those who were responsible.” He added, “Political will is needed to tackle terrorism. Does the will exist? India has it.” As a young Pakistani journalist noted, implicit in Mr Krishna’s comments was “the Indian assessment that Pakistan and more specially the Pakistani Army does not have the will”. Mr Krishna also left Pakistani journalists in no doubt that in a climate where there was a ‘trust deficit’ it would be unrealistic to expect major breakthroughs. He told the journalists, “It will take talks, lots of talks before an agreement.”



New Delhi evidently recognises that Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani and his ISI chief are working overtime to get the Taliban leader Sirajuddin Haqqani, now based in Pakistan, to control southern Afghanistan through a deal they appear to be negotiating with a beleaguered Afghan President Hamid Karzai, who is beset with fears of a precipitate American withdrawal. Simultaneously the ISI intends to keep the pot boiling in Jammu & Kashmir by backing Jama’at-e-Islami leader Syed Ali Shah Geelani and target Indian interests through the LeT and the Taliban’s Haqqani network across Afghanistan and in Bangladesh. Pakistan’s assets in India like SIMI will also be used to keep Indian security agencies on edge, but a repetition of attacks like the Mumbai carnage could well be avoided for the present as any such attack will undermine Pakistani ambitions on its western borders with Afghanistan.



Both Sirajuddin Haqqani and his father Jalaluddin Haqqani have been long-term assets of the ISI. They are both members of the ruling council of the Taliban, headed by Mullah Mohammed Omar. More importantly, Jalaluddin Haqqani, together with the ISI, has helped Osama bin Laden’s jihadi network in Afghanistan and Pakistan since 1988, When the Americans invaded Afghanistan in October 2001, Osama bin Laden escaped from the American bombing of the caves where he was hiding in Tora Bora. He was escorted to north Waziristan and has since been protected by the Haqqani network there.



The Haqqani network, now led by Sirajuddin Haqqani, openly claims that its support for Al Qaeda today is “at its highest limit”. It also provides haven and support to jihadis from Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, Chechnya, the Kurdish areas of Iran and Iraq, and even from Germany. While Gen Kayani has stonewalled and stalled American requests to crackdown on the Haqqani network on one pretext or another, the Americans are now dumbfounded to learn that behind their backs the Pakistani Army has been seeking to persuade the Afghans to give a leading role, probably involving de facto control of southern Afghanistan, to start with, for Sirajuddin Haqqani, their protégé who is an Islamic radical with demonstrably inseparable links with Al Qaeda.



The question that arises is that why is Gen Kayani, scheduled to retire in a few months, so keen on pushing ‘reconciliation’ with the Haqqani network, backed by his ISI geniuses? As well-known American analyst Jeffrey Dressler avers, “The Haqqanis rely on Al Qaeda for mass appeal, funding and training. In return, they provide Al Qaeda with shelter and protection, to strike at foreign forces in Afghanistan and beyond. Any negotiated settlement with the Haqqanis threatens to undermine the raison d'être of US involvement in Afghanistan for over the past decade.” One can only conclude that Gen Kayani and the ISI believe, like the Taliban leadership, that Taliban resistance will force an early American exit from Afghanistan, with the US willing to agree to any settlement that is “face-saving”.



Afghanistan’s neighbours and Russia have reacted with alarm to the ongoing Karzai-Kayani nexus which followed the sacking or sidelining of key officials suspicious of Pakistani intentions, like former Intelligence Chief Amrullah Saleh and Army Chief Gen Bismillah Khan by Mr Karzai. On July 1 an official spokesman of the Russian Foreign office warned: “Attempts by the Afghan leadership with the support of Western countries to establish a negotiation process with Taliban leaders to build a mechanism for national ‘reconciliation’ gives us serious cause for concern.” The spokesman added, “Work to return repentant Taliban militants to civilian life should not be replaced with a campaign to rehabilitate the entire Taliban movement.” The Chinese have noted that the Taliban have demanded unconditional American withdrawal as a precondition for any dialogue. Chinese ‘analysts’ aver, “War is prevailing and continuing (in Afghanistan) and the peace process has not started. Peace on the foundation of conditions is not possible, if the Taliban are not weakened.”



The entire Afghan strategy of Pakistan is being managed primarily by the Army establishment, with the elected Government sidelined. It is a high-risk strategy which could well flounder as it is apparent that while the Americans are confused they are hardly likely to leave Afghanistan to the mercies of an ISI-backed Sirajuddin Haqqani.



The major reason for Pakistan’s interest in having southern Afghanistan controlled by Haqqani is that it fears that the traditional Pashtun leadership in Afghanistan strongly rejects the Durand Line and supports the formation of a ‘Pashtunistan’. High-risk policies by Gen Ayub Khan, Gen Yahya Khan and Gen Pervez Musharraf, leading to conflict with India, have in the past proved disastrous for Pakistan. Will Gen Kayani lead his country to similar disaster with his ambitions in Afghanistan?

So what GP is saying is Sirajuddin Haqqani is going to get control of Southern Afghanistan ie the area that is west of Durand Line. Is this the TSPA idea to hedge the Durand Line issue?



Looks to me the TSPA goal of transforming "bad" Taliban into "good" Taliban is to hedge the Durand line. How does it advance their strategic depth goal?





Any insights from our members?