Our Friend and Ally has an ever-increasing amount of explaining to do, if only it were held to account. "Pakistani Role Seen in Taliban Surge at Border," by Carlotta Gall for the New York Times:
QUETTA, Pakistan — The most explosive question about the Taliban resurgence here along the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan is this: Have Pakistani intelligence agencies been promoting the Islamic insurgency?
The government of Pakistan vehemently rejects the allegation and insists that it is fully committed to help American and NATO forces prevail against the Taliban militants who were driven from power in Afghanistan in 2001.
Western diplomats in both countries and Pakistani opposition figures say that Pakistani intelligence agencies — in particular the powerful Inter-Services Intelligence and Military Intelligence — have been supporting a Taliban restoration, motivated not only by Islamic fervor but also by a longstanding view that the jihadist movement allows them to assert greater influence on Pakistan’s vulnerable western flank.
More than two weeks of reporting along this frontier, including dozens of interviews with residents on each side of the porous border, leaves little doubt that Quetta is an important base for the Taliban, and found many signs that Pakistani authorities are encouraging the insurgents, if not sponsoring them.
The evidence is provided in fearful whispers, and it is anecdotal.
At Jamiya Islamiya, a religious school here in Quetta, Taliban sympathies are on flagrant display, and residents say students have gone with their teachers’ blessings to die in suicide bombings in Afghanistan.
Three families whose sons had died as suicide bombers in Afghanistan said they were afraid to talk about the deaths because of pressure from Pakistani intelligence agents. Local people say dozens of families have lost sons in Afghanistan as suicide bombers and fighters.
One former Taliban commander said in an interview that he had been jailed by Pakistani intelligence officials because he would not go to Afghanistan to fight. He said that, for Western and local consumption, his arrest had been billed as part of Pakistan’s crackdown on the Taliban in Pakistan. Former Taliban members who have refused to fight in Afghanistan have been arrested — or even mysteriously killed — after resisting pressure to re-enlist in the Taliban, Pakistani and Afghan tribal elders said.
“The Pakistanis are actively supporting the Taliban,” declared a Western diplomat in an interview in Kabul. He said he had seen an intelligence report of a recent meeting on the Afghan border between a senior Taliban commander and a retired colonel of the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence.
Pakistanis and Afghans interviewed on the frontier, frightened by the long reach of Pakistan’s intelligence agencies, spoke only with assurances that they would not be named. Even then, they spoke cautiously.
[...]
The Inter-Services Intelligence once had an entire wing dedicated to training jihadis, he said. Today the religious parties probably have enough of their own people to do the training, but, he added, the I.S.I. so thoroughly monitors phone calls and people’s movements that it would be almost impossible for any religious party to operate a training camp without its knowledge.
“They trained the people who are at the heart of it all, and they have done nothing to roll back their protégés,” Mr. Haqqani said.
[...]
Pakistan has long seen jihadi movements like the Taliban as a counter to Indian and Russian influence next door in Afghanistan, the Western diplomat and other analysts said, and as a way to provide Pakistan with “strategic depth,” or a friendly buffer on its western border.
[...]
Three students from the madrasa went to Afghanistan recently on suicide missions, he said. The family of one of the men admitted that he had blown himself up but denied that he had attended the school. The man’s brother suggested that he had been forced into the mission and that someone had recruited him for payment.
President Musharraf relies on the religious party Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam, or J.U.I., which dominates this province, Baluchistan, as an important partner in the provincial and national parliaments.
At a madrasa, called simply Jamiya Islamiya, on winding Hajji Ghabi Road, a board in the courtyard proudly declares “Long Live Mullah Omar,” in praise of the Taliban leader, and “Long Live Fazlur Rehman,” the leader of J.U.I.
Members of the provincial government and Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam are frequent visitors to the school, the local opposition party member said, asking that his name not be used because he feared Pakistan’s intelligence services. People on motorbikes with green government license plates visit at night, he said, as do luxurious sport utility vehicles with blackened windows, a favorite of Taliban commanders.
Maulvi Noor Muhammad, a Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam representative from Baluchistan in the National Assembly, recently received a guest barefoot while sitting on the floor of a grubby district office in Quetta, a map of the world above him painted on the wall to represent his belief in worldwide Islamic revolution.
He denied providing the militants any logistical support. “The J.U.I. is not supporting the Taliban anymore,” he said. “We are only providing moral support. We pray for their success in ousting the foreign troops from the land of Afghanistan.”
On a recent morning, the deputy director of the Jamiya Islamiya madrasa, Qari Muhammad Ibrahim, declined to meet a female reporter for The New York Times but answered a question from a local male reporter.
He did not deny that some of the madrasa’s 280 students had gone to fight in Afghanistan. “In the Koran it is written that it is every Muslim’s right to fight jihad,” he said. “All we are telling them is what is in the Koran, and then it’s up to them to go to jihad.”
NATO officials and Western diplomats in Afghanistan have grown increasingly critical of Pakistan for allowing the Taliban leaders, commanders and soldiers to operate from their country, which has given an advantage to the insurgency in southern Afghanistan. In September, Gen. James L. Jones, then NATO’s supreme commander, told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that Quetta remained the headquarters of the Taliban movement.
Still, Pakistan has insisted that the Taliban leadership is not based in Quetta. “If there are Taliban in Quetta, they are few,” said Pakistan’s minister for information and broadcasting, Tariq Azim Khan. “You can count them on your fingers.”
American officials and Western diplomats noted that, when put under enough pressure, Pakistan had come through with flashes of cooperation. But that only seems to reinforce the view that Pakistan’s intelligence agencies are more in touch with what is going on in the Taliban insurgency than the government lets on publicly.
At the same time, a kind of dirty war is building between Afghan and Pakistani intelligence agencies. A senior Afghan intelligence official said one of its informers in Pakistan was recently killed and dumped in pieces in Peshawar, a border town. The Afghan intelligence service has also recently arrested two Afghan generals, one retired, who have been charged with spying for Pakistan, as well as a Pakistani suspected of being an intelligence agent.
[...]
Mr. Hai, 50, who is a Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam member, denied that his son had been persuaded to fight by anyone. “From the start it was his spirit to take part in jihad,” his father said. “It’s all to do with personal will. If someone agrees, then he goes. Even if someone wishes to, no one can stop him.”
It is an argument that supporters of the jihad use frequently. But for some of the families mourning their sons, there is no doubt that the madrasas and the religious parties are the first point of contact.
That was the conclusion reached by the family of Muhammad Daoud, a 22-year-old man from Pishin who disappeared more than a year ago.
Mr. Hai, 50, who is a Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam member, denied that his son had been persuaded to fight by anyone. “From the start it was his spirit to take part in jihad,” his father said. “It’s all to do with personal will. If someone agrees, then he goes. Even if someone wishes to, no one can stop him.”
It is an argument that supporters of the jihad use frequently. But for some of the families mourning their sons, there is no doubt that the madrasas and the religious parties are the first point of contact.
That was the conclusion reached by the family of Muhammad Daoud, a 22-year-old man from Pishin who disappeared more than a year ago.
[...]
Then, he said, a Taliban propaganda CD came out showing his son with a group of others taking an oath before the Taliban commander, Mullah Dadullah.
“He had a shawl over his head and was preparing for a suicide bombing,” Mr. Gul said. “He said, ‘I am fighting for God, and I am ready for this.’”
His eldest son, Allah Dad, 33, blamed the jihadi groups and the Inter-Services Intelligence. “We don’t know how he made contact with those jihadi groups,” he said. “There are some groups active in taking people to Afghanistan and they are active in Quetta.
“All Taliban are I.S.I. Taliban,” he added. “It is not possible to go to Afghanistan without the help of the I.S.I. Everyone says this.”
NYT realizes that around 7 or 8 Eastern standard time you can read the UK papers on the internet.
Big Project Links to World Wide Newspapers in English
Asia Times is very good for news in all of Asia including Pakistan.
Maybe NYT is finally reading Christina Lamb and the Pakistan connection. Maybe they are even, gasp, reading Jihad Watch.
Again, evidence that Pathologicalstan is playing a double game. Next time India wars with them, let Pathologicalstan get clobbered.
With friends and allies such as Pakistan and Saudi Arabia-WHO NEEDS ENEMIES?
“If there are Taliban in Quetta, they are few,” said Pakistan’s minister for information and broadcasting, Tariq Azim Khan. “You can count them on your fingers.”
These people are a bunch of crack-pots jerking us around. Why do we ever believe what they say?
But behold, the administration's support monkey convoy will say Musharraf is our only choice, blah blah blah moderate, blah blah, mullah takeover, blah blah.
Pakistan is an expert at this duplicitous game. Its been playing it for decades against India. US and NATO are only new customers or shall we say guinea pigs.
The problem with this war against terrorism is the fact, America's money is being used for it. If the goose is laying a 50 Billion dollar golden egg in six months, how are ya going to get that damn thing back home ? People will kill each other for that shit !
The Bush Administration's Assumptions Fall One By One:
#1.
All people "want freedom" and in the Middle East, the removal of Saddam Hussein has led to what can be summed up as:
Democracy is on the March.
Just look at Egypt. Just look at Lebanon. Just look at Jordan and Bahrain. Everywhere, in every election, either Sunni or Shi'a more devout and therefore more dangerous, were elected: Ikhwan members in Egypt (and had more of their candidates been allowed to stand, more would have been elected) winning seat and after seat. In Lebanon, after that famously photographed and ballyhooed anti-Syrian demonstration by Christians, Druse, and some Sunni Arabs, it is now pro-Syrian Hezbollah that is demonstrating, agitating, endangering the Lebanese government. In Bahrain, the "elections" held hardly shook the power of "King Hamid (the British always called the ruler of that tight little island simply "The Ruler" but lately those rulers have been giving themselves promotions), a Sunni, who rules that Shi'a-populated islandette. And so on: Democracy Is Not on the March, and wherever elections did not shake his pwo right up that demonstration of Christians, Sunnis, and Druse last year.
#2. Iraq is or will be, or at least could be, a Light Unto the Muslim Nations. But how could Shi'a-dominated Iraq, with the Sunnis now deprived of both economic and political power, ever be regarded with anything but horror by Sunni Arabs who run every other Arab country? How could the Bush Administration, how could all those think-tank and media ponitificators, have missed this point? How could they have failed to understand the depth and duration of the Sunni-Shi'a divide, that goes far beyond the behavior of Saddam Hussein during the last decade or two of his reign? How could they not have known, for example, that the Shi'a are regared by many Sunnis as virtual Infidels? How could they not have known that many Sunnis blame the Shi'a for behaving treacherously in 1253, at the time of the catastrophic invasion by the Mongols -- even charging them with making it easier for the Mongols to enter the city?
#3. Pakistan is our "staunch ally," indeed our most important "ally," in the battle against terrorism. Pakistan is not, never was, and never can be, anything of the kind. Pakistan's population, below a thin anglophone veneer, consists of primitive people who believe primitive things, and whose belief-system inculcates permanent hostlity toward the Infidels. And if the Bush Administration needs to be reminded, we are Infidels. America is an Infidel land. Having a handful of such Muslim-for-identification-purposes Muslims as Zalmay Khalilzad in high-ranking and visible positions. or Fouad Ajami as a well-known commentator (or the glued-on smile of the much less intelligent Fareed Zakaria on display in every Newsweek, where he is aparently some kind of bigshot and delivers himself of either calculated or merely ignorant nonsense on the subject of Jihad) and thus can never be regarded by Pakistan as anything other than a land and people to be used, to be manipulated, to be exploited for as much money and weaponry as we can conceivably supply.
Pakistan's I.S.I. gave birth to the Taliban in the madrasas of Pakistan. It nurtured the Taliban, and helped to send its members back to Afghanistan. It was one of only three countries to extend diplomatic recognition to the Taliban government. Powerful generals, more powerful than the seemingly straight-talking but quite meretricious Musharraf, harbor, protect, outfit, and send back into Afghanistan to fight the Americans and other NATO forces many membfers of the Taliban.
Who reflects better the views of the 150 million primitives of Pakistan? Is it Musharraf, who grew up partly in Turkey, with a secularisant father, and a biography of Ataturk at the ready, Musharraf who attended a Catholic-run college, or is it, rather, Hamid Gul, the sinister former head of I.S.I.? Which one do you think is the more representative man?
Nothing remains of the Bush Administration's assumptions about Democracy, about Iraq, about Pakistan. Yet it perseveres, and Rice still prates about a New Day That Has Dawned in the Middle East. It hasn't. All that has happened is that the removal of Saddam Hussein set in motion the takeover of Iraq by Shi'a, and the inevitable resistance to that takeover by the Sunnis inside and outside Iraq. That has created a situation to be welcomed and exploited. Instead Rice seems intent on preventing that Sunni-Shia' split, for this is what she has been telling reporters:
"Looking more broadly across the region, in particular to the nations bordering Iraq and along the Persian Gulf, Ms. Rice said she was trying to construct a geopolitical framework of moderate Sunni and Shiites into a stronger, and more active, alliance against extremist Sunni and Shiite states -- meaning Syria and Iran.
But tensions emerge. America's Muslim allies in the region do not like being called moderate, as they see themselves as fervent in their religious belief, though mainstream, perhaps, in their view of the world. There are also divisions over how and whether to negotiate with Iran.
'There's still a tendency to see these things in Sunni-Shia terms,' Ms. Rice said. 'But the Middle East is going to have to overcome that.' [Fat chance]' She added that neighboring Sunni-led Arab states should understand that Iraq's Shiite-led government primarily saw itself as Arab and that the only way it would ally itself with Iran, which is Shiite but not Arab, would be 'if people deny the Shia-led Iraq a place in the Arab world.'"
That's how Condoleeza Rice understands the Shi'a-Sunni split, which the "Middle East is going to have to overcome," and how she thinks she will be able to reassure the Sunni Arabs. And of course she apparently sees her job as one of smooting over that split, making sure that it does not expand.
To which one wishes to reply: Are you really a complete idiot, or just a partial one?
The UK is letting in a plane load of immigrants from this country with these same ideas every day. And the US is also.
Why don't they stop immigration?
Why don't they forbid travel to this country? The way the US does with Cuba, a country where the people would not be a menace?
I don't give a rip if the ISI or Joan Baez is helping the Taliban as everyone knows it is government aided from China to Russia to Iran to Pakistan.
There are limited numbers of routes into Afghanistan though and what I care about are simple infared cameras, simple warthogs, simple artie and simple napalm as the solution to stop the free terrorist trade. Dead terrorists harm no one.
Meanwhile, India still has 'dialogues' with the worst neighbor possible. And you thought the college kids next door playing loud rap music were bad? How would you like to have a neighbor that wants to kill you.
"Nothing remains of the Bush Administration's assumptions about Democracy, about Iraq, about Pakistan. Yet it perseveres, and Rice still prates about a New Day That Has Dawned in the Middle East."
Insanity has been defined as doing the same thing many times over and always expecting a different result. Sounds like our leaders (at all levels in both parties) are certifiable.
Odds are we'll hear from the Bushies that these are "rogue elements" within the ISI, just as the September 11 terrorists didn't represent Islam.
The question to ask Musharraf is not: are you with us or against us? It's: are you part of the problem or part of the solution?
Today Steven Emerson took questions from viewers on C-SPAN and he spoke of the need to isolate the militant jihadists, their leaders and their supporters while "empowering the 'genuine moderates' who DO exist and could come to the fore if we gave them enough political backing".
Emerson is a man with a broad background and knowledge of Islamic terrorists.
When Hugh and Robert talk about the inherent dangers in Islam as it is constituted and its fourteen centuries of violent conquest, how do we ever arrive at a separation of "moderate" and "radical" Islam?
Hugh said:
"America's Muslim allies in the region do not like being called moderate, as they see themselves as fervent in their religious belief, though mainstream, perhaps, in their view of the world."
Our allies don't like to be called moderate, so where does that leave us? Where are the moderates that Emerson says exist?
“In the Koran it is written that it is every Muslim’s right to fight jihad,” he said. “All we are telling them is what is in the Koran, and then it’s up to them to go to jihad.”
Steve Emerson defined "genuine moderates" as those who would publicly and unambiguously condemn Hamas, Hezbollah, etc. as terrorists and would also renounce the concept of jihad as violent holy war.
Where can such moderates be found? Who is ready to risk his life to reform Islam, for that is what will be required.
Borg, you say and asks,
"The UK is letting in a plane load of immigrants from t[Pakistan] every day. And the US is also. Why don't they stop immigration? Why don't they forbid travel to this country {to the US]? The way the US does with Cuba, a country where the people would not be a menace?"
ANSWER:
That is because Cuba is ruled by a Communist dictatorship. This (Communism) still is (even with the demise of the Soviet Union) regarded as the eternal enemy of the US.
The people of Cuba are not all communists, wereas the Pakis are for the most part Moslem, and as such beholden to wage jihad, etc.
If you read Joseph C, Myers' review of "Islamic Warfare" by a Paki author, you are struck that this Paki military man is thoroughly reliant on the koran, faith in allah and etc., and striking terror into the hearts of all anti-jihadist forces
when conducting jihad (islamic warfare).
I would much rather see a selective importation of Cuban immigrants (thoroughly vetted--no Marielitos) than Pakis, Saudis, "West Bankers, "Gazans" and other Islamics.
Then again, nothing makes sense (is rational) that is being done by the US Administration (less so by the disloyal Democrat opposition.
The words that come out of Condoleeza Rice's mouth could have been spoken by a mentally challenged person. We know that she has academic credentials and I suppose a high IQ.
Mme. Rice's boss is not burdened by such baggage. Allying with the Pakis (Musharaf) is not a bad idea, trusting them to root out the Taliban and "help us" in Afghanistan is as "brilliant" (not) idea as asking Iran and Syria to "help us" solve the Iraqi conundrum--actually a Gordian knot.
(Oh for Alexandros, where is there one like him when he is needed?)
"The UK is letting in a plane load of immigrants from this country with these same ideas every day. And the US is also"
Its actually far worse than that - if you read Michael Moran's artice on MSNBC.com from a few years ago on the "airlift of evil" [same data is available in a Seymour Hersh article] - you'll see that we actually aided the Pakistanis in recreating the Taliban, by allowing the airift of key Pakistani Al-Qaeda associates[leaders] back to the safety of Pakistani soil.
These Taliban now fully resucitated with the help of Pakistan's ISI - are now kiling coalition soldiers n a regular basis, not to speak of Afghan scholl eachers, road-workers and the like.
The question is why?
Does it really take a Sherlock holmes to figure out why Osama Bin laden ,Mullah Omar, Dawood Ibrahim(wanted in 1993 bombay blasts) are safe and sound despite armies of world looking for it.
How come a powerful leader like Saddam was caught?
Simple Becasue the USA and coa-llition forces were able to search in the land and country where he was hiding.
Pakistan has cleverly joined the war on terror, thus not allowing USA soilders on its soil and claiming to put its soilders on the hunt for Osama.
Is it not obvious that they are not hunting them but infact helping them and putting on an act of hunting for the world.
Lets USA or co-alition troops of other country in and its just a matter of time before these barbarians are caught.
"Have Pakistani intelligence agencies been promoting the Islamic insurgency?"
A rhetorical question in the class of "Is the Pope Italian/Polish/German?"
To those who would rather believe that the Pakistani government is our ally in "the war against terror", I would remind them of the clemency granted to AQ Khan's following revelations of his sales of nuclear technology to other Muslim states. More likely than not, the Pakistani government left AQ Khan to his quiet retirement because trying him would doubtless have embarrassed the government officials who were also involved.
Pakistan vehemently objects to US incursions and overflights used to locate and destroy terrorist camps and terrorists.. Why? one might ask...If Pakistan were a true ally, would it be too much to ask for a little cooperation in eliminating a common foe? Pakistan is a rugged country and is certainly hard to patrol, but not impossible.
Our satellite surveillance certainly produces excellent photos, as do our spy planes and spy drones. Evidently this is causing other countries some concern, such as China? China recently had a successful display of anti satellite warfare as demonstrated by destroying one of their own satellites..China has long been arming the terrorists. I think China is like a tiger on the prowl lurking in the tall grass....China is using the Muslims to weaken the western forces. If the western eyes in the skies could be eliminated, the terrorists could move even more freely about. If Pakistan were a true ally, they would allow the US and other coalition forces to go into Pakistan and eliminate these terrorists and their encampments. It is no an impossible thing to do...Pakistan is an ally, but only to the Muslims....
And Bush continues to feed this monster
America agrees to sell Howitzer artillery guns to Pakistan
http://www.india-defence.com/reports/1038
Pakistan to Receive First of Eight P-3 C Orion from United States
http://www.india-defence.com/reports/2807