U.S. aid used by Pakistan against India

In another ally-on-ally conflict reminiscent of the Turk-Kurd conflict, it now is becoming clear that much of the military aid Bush gave to Pakistan for the Global War on Terror has instead gone into arms purchases designed to prepare Pakistan for a war against India. Somehow, arming one side of two nuclear-armed nations that have fought previous wars makes us safer, though I honestly can't say how.

It's abundantly clear that whatever alliance Bush made with Pakistan was simply one of convenience on Musharraf's part. Once again, Bush got taken for a ride, to the tune of $10 billion. For years, Musharraf did little or nothing to evict the Taliban from the federal tribal areas, while they built camps and hid Bin Laden. Finally, in the past two months, the Taliban have made the federal tribal areas a de-facto independent state and the rebellion has spread beyond the frontier into Swat Valley. Then our ally, Musharraf, boldly sprung into action. He declared martial law and threw the democratic opposition into jail. Then he got some of his troops that had been taken hostage in the tribal areas released, while continuing his winning policy of doing nothing about the rebellion on the frontier. This is what we got for $10 billion. Unless, of course, Musharraf throws in a war with India as part of the deal for his "support".

Bush seems to have no other card up his sleeve but military force and huge arms shipments. Reconstruction won't take place without security, and you can't get security without reconstruction. Meanwhile, the bill just gets bigger every day, and war becomes more likely in every area Bush's magic was worked. Russia and China get more powerful as we blow huge amounts of borrowed cash on two wars that increase regional instability. If another crisis erupts, Bush has few legions left to throw at it. His base speaks glowingly of the Long War, an endless series of conflicts across the globe in which we grind our heel into the face of any nations that fail to repeat our talking points. We will be "safe" only when we can dominate the world and dictate who takes power where. Those nations friendly to us, such as Israel, can have nuclear weapons (and already do), but those who are not under our hegemony are a danger to the world. Pakistan itself was once classified by the U.S. as a rogue state for its possession of nukes and failure to sign the NPT. But when the Global War On Terror was dreamed up, all that went by the wayside. Democracy is the goal and the watchword, unless it produces governments that don't bow to our whim, such as in Palestine, Venezuela, or Russia.

Even worse, pointing out this arrogance and hypocrisy earns you the label "America Hater" from Republicans. This Long War, if it is carried out, will cost this country multiple trillions of dollars and result in a military draft and national insolvency. It will cost us our allies and create new wars which we have no control over.

In a war between India and Pakistan, the big winners will be China and Russia. Money spent on goading one side into such a war is absolutely counter to our national interests, yet this is what "patriotic" Republicans are doing. Russia controls the energy supplies for our allies in Europe, and China has the ability to create economic collapse for us at the drop of a hat, at a far cheaper cost to them than war with us. At the same time, we are committed to defending Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea, no to mention Israel. If Republicans would stop their incessant cheerleading and flag-waving for a moment and look at the big picture, they might very well put down the Kool-Aid. It has nothing to do with patriotism; it's delusion versus reality. Every nation that we defeated in the past "wanted to win", but that was not enough. Republicans seem to think that's all that is required to prevail. They are sadly deluded.


full story from ExpressIndia

Pak spent bulk of US aid on arming against India

Posted online: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 at 12:00:00
Updated: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 at 09:58:02

Silicon Valley, November 21: Pakistan has used a significant portion of the US aid since September 11 attack to arm itself for a confrontation with India instead of conducting war on terrorism, according to a strategic think tank.
Most of the USD 10 billion US aid is supposed to compensate the Pakistani government for sending its 80,000 or so soldiers to the Northwest Frontier Province and providing support to the US war in Afghanistan.
However, the money has been used for procuring high-tech weaponry to arm the military for its confrontation with India, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) has said.
"We found that that the Pakistani military has been using that money and the majority of our direct military assistance for the purchase of high-tech weaponry such as the F-16 fighters," senior adviser in the CSIS Frederick (Rick) Barton said.
"It appears that the Pakistan military is continuing to arm more for its confrontation with India than it is for the war on terror because these weapons really don't have that much application for the kinds of low-grade persistent Taliban fighters and al-Qaeda fighters that you find in the Northwest part of Pakistan," Barton told the National Public Radio.
Urging Washington to make a more strategic use of the money it gives Pakistan, Barton said "If we had wise approach to war on terror, we would have found ways to align ourselves more with the Pakistan people. Because the only way you can deal this kind of insurgency is to have the people on your side and to not have the people harboring the insurgents."
One of the key points that the CSIS study pointed out was that the US needs to re-establish a whole new kind of relationship with Pakistan, Barton said in an interview with the public radio.
In 1990s, the US stayed away from Pakistan for 10 years, following Pakistan's nuclear weapons development.
He said Pakistan deserved a great deal of attention which the US has never done.
"We constantly flush them with money, then head for exits and none of those approaches really work."
He said only 10 per cent of the aid had gone to education and humanitarian causes and the majority of that went in response to the earthquake where tens and thousands of people were killed.
The US gave direct humanitarian assistance and military assistance and as a result the US public support in Pakistan went up from about 25 per cent to well over 50 per cent.
"None of these polls mean that much, but part of what we want to do as a country is to make it clear that we are on the side of the people, not just the powerful," said Barton.
He said America's second-largest area of humanitarian expense was in education, but there again the US is trying to do a million different things rather than focusing on particular areas where it might have higher impact.

Pakistan is beginning to crumble

So I guess throwing democratic opponents, lawyers, and judges in jail hasn't helped Musharraf deal with the radical Islamist insurgency in Pakistan. Are we surprised?

The Pakistani Army has already lost the federally-administered tribal areas on the border with Afghanistan, and the Swat Valley. Now the insurgents are moving east, further into Pakistan proper, and they aren't meeting with much resistance. In Bush-speak, this means that the militants are "desperate". In the language that the rest of the world uses, they are in ascendance.

Meanwhile Bush wrings his hands in a most powerful manner. He is willing to escalate to finger-crossing if it comes to that, however.

story from the New York Times

Militants Gain Despite Decree by Musharraf

By JANE PERLEZ and ISMAIL KHAN

Published: November 16, 2007

PESHAWAR, Pakistan, Nov. 15 — Gen. Pervez Musharraf, the Pakistani president, says he instituted emergency rule for the extra powers it would give him to push back the militants who have carved out a mini-state in Pakistan’s tribal areas.

But in the last several days, the militants have extended their reach, capturing more territory in Pakistan’s settled areas and chasing away frightened policemen, local government officials said.

As inconspicuous as it might be in a nation of 160 million people, the takeover of the small Alpuri district headquarters this week was considered a particular embarrassment for General Musharraf. It showed how the militants could still thumb their noses at the Pakistani Army.

In fact, local officials and Western diplomats said, there is little evidence that the 12-day-old emergency decree has increased the government’s leverage in fighting the militants, or that General Musharraf has used the decree to take any extraordinary steps to combat them.

Instead, it has proved more of a distraction, they said, forcing General Musharraf to concentrate on his own political survival, even as the army starts its first offensive operation since the Nov. 3 decree.

The success of the militants in Swat has caused new concern in Washington about the ability and the will of Pakistani forces to fight the militants who are now training their sights directly on Pakistan’s government, not only on the NATO and American forces across the border in Afghanistan, Western officials said.

After several weeks of heavy clashes, the militants largely control Swat, the mountainous region that is the scenic jewel of Pakistan, and are pushing into Shangla, to the east. All of the sites lie deeper inside Pakistan than the tribal areas, on the Afghan border, where Al Qaeda, the Taliban and assorted foreign and local militants have expanded a stronghold in recent years. In Alpuri, the administrative headquarters of Shangla, a crowd of militants easily took over the police station, despite the emergency decree, Mayor Ibad Khan said.

“They came straight to the police station; it was empty,” he said in a telephone interview. The district police officer had run away. “I am still searching for him,” Mr. Khan said. Asked why the police station was empty, he said, “I am asking myself the same question.”

--------------------------------------------------------

Even though the militants numbered only in the hundreds, they would give “a tough time to the army, and they will cost the army a lot,” said Hasan-Askari Rizvi, a military analyst in Lahore.

He said the army would probably be able to expel the militants from the cities and towns. But the militants would take shelter in the mountains, and could survive the winter unscathed.

The soldiers, almost all of whom do not come from the region and feel like outsiders there, are unprepared for what could amount to a guerrilla war, he said.

Another problem was the intense barrage of propaganda from the religious clerics in the region. The messages exhorting soldiers not to fight a “foreigners war,” meaning a war on behalf of the United States, had undermined the morale of the government paramilitary forces that were leading the fight, he said.

“The army has never faced such a serious challenge in the tribal areas or in Swat before,” Mr. Rizvi said.

Pakistan makes its slide into dictatorship

Unbelievable, in every sense of the word.
Martial law was declared in Pakistan (again), ostensibly to help in the fight against "militants", however the democratic opposition and lawyers seem to be the main targets. It's also illegal now to report on suicide bombings and "militant activities", and any broadcasters that "ridicule" members of the government or armed forces are in for three years in prison.

Meanwhile, morale among Pakistan's military is low, with little enthusiasm for a war against their own people. Somehow this helps the War On Terror, but I'm not really sure how. The rebellion has spread beyond the federally-administered Tribal Areas into Swat Valley, with prominent clerics and even local government officials taking a defiant tone. Bush has sent drones into the frontier to fire missiles on "rebel positions", further polarising public opinion.

Another regional ally, Georgia, has also established a "state of emergency" in the face of large peaceful protests. The U.S. is helping Georgia rapidly build up its military, and the country is important to Bush's plans in keeping Russia in check. Georgia also sent troops to Iraq, and Bush is dangling NATO membership as a prize if ' support' continues. So, another U.S. client state is now having "democracy problems".

The media has put a happy smiley face on the Pakistan situation by showing us that Bhutto is able to leave her house, and that Saakashvili promises elections in January.

story from The Star

Nov 05, 2007 04:30 AM

Allan Woods
OTTAWA BUREAU

OTTAWA–The imposition of emergency rule in Pakistan this weekend could turn the difficult task of fighting Afghanistan's Taliban insurgency into an impossible mission, military and diplomatic analysts warned yesterday.

"The Taliban and the rest of that gangster crew is going to have an easier time in Pakistan, which in turn means that the situation in Afghanistan may continue to be unstable," said Alex Morrison, president of the Canadian Institute of Strategic Studies. "The equation is that the more Pakistan is unsettled, the more Afghanistan is unsettled."

Yesterday, the government of Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf began a nationwide crackdown on the political opposition, the news media and the courts. Police throughout the country raided the homes of opposition party leaders and activists, arresting at least 500.

A main Islamist opposition party said authorities had also detained 600-700 of its supporters overnight in southern and central provinces.

Police with batons charged dozens of lawyers protesting outside the High Court in the economic capital Karachi early today, arresting at least 50, lawyers said. Another half a dozen lawyers were "mercilessly beaten" when they chanted anti-government slogans at a court in Rawalpindi.

About 70 activists were detained at the offices of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan in the eastern city of Lahore. Police confiscated the equipment of journalists covering the raid and ordered them to leave the premises. All independent television news stations remained off the air for a second straight day.

Pakistan's deposed chief justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry declared Musharraf's post-emergency setup "illegal and unconstitutional" in comments published today.

"Every thing that is happening today is illegal, unconstitutional and against the orders of the Supreme Court," Chaudhry told local daily The News in his first reported comments since the crisis began.

In an address to the nation that ended early yesterday, Musharraf justified his declaration on the grounds that he needed a free hand to battle rising militancy in Pakistan. The move drew strong rebukes from Musharraf's allies in the West, including Canada and the United States.

Non-government critics at home and abroad say the measures amount to martial law and say it was concern over his political longevity that prompted the controversial decision. Pakistan's Supreme Court was set to rule on whether the Oct. 6 re-election of Musharraf, who stayed on as head of the army after a military coup in 1999, was legitimate.

A top adviser to the president conceded later yesterday that the final decision came after a Supreme Court judge quietly informed the government last week the court would rule against Musharraf's effort to stay on as president.

"After that, there was no option," said Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain, president of the ruling Pakistan Muslim League. "He is not happy with this decision, frankly speaking. We are all not happy with the decision. But there was no other choice.''

Canada's Department of Foreign Affairs said yesterday that Canadian diplomats at the High Commission in Islamabad, and at consulates in Karachi and Lahore, are closely monitoring the situation. There have been no requests for consular assistance from Canadian citizens in Pakistan, but the government has warned against all travel to the country.

However, Ottawa has made no decisions yet about the future of any aid that it delivers. In 2004-05 the Canadian International Development Agency sent $50 million to Pakistan.

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Washington would review its $150 million-a-month assistance program to Pakistan.

During a surprise stop in Afghanistan yesterday, Defence Minister Peter MacKay said Canada is "very concerned" the emergency measures, which have no expiry date, will destabilize the work that NATO and the United Nations are doing in Afghanistan.

The two countries have a long, porous border and insurgents freely cross from Afghanistan into Pakistan's lawless tribal zones, which serve as a home base where they are largely safe from coalition forces.

"We're calling for free and fair elections, the reinstatement of the judiciary and we're hoping they will continue their efforts toward regional security in Afghanistan," MacKay said in Kandahar.

MacKay's last trip to the region, in January as foreign affairs minister, was to have included a "blunt talk" with Musharraf over border concerns. But the face-to-face meeting never transpired and he had to content himself with talking to his Pakistani counterpart.

MacKay said Canada's "specific concerns" relate to Afghan refugees in Pakistan and the impact the emergency rule will have on their movement in and out of the country.

"We're concerned about the impact it will have politically throughout the region," he told reporters.

The U.S. and other allies of the war on terror have largely overlooked Musharraf's eight-year dictatorship in exchange for the efforts of Pakistan's military to root out Taliban and other insurgents in the tribal region along the border.

The support for the coalition has made Musharraf unpopular at home, even though there has been little done to impede the movements of Islamic fighters, said Kamran Bokhari, the Toronto-based director of Middle East analysis for Strategic Forecasting Inc.

"Pakistan was becoming destabilized already, even before Musharraf did this," Bokhari said in a telephone interview from Ankara, Turkey. "Now that Musharraf has done this, it's going to get, more than likely, worse because he's fully paying attention to surviving. The question is: how does martial law, or emergency ... help him fight against Al Qaeda more effectively than he could before this?"

Gordon Smith, a former Canadian ambassador to NATO, said if Musharraf is truly serious about cracking down on Islamic radicals, he may now allow NATO troops to enter his country and fight with the more than 60,000 Pakistani soldiers that are already policing the tribal regions. That may be the only way he can keep Western allies on side while still flouting democracy.

Then-defence minister Gordon O'Connor raised this issue on a September 2006 visit to Pakistan, saying that placing Canadian troops in Pakistan would ease intelligence sharing. The idea was quickly dismissed as politically unsaleable.

"Musharraf was always trying to balance the pressures on him to do something about Al Qaeda, coming from the Americans and others, including us," said Smith, who now teaches politics at the University of Victoria. "Maybe what this indicates now is that ... he will really allow what needs to happen in northern Pakistan."

A senior NATO official speaking last week in Ottawa warned of the need for a "more effective contribution" from Pakistan in the effort to stabilize Afghanistan. Jonathan Parish, a senior policy adviser, said the task for military forces in the south and east of the country would otherwise be "difficult if not impossible."