Tribal reaction in South Waziristan
An interesting article on the likely reaction of the Mehsud tribe, who dominate South Waziristan, which is based on interviews with refugees (no-one is embedded with the Pakistani Army IIRC): http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...tribesmen.html
One telling passage reminds us of the previous 'Go,Stop' policy:
Quote:
Three times in the past, the army has agreed a ceasefire and peace terms with the Taliban in South Waziristan. Each time, the Taliban took bloody revenge on those who had sided with the state. Mehsuds remember bitterly how in 2005, following such a deal, a Pakistani army general literally embraced the then Taliban chief Baitullah Mehsud, and called him "a soldier of peace".
davidbfpo
South Waziristan daily updates and maps
This site is tracking day-by-day actions and maps on South Waziristan campaign http://www.irantracker.org/analysis/...n-october-2009.
They’ve also got profiles of Taliban leaders. Here’s the link to Hakimullah Mehsud. I found Hafiz Gul Bahadur’s profile to be detailed and careful with the facts (accurate as far as I could know) http://www.irantracker.org/related-t...akes-power-ttp.
Nice maps, the analysis well...
MPayson,
Thanks for the pointer to:http://www.irantracker.org/analysis/...n-october-2009 . Yes, the mapping is useful and the information. I did read some of the analysis and paused reading this:
Quote:
Pakistan has an effective military strategy
•Methodical – slow advance with a force that outnumbers the enemy. Difficult towns (Kotkai, Makin) are encircled through control of surrounding peaks then cleared later. Jets with precision munitions eliminate 12.7mm anti-aircraft guns after initial TTP harassment of helicopters, allowing close helicopter support.
•The Pakistani military has learned lessons from its 2004 incursion into Waziristan and 2008 Bajaur operation: they are seizing the high ground to control valleys.
•Pakistanis employing effective route clearance packages to limit damage from IEDs
Even I know from this "armchair" that seizing the high ground is basic in mountain warfare, add in years of experience and preparation - if the Pakistanis had failed to do this I'd be worried. They are a professional army, grounded in preparing to fight a conventional war and have adapted.
davidbfpo
Clinton met...Waziristan elders?
Well, it turns out that she didn't really meet with "Pakhtun leaders" as we might reasonably understand it -- or the mix of traditional leaders I'd have hoped for in the current situation http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=206400. Whether that was because they refused or weren't invited isn't clear.
But it's more likely that "promoting civil society" won out over talking to the tribes, and that an NGO-driven approach to development and reconstruction is being pursued in a place where people don't even relate to what that is -- except in the negative. "We don't understand what it is, but we know it's bad," said one senior leader from North Waziristan during a discussion about development earlier this year. "They come to do development but preaching religion is their main aim," said another. They're also the ones who said non-threatening things like, "We invite foreign assistance, we need it" and "People are losing confidence....We need action and results!" and "Until now, we were just asked about our problems, not about how to solve them."
It's ironic that the group credited with organizing the invitees seems to have lost their own plot. "FIDA aims to act as a bridge between traditional and modern systems of governance and society." http://fidapk.org/about/intro.html They forgot the traditional.
The US has virtually no constructive relationship with either of the Waziristans. Working from the outside in and forgetting the complex of existing leaders simply won't cut the mustard, nor will nattering on about peace. I thought the Obama administration was working on that, but somebody on the team got the messaging wrong this time. And these folks are pretty attuned to messages.
Captured suicide bomber talks
Released in July 2009 in Pakistan, with an un-identified male prsioner, shown in shadow, which was on Geo-TV (IIRC an independent station); a stunning and depressing film clip:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nq88egK755k&feature=fvw
davidbfpo
Waziristan report and some "spin"
Again thanks Abu M spotting a UK Daily Mail reporter on the Pakistani campaign, under the hopeful IMHO headline 'Why Pakistan is winning ITS war against the Taliban'.
As always there is a "sting" at the end:
Quote:
Meanwhile, General Abbas cited a further stupefying sign of Nato’s apparent absence of strategic co-ordination.
In the name of the new ‘protection’ strategy, the US has this autumn been withdrawing from its posts on the Afghan side of the frontier, including those in Paktika, the province next to South Waziristan.
‘It will create a vacuum,’ he said, ‘and if militants escape from Waziristan, what can we do? We cannot fire on them when they cross the border.’
For years, Nato chiefs have accused Pakistan of failing to deal with the Taliban’s safe havens in Pakistani territory. Now, in one of the more bitter ironies of this ever-lengthening war, that role has been reversed.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/ar...#ixzz0XFwBOxbn
Pakistan insurgency: war or "policital solution"
If you go to this link and scroll down the comments, you can see a discussion about the ongoing war in Pakistan (I am a participant and have the longest final comment, so this is also a plug). I thought some of you may be interested.
http://www.chapatimystery.com/archiv...comment-158346
also check out Pakistani blogger Hakim Hazik's latest at
http://justicedeniedpk.com/JDP/post/....aspx#continue
http://pakistankakhudahafiz.wordpress.com/
I spoke with someone in Pakistan recently (someone who eagerly supports what one may call the ISI version of recent events) and his vision was as follows:
1. The US and Israel and maybe India want to destroy Islam and to do this, they understand that they must destroy Pakistan.
2. Using 9-11 as the excuse, an invasion was launched.
3. Our army has managed, in very adverse circumstances, to keep Pakistan intact until now and protected our nuclear assets.
4. Terrorism that you see is basically mercenary jihadis acting on the instructions of America, Israel and Zionist Brahmins (I kid you not).
5. The army is united, and every officer knows that this is the final battle for Pakistan. We will defeat these mercenary terrorists, safeguard our nuclear assets and inshallah win the war after the coming global collapse destroys America's ability to impose its will on us. India will be the first to fall> Already, our Red chinese friends have green lighted the naxalites and when we unleash the jihadis, the brahmins will fall in one day...
and so on. This is NOT a fringe view. He gets this from TV 21, which is owned by interflo, which is the largest ad agency in Pakistan and the largest civilian asset used by the army in its PR moves. I highly recommend visiting paknationalists.com or http://pakistankakhudahafiz.wordpress.com/ to see for yourself.
Anyway, I wrote the following on the Pakistani blog chapati mystery today (or Pakistani-German, as the owner is a pakistani historian working in Germany). Its in response to comments that questioned the existence of an international jihadi threat. Some of it is relevant to your question.
http://www.chapatimystery.com/archiv....html#comments
The army armed and trained half a million terrorists. It encouraged an entire cultural shift towards Jihadism and extremism. It then lost control of the situation after 9-11. BUT instead of stepping back and saying we were wrong (not necessarily publicly, I am just speaking of saying it to themselves) and need to do many things now to fix the mess, they have always pursued a schizophrenic policy where they will abandon some of their former proxies and kill them, while keeping others for future use AND retain crucial parts of the previous paradigm of zero-sum competition with India, playing profitable games with America, retaining monopoly over most of Afghanistan and so on.
As a result, there is continued confusion within Pakistan about who is fighting who and for what reason and this confusion is hampering the war effort. A good section of the military is still working on the Zaid Hamid and Ahmed Qureshi paradigm without noticing that Zaid Hamid and company themselves believe that the future consists of massive and extremely violent wars against India and other powers...wars they hope to win, but wars which to any sane person must seem MUCH worse than the current mess. The army high command may or may not all be in the Zaid Hamid mould, but their continued short sighted encouragement of this line of psyops is creating massive confusion and will make their job harder, not easier.
The army itself will be better off if it faces the facts and changes some of its fundamental assumptions. Let us, for the sake of argument, accept that all these attacks are carried out by jihadis acting on the orders of India, Israel and America. What is the army doing to clarify the situation and fight back? What is the plan by which these three great powers and their jihadi agents are to be defeated? I submit that no coherent plan can be made because the accusation itself is incoherent.
I am not saying the US or India could not be involved in any terrorist acts. Pakistan is not a total outlier in its use of terrorism as a tool of policy. Others can and do play this game. But the question remains, what is the policy? why do these powers oppose the army? What can be done to stop them? What is in the best interests of the people of Pakistan? on all these questions, the army's response has been and remains unclear. And it remains so because they insist on having their cake and eating it too. Either they throw in their lot with the jihadists and the taliban and deal with USA and India as best as they can, or they fully switch sides and try to find a way to cooperate WITH the US and India AND with civilian politicians, against the jihadi worldview. There is no middle way that is going to work....
Pakistan's Security Paradox
JSOU, Dec 09: Pakistan’s Security Paradox: Countering and Fomenting Insurgencies
Quote:
Most American and Pakistani political and military leaders agree that without a credible U.S.-Pakistan partnership, victory against Taliban and Al Qaeda is impossible. For such a partnership, shared goals must be matched by shared threats, and perceptions must follow demonstrable action. Washington and Islamabad agree that Al Qaeda must be defeated. Pakistan’s national security calculus—based on India’s influence in Afghanistan—however, treats Afghan Taliban as leverage and Pakistani Taliban as enemies of the state. Consequently, Afghan Taliban are provided asylum in Pakistan while they wreak havoc in Afghanistan, and Pakistani Taliban are attacked. While Pakistan has countered and fomented numerous insurgencies, this is the first time that it has done both to achieve its national security goals. This dual policy and disconnect between American and Pakistani threat perceptions is at the heart of Pakistan’s security paradox. Pakistan continues to indirectly counter (COIN) and foment (FOIN) insurgency in Afghanistan. Without acknowledging, explicating, and eventually changing this paradox, Afghanistan and Pakistan will continue to descent into chaos.....