The Frenemy of My Frenemy is My Frenemy?

Ever since their landing in Afghanistan, our allies have badgered Pakistan to make no distinction between Pakistani and Afghan Taliban; and they have made every possible distinction between the two loosely affiliated groups - to the extent of pressing us hard and consistently to attack the Afghan Taliban at the expense of our own struggle with the domestic baddies in Swat, South Waziristan, Orakzai, and everywhere else.

More recently, their strategy in Afghanistan has apparently shifted. The Karzai government, they insist, is holding talks with them, purportedly with a view to reaching agreement over a future political dispensation. The Pentagon approves and the State Department appreciates this moment of truth. 

Happy ending, right? All parties embracing one another in an inclusive peace for the cameras, and all the accompanying nonsensical political oratory before the Afghan factions return to another round of mutual bloodletting? Wrong.

Our allies' obsession with Pakistan zapping the Afghan Taliban shows no signs of wearing away; they would (still) have Islamabad search and destroy the Afghan Taliban, although they highly appreciate the Karzai-led Kabul befriending them. 

Heck, this is getting far too disconcerting; what was that strategic saw again? The frenemy of my frenemy is my frenemy?

Michael D. Furlong: Overzealous Patriot or Fall Guy?

So was Michael D. Furlong, senior Pentagon official who set up a network of private contractors to spy in Afghanistan and Pakistan beginning last year, an overzealous patriot who overstepped the line - or is he being scapegoated to save more consequential personages or corporations? Only time will tell.

A Pentagon inquiry into the matter prompted by a March expose by NYT says he acted without authorization; he 'deliberately misled' senior generals; and that further investigation of his actions is warranted.

Says the new NYT report: "[W]hen Gen. David H. Petraeus, then the top commander in the region, signed off on Mr. Furlong’s operation in January 2009, there were specific prohibitions against intelligence-gathering, including hiring agents to provide information about enemy positions in Pakistan."

Also, "Mr. Furlong’s network, composed of a group of small companies that used agents deep inside Afghanistan and Pakistan to collect intelligence on militant groups, operated under a $22 million contract run by Lockheed Martin."

The NYTimes.com report is here: Inquiry Finds U.S. Official Set Up Spy Ring in Asia

Media Hawks Are the Best of 'Em All

Hawks inside the American media, think tanks, and policy circles have long advocated an openly hostile approach to Pakistan. Of late, this hawkish mindset is becoming more rampant by the hour. The NewsWeek article "Tortured Ties: Is Pakistan a U.S. Ally or Not?" is a must-read for Pakistani strategists. Says the piece, jointly authored by Nisid Hajari and Ron Moreau:

"According to a source involved in the discussions, administration officials have reluctantly begun to consider options for stepping up the campaign against the Haqqanis. These include sending U.S. Special Operations Forces across the border, and even launching a full-scale bombing campaign."

...and:

"[W]e have to pursue our interests as ruthlessly as we can, regardless of whether they damage Pakistan’s interests or its ego."

U.S. Preparing the Pakhtun Card?

Here is a rambling piece of propaganda masquerading as journalism without any solid premise or substance - but what would you expect of Radio Free Europe - a media outlet funded for a long time by the CIA and then the State Department?

The piece starts off with "Pashtuns straddling the Pakistani-Afghan border", but quickly deserts the Afghan Pashtuns and degenerates into Pakistan bashing. Interestingly, it does not criticize the U.S.-backed "negotiations between the Afghan government and the Afghan Taliban" - but roundly mauls Pakistan's push for "a greater voice for Afghanistan's Pashtuns".

All in all, the intent of the piece is totally in line with the U.S. policy priority of putting pressure on Pakistan for the real or perceived ills of the country's policies towards Afghanistan - and the strategy of stacking the Pashtuns against the government.

The article concludes:

"Now everyone is discussing reports of peace negotiations between the Afghan government and the Afghan Taliban. Much to the bewilderment of Pakistan's Pashtuns, the government in Pakistan has been urging a greater voice for Afghanistan's Pashtuns vis-a-vis the country's ethnic Uzbeks and Tajiks. And Pakistan's Pashtuns watch, wait, and wonder what will become of them if the Taliban returns to power in Kabul."

If one may ask, how will a greater voice for the Afghan Pashtuns in the affairs of that country hurt Pakistani Pashtuns? Why is the U.S.-backed Afghan initiative to include Pashtuns good, but Pakistan's long-standing support for that cause bad?

Washington Seeks CIA Paramilitary Presence in Pakistan

Reported American security presence in Pakistan includes a private spy network deployed by the Pengaton; J-SOC units (supported by contractors like Xe); and a clandestine CIA force made up of Afghan nationals - in addition of course to formal CIA presence. The WSJ now reports our friends in Washington DC are pressing for "Wider CIA Role". What kind of an expansion could they be seeking?

"The current efforts to expand CIA presence are meant to expand intelligence collection and facilitate more aggressive Pakistani-led actions on the ground. Some U.S. officials, however, remain hopeful that Islamabad will allow a greater covert presence that could include CIA paramilitary forces."

CIA vs. ISI: Friendly Sparring or Serious Dueling?

This HuffingtonPost piece includes nothing to warrant the sensational headline: CIA And Pakistan Locked In Aggressive Spy Battles. It could be that the editors deleted the revelations - but forgot to revise the headline? The intro hints at precisely that possibility.

"Publicly, the U.S. credits Pakistan with helping kill and capture many al-Qaida and Taliban leaders. Privately, the relationship is often marked by mistrust and double-dealing as Pakistan runs double agents against the CIA and the agency tries to penetrate Pakistan's closely guarded nuclear program."

Not a word beyond this about the CIA efforts to crack "Pakistan's closely guarded nuclear program"!

After Strategic Haggling, U.S. Agrees to Pay Up Some

"The new aid package, totaling $2 billion, is meant to replace one that expired Oct. 1. It would complement $7.5 billion in aid that the United States has already pledged to Pakistan for civilian projects, some have which have been directed toward helping the nation recover from the damaging floods."

NYT Report: U.S. Offers Pakistan Army $2 Billion Aid Package

A Psy-Op Outed

This McClatchy Newspapers story lays bare the features of a U.S. psychological operation unfolding in the region: "US Officials, Experts: No High-Level Afghan Peace Talks Under Way"

Says the report, carrying joint: byline of Jonathan S. Landay and Warren P. Strobel:

'...experts said the reports, which appeared in a number of U.S. media outlets, could be part of a U.S. "information strategy" to divide and weaken the Taliban leadership. "This is a psychological operation, plain and simple," said a U.S. official with firsthand knowledge of Afghan President Hamid Karzai's outreach effort.'

A Concerted Effort to Push Pakistan Army into Politics?

This HuffPost piece may be read as an Indian analyst pushing her country's anti-Pakistan agenda by taking a swipe at Pakistan's army and democracy in one go; however, the context dictates that we see in the light of a concerted effort to push the Pakistan military into politics - which would be catastrophic not just for the military but also for the country.

For the record, Gen. Kayani is known as a thorough professional who has done a great deal to wean the military away from politics. That the Zardari-led civilian government is still in-charge is thanks in no small part to Kayani's rock-solid support for constitutionalism.

U.S. Egging on the Military to Lord Over Pakistan?

Foreign Policy Magazine has published a curtain raiser to the Pak-U.S. strategic dialog by David Rothkopf. Says the writer:

"The Pakistani delegation will nominally be led by the country's foreign minister, Shah Mahmood Qureshi. But the real focus will be the man who many feel is so powerful that the fact he is not yet president reflects only a personal choice on his part. As Pakistan's top military officer, General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani might as well be known as General Plan B. If the current government stumbles, if unrest spreads, U.S. officials are fully counting on him to step in and put a lid on the problem."

This begs a question: How long have 'U.S. officials' been egging on Gen. Kayani to lord over the country's civilian government - and to stand ready to 'step in and put a lid on the problem', 'if the current government stumbles, if unrest spreads', etc.? On an optimistic note, Gen. Kayani must be a man of parts through and through to have withstood this kind of temptation, to have made 'a personal choice' to be 'not yet president'.

The Perfect Recipe for Disaster

"Climate change, Deforestation and Corruption Combine to Drown Pakistan", says this piece carried by Scientific American. The prospect is grim as it is real. Is there anything we can do about it?

Strategic Dialogue, in Essence

"What you don’t understand is that after a bloody partition 63 years ago, four hot wars, in one of which an Indian army invaded East Pakistan and dismembered our country in 1971, we are in a cold war every bit as serious to us as your cold war against the Communists. As you well remember, in a cold war you probe for weakness along the perimeters, as you did with Contras in Nicaragua and other proxy wars. Your endearment of India may come at our expense. All right, we have stung them from time to time, as they are stinging us in stirring up Balochistan."

NYTimes.com: I.H.T. Op-Ed Contributor - Talking at Cross-Purposes

Democracy Trumps Censorship

This piece from Secrecy News is a perfect example of democracy at work.

"The Pentagon’s heavy-handed attempt to censor the new Afghanistan war memoir “Operation Dark Heart” by Anthony Shaffer has predictably turned a volume of narrow, specialized interest into a mainstream bestseller.

It has also focused attention on just what information the government was seeking to conceal, and why. For a review of the material that was blacked out in the second edition of the book, see “Censored book masks sensitive operations” by Sean D. Naylor, Army Times, October 4. A side-by-side view of the book’s Index, in censored and uncensored formats, is here (pdf)."

Operation Dark Heart: The Aftermath | Secrecy News:

One Intelligence Service, Two Histories

"Two histories of the early decades of MI-6, the United Kingdom’s foreign intelligence service, have recently been published. “MI6: The History of the Secret Intelligence Service 1909-1949″ by Keith Jeffery is the authorized version, prepared with the cooperation of the Service. “Six: A History of Britain’s Secret Intelligence Service” by Michael Smith is the unauthorized version."

Thank you, Secrecy News: The History of MI-6, Authorized and Unauthorized

DAWN.COM | World | Nato has facilitated Taliban movement: Petraeus

"Senior US officials have long said they didn’t expect the Taliban to talk peace as long as the militants believed they were winning, and at least some administration officials had been cool to peace feelers put forth by Karzai.

That changed publicly on Thursday, when US Secretary Robert Gates and US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton backed exploratory talks between the Afghan government and the militants."

Dawn.com story: Nato has facilitated Taliban movement: Petraeus

Drone Attacks in Pakistan Making a Terror Attack More Likely

If you are ambivalent about drone attacks, this one may tip you over. I for one am converted. Kudos, Johann Hari.

"I detest jihadism. Their ideology is everything I oppose distilled: Their ideal society is my Hell. It is precisely because I want to really undermine them -- rather than pose as macho -- that I am against this robot slaughter. It enlarges the threat. It drags us into a terrible feedback loop, where the US launches more drone attacks to deal with jihadism, which makes jihadism worse, which prompts more drone attacks, which makes jihadism worse -- and on and on, in a state with nuclear weapons, and with many people in Europe who are from the terrorized region. It could be poised to get even worse: Bob Woodward's Obama's Wars says the US has an immediate plan to bomb 150 targets in Pakistan if there is a jihadi attack inside America."

Obama's Escalating Robot War in Pakistan Is Making a Terror Attack More Likely.

Fire & Brimstone, Much More Widespread & Sooner Than You Think

The opening is innocent enough - Muslims as victims of terror - and the build up is equally innocuous: "Today's narrative about so-called Islamic violence is often paired with cries against Muslims not combating evil 'within their midst.'"

But then there is this sting in the tail: "However, it is usually forgotten that it was the Muslims themselves who defeated the Wahabi rhetoric and their violence in 1818, when Saud and his forces were expelled by the Ottoman forces.

"While Muslims soundly defeated terrorism 200 years ago, history shows that it was Western powers who revived it and supported Wahabi extremism. With the Treaty of Darin, the British chose to make the Saud family and the Wahabi ideology a British protectorate and supported them as they killed Muslims and destroyed tombs, just like the ones in Pakistan. After capturing Makkah and Medina, where Wahabi's razed and disinterred the graves of the Prophet Muhammad's (AS) family and companions in 1925, it was the British government which was the first to recognize the Wahabi state."

Who is this Yusril Kidwai HuffPo introduces as "Muslim historian, Sufi, and award-winning blogger"? His discourse is not sufi, his line of argument portends fire and brimstone. His piece at HuffPo: Recent Shrine Bombings Remind Us That Muslims Are Victims of Terrorism Too.

Jones Sees War Through 2050, Puts Pakistan on Notice

SPIEGEL ONLINE has published a very interesting interview of outgoing U.S. National Security Advisor James Jones. Excerpt:

If the Pakistanis are going to be a partner in the long term, they have to make a commitment that shows the watching world that they are serious about forms of terrorism.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Should your cooperation with the Pakistani army fail, is there a possibility that Pakistan would become the next military target of the US?

Jones: I am going to take the optimistic view that rational people do rational things and that -- with the help of friends and allies and common goals -- Pakistan will avoid, or hopefully avoid, that unfortunate eventuality. But hope is not a strategy, so we have to be cognizant of the fact that there are things which could happen that could alter the relationship if we are not careful.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Can you define exactly who is the enemy in the Hindu Kush region today?

Jones: Our enemies are the radicals who are targeting not only the US but also Europe, who advocate violence and who want to bring harm to our way of life and the world as we know it today. This is not a threat which is going to go away in the near future. This is a 21st-century-reality, a struggle at least for the first half of the century.

Full story at SPIEGEL ONLINE: 'Hope Is Not a Strategy': Outgoing Security Advisor Jones Voices Concern on Pakistan.

The Incredible ISI

"The Taliban commander in Kunar, like others interviewed in recent days, said he remained opposed to the presence of foreign troops in Afghanistan and had no plans to stop fighting them. But 'the ISI wants us to kill everyone—policemen, soldiers, engineers, teachers, civilians—just to intimidate people,' the commander said.

He said he refused, and that the ISI had tried to arrest him. 'Afghans are all brothers; tomorrow we could be sitting together in one room.'"

Pakistan Urges On Taliban - WSJ.com

A Mouthful from an Afghan Pundit

"...in Pakistan, where the corrupt and effete civilian government led by President Asif Ali Zardari, the jihad-motivated army led by General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, the uncontrolled ISI, the profiteering hypocrite political parties and the jingoist media unanimously support extremism and terrorism, mysterious militants continued torching NATO oil tankers in different parts of the country...", says Abdulhadi Hairan; and he concludes: "The international community must do something to stop Pakistan's support for terrorism."

What a mouthful. Read the story at Huffingtom Post: The Unpeaceful Karzai-Taliban 'Peace Talks'.

Pakistan-U.S. Relations Post "Obama's Wars"

Splendid piece by Musharraf Zaidi:"Pakistani anti-Americanism comes from a sustained narrative in which Pakistan is the undignified and humiliated recipient of U.S. financial support -- provided at the expense of Pakistani blood. This may not be reflective of the intentions of Obama's war, but it is reflective of the outcome of this war on main street in Pakistan. And perception is reality.
...
"Pakistanis will not come away from reading Obama's Wars with any confidence in the warm sincerity of Hillary Clinton's multiple visits to the country to build bridges and spur the U.S. public diplomacy machine. Instead, the suspicious instincts of Pakistanis will be vindicated. The irony could not be richer. No U.S. administration has ever invested so much effort and time in trying to understand and accommodate Pakistan's complex realities into its own calculus. Woodward's book confirms what this outpouring of U.S. interest and attention is all about: It is about fear."
Read at Foreign Policy: Reading Woodward in Karachi - By Mosharraf Zaidi

Dozens Of European Jihadis Training in NWA

"The plot apparently called for several gunmen to fan out across Germany, Britain and France in hopes of launching attacks similar not only to the Mumbai assault but also to so-called "swarm attacks" that extremists have mounted in Kabul and other Afghan cities. The tactic calls for small teams with automatic rifles, grenade launchers and suicide vests to strike simultaneously at several targets in a city and cause as much havoc as possible before they can be killed or captured." Huffington Post story: Pakistan Terrorism Training: Dozens Of Europeans Visiting.

Change is Afoot in Pakistan

"U.S. officials indicated that the administration has begun to contemplate the effects of a change, engineered through Zardari's resignation as head of his political party, the dissolution of the current coalition government, or a call for new elections under the Pakistani constitution, rather than any overt action by the military. Some suggested that a new, constitutionally-approved government that was more competent and popular, and had strong military backing, might be better positioned to support U.S. policies." Washington Post story: U.S. tense over Pakistan

Could the Military Tell Mush to Shut Up?

In case you did not know, former strongman Musharraf is a big political thinker, witness this AP story: The Associated Press: Musharraf: Pakistan's military need political role.

In my opinion, this guys needs a real big shut-up call - from none other than the Pakistani military. Would they oblige?

The Other 'Jihadis', Homegrown, Threaten the U.S. Homeland

"Scores of armed antigovernment groups, some of them far more radical, have formed or been revived during the Obama years, according to law-enforcement agencies and outside watchdogs. A six-month TIME investigation reveals that recruiting, planning, training and explicit calls for a shooting war are on the rise, as are criminal investigations by the FBI and state authorities. Readier for bloodshed than at any time since at least the confrontations in the 1990s in Ruby Ridge, Idaho, and Waco, Texas, the radical right has raised the threat level against the President and other government targets."

For more, see the Time story "The Secret World of Extreme Militias"