A suggestion for changing the course of the conflict on the Afghan/Pakistani frontier

[Quiet Raven]

This is an excerpt from an as yet unpublished article. Any comments - regardless of how harsh they might be - would be very much appreciated.
All the best!


The shear quantity and cost - in lives - of recent American incursions into Pakistani territory is not the kind of thing that - rationally - one could expect to be ignored - even by a friendly government - let alone one that had recently seemed on the brink of curtailing, or even ending, military cooperation. And, it is unlikely that even a tacit understanding on the governmental level - to allow such actions - could be long sustained in practice without broader support - particularly within the Pakistani Army.

On the other hand, continued existence of safe areas from which the Taliban and other Terrorists factions can launch attacks on targets in Afghanistan with impunity - and then to which they can retreat to for safety - as well as where they can recruit, train and draw other support from generally - is intolerable. Some solution must be arrived at, one that allows American, Afghani and NATO forces to combat these factions more effectively and do so without tipping the political balance in Pakistan against us and towards a renewal of their efforts to develop a workable accord with our enemies.

A suggestion for consideration in that discussion:
reverse the nature of the incursions. I.e. allow and support Pakistani forces in operations - into their own country - based from sites on the Afghanistan side of the border. Besides the obvious - the possibility of reducing or eliminating the need for unauthorized American incursions into Pakistan - this approach may have other advantages. The enemy could be then attacked - unexpectedly - in greater force than that which can be obtained through periodic cross-border raiding - and from directions from which their current defensive preparations may be less suitable for effective resistance. Circumstances of that kind may also provide a solid basis for the renewal; and development of closer working ties between the Pakistani military and our own best ambassadors - the American Soldier, Marine, Sailor and Airmen. And, at some point it may then become possible for there to be cross border actions involving American, Afghani and NATO forces that are authorized - formally or in reply to requests from local Pakistani commanders. Pakistani units in a hard fight are unlikely to stand firm against offers of assistance. Therefore, instead of losing or reducing the cooperation of Pakistan - as the present course of action threatens to do - or worse, pushing the Pakistani government and military towards greater engagement with the Islamists - we may alternatively cement solid ties with the Pakistani military, connections that would likely go a long way towards moving the country as a whole into our corner. That possibility, along with that of an increase in tactical and strategic opportunities, may make this an attractive alternative to the current approaches

[davidbfpo]

QuietRaven,

As a new SWC member please take time to introduce yourself, on the Tell Us About You: http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...splay.php?f=33

SWC members prefer to comment when they can read an introduction. That might get a better response to your first thread.

davidbfpo

[sapperfitz82]

Not sure the Paki's have the political wherewithall to do that and there are some sticking points

-the Pashtuns do not much care for the Pak gov,
-the tribes on the other side of the border (in Pak) are Pashtun relatives
-the Karzai gov probably does not have the political backing to support Pak troops on Afghan soil (any more than the Pak gov does to support US in Pak)

However, the idea has a great deal of merit and if it is not being pursued now it should be.

The Paki's have spend a great deal of blood since 9/11 trying to pacify this area, more than America has in Afghanistan by some numbers.

Given their nuclear status, Paki cooperation on dismantling Al-Queda, and the nature of the Paki-Afghani relationship, I would hope that this type of approach has been explored in depth and the current ops are a reflection of the failure of all other options.

[Quiet Raven]

Not sure the Paki's have the political wherewithall to do that and there are some sticking points

Thank you very much for your comments!
And, I apologize for being so tardy with my reply .

I realize that implementation of a project of this kind is anything but simple, the sympathy that all-too-many Pakistanis - including those in the PA and ISI - seem to have for the Islamists - being not the least of those.

the Karzai gov probably does not have the political backing to support Pak troops on Afghan soil (any more than the Pak gov does to support US in Pak)

However, the idea has a great deal of merit and if it is not being pursued now it should be.

The following article may indicate that similar conceptions are being considered - and by the Karzai government in particular.
Afghanistan Calls for Joint Border Patrol with Pakistan.

And, thank you for the complement!

The Paki's have spend a great deal of blood since 9/11 trying to pacify this area, more than America has in Afghanistan by some numbers.

Given their nuclear status, Paki cooperation on dismantling Al-Queda, and the nature of the Paki-Afghani relationship, I would hope that this type of approach has been explored in depth and the current ops are a reflection of the failure of all other options.

I tend to agree. But I've met with a great deal of skepticism from those who believe that the Pakistani government only acts out of a fear for American military reprisals when it orders action to be taken against the Islamists by the the PA and security forces, and, that there is some significant element of sham to the efforts that the PA and security forces claim to have made (and to be making) in that regards.

I suspect that comments which express perspectives of that kind do little to motivate the Pakistanis towards continued efforts.

Thank you again for your comments,
and all the best to you and yours!
Quiet Raven
BTW: if you or others decide to make further comments on this thread - I will need to go offline early this even and stay off until Saturday night, due my Sabbath observance - Shabbat. I will try and reply to any additional comments at that time.

[221CAV]

Why doesnt the US try and seal the border itself. Sure, we can't make it impervious, but I'm betting a healthy US presence in this area would cut down a lot of cross border antics by the tribesmen.

Key measure: if we build some sort of border defensive system and it immediately comes under attack from the Taliban/Pakis. Should that happen we will know we are doing something that is hurting them.

[Tom Odom]

Why doesnt the US try and seal the border itself. Sure, we can't make it impervious, but I'm betting a healthy US presence in this area would cut down a lot of cross border antics by the tribesmen.

Key measure: if we build some sort of border defensive system and it immediately comes under attack from the Taliban/Pakis. Should that happen we will know we are doing something that is hurting them.

Two words: manpower and terrain

We are short on manpower and even with a couple or six BCTs that is not going to change.

As a military goal, "sealing" this border area is a classic exercise in self-delusion. We can make it tougher, no doubt, if you can get the manpower required.

Tom

[Tacitus]

Why doesn't the US try and seal the border itself. Sure, we can't make it impervious, but I'm betting a healthy US presence in this area would cut down a lot of cross border antics by the tribesmen.

Our own country is either unable or unwilling to control substantial population movements on our own southern border. Yet we demand Pakistan and Afghanistan to do exactly that?

Just how many US soldiers would it take to man that border for who knows how long? I'm betting quite a bit for a LONG time.