Pentagon opts against sledge hammer
Demetri Sevastopulo | Friday, 27 June 2008
FT Syndication Service
WASHINGTON: US military commanders were quick to tout General Ashfaq Kiyani as "his own man" after he replaced Pervez Musharraf, the Pakistani president, as the country's army chief of staff last November.
The Pentagon hoped Gen Kiyani would develop a counter-insurgency force that could help tackle Taliban and al-Qaeda extremists operating along the Pakistani border with Afghanistan. While the US prepares to send a handful of counter-insurgency trainers to Pakistan this summer, however, the relationship has recently become tense.
Those tensions have been heightened in the wake of a US air strike this month which Islamabad says killed 11 Pakistani troops in an area bordering Afghanistan. The US military has not confirmed whether the strike killed the Pakistani soldiers, adding that its actions were directed against Taliban fighters attacking Afghanistan from Pakistan.
The Pakistani government and military must negotiate the difficult fact that Pakistanis favour negotiations with both al-Qaeda and Pakistani extremists.
A recent poll by the Terror Free Tomorrow, a Washington-based group, found that 50 per cent of Pakistanis believed the government in Islamabad should negotiate with al-Qaeda, while 70 per cent opposed US military action against both al-Qaeda and the Taliban. The killing of Pakistani troops in the US air strike this month has not made that situation any easier. "Obviously this has had a big impact on us in Pakistan," a senior US administration official told the Financial Times. "What we are hoping is that a joint investigation of this incident will begin to lower the temperature."
Gen Kiyani was already treading a difficult path. Much as the US military has struggled to adapt to a new counter-insurgency mission in Iraq, Gen Kiyani must accomplish the difficult task of weaning the military off its preoccupation with India.
Aware that too much overt US support could lead to charges that he is too pliant to US demands, US military officers have toned down their praise of Gen Kiyani. The Pentagon has also played down concerns about the peace deals to avoid complicating life for Gen Kiyani, who must also balance his relationship with the new civilian government.
"My sense is if we tried to get in the middle of those politics we'd be wielding a sledge hammer inside of a surgery room," one senior US military official said. "We would like to give both the military and the government the ability to manoeuvre and move in a direction that makes sense."
Another reason the Pentagon has been less critical is that it is not clear who is pushing the peace deals. Some Pakistanis stress that the deals were in the works before the new government took office in February.
General Dan McNeill, who has just returned from commanding Nato forces in Afghanistan, says Gen Kiyani showed no interest in peace deals when they met shortly after he took over as Pakistan's army chief.
"The suggestion from him was that they were looking for some help to get their force trained to be a good counter-insurgency force. I don't recall the term or the expression [peace deal] coming up," Gen McNeill said.
But Gen McNeill has also been less reluctant to criticise the peace deals and call on Pakistan to clamp down on the extremists, which he says pose a domestic threat to Pakistan.
"There is no question that when the Pakistanis do not put pressure on the insurgents that are located in their north-west frontier provinces then the untoward acts inside of Afghanistan and in the vicinity of the Pakistan border go up."
Husain Haqqani, the new Pakistani ambassador to Washington, says Islamabad "has made a political decision that we want to improve the co-ordination with Afghanistan, Pakistan and coalition forces in the border areas". But the mistrust between the countries was on show recently when Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, threatened to send Afghan troops into Pakistan to deal with the insurgents.
Mr Haqqani insists that any deal will include provisions against the tribal areas being used to host Taliban or "foreign fighters" or to launch suicide attacks. But the US says such safeguards may not be enforced unless there is a substantial Pakistani military presence in the area.
WASHINGTON: US military commanders were quick to tout General Ashfaq Kiyani as "his own man" after he replaced Pervez Musharraf, the Pakistani president, as the country's army chief of staff last November.
The Pentagon hoped Gen Kiyani would develop a counter-insurgency force that could help tackle Taliban and al-Qaeda extremists operating along the Pakistani border with Afghanistan. While the US prepares to send a handful of counter-insurgency trainers to Pakistan this summer, however, the relationship has recently become tense.
Those tensions have been heightened in the wake of a US air strike this month which Islamabad says killed 11 Pakistani troops in an area bordering Afghanistan. The US military has not confirmed whether the strike killed the Pakistani soldiers, adding that its actions were directed against Taliban fighters attacking Afghanistan from Pakistan.
The Pakistani government and military must negotiate the difficult fact that Pakistanis favour negotiations with both al-Qaeda and Pakistani extremists.
A recent poll by the Terror Free Tomorrow, a Washington-based group, found that 50 per cent of Pakistanis believed the government in Islamabad should negotiate with al-Qaeda, while 70 per cent opposed US military action against both al-Qaeda and the Taliban. The killing of Pakistani troops in the US air strike this month has not made that situation any easier. "Obviously this has had a big impact on us in Pakistan," a senior US administration official told the Financial Times. "What we are hoping is that a joint investigation of this incident will begin to lower the temperature."
Gen Kiyani was already treading a difficult path. Much as the US military has struggled to adapt to a new counter-insurgency mission in Iraq, Gen Kiyani must accomplish the difficult task of weaning the military off its preoccupation with India.
Aware that too much overt US support could lead to charges that he is too pliant to US demands, US military officers have toned down their praise of Gen Kiyani. The Pentagon has also played down concerns about the peace deals to avoid complicating life for Gen Kiyani, who must also balance his relationship with the new civilian government.
"My sense is if we tried to get in the middle of those politics we'd be wielding a sledge hammer inside of a surgery room," one senior US military official said. "We would like to give both the military and the government the ability to manoeuvre and move in a direction that makes sense."
Another reason the Pentagon has been less critical is that it is not clear who is pushing the peace deals. Some Pakistanis stress that the deals were in the works before the new government took office in February.
General Dan McNeill, who has just returned from commanding Nato forces in Afghanistan, says Gen Kiyani showed no interest in peace deals when they met shortly after he took over as Pakistan's army chief.
"The suggestion from him was that they were looking for some help to get their force trained to be a good counter-insurgency force. I don't recall the term or the expression [peace deal] coming up," Gen McNeill said.
But Gen McNeill has also been less reluctant to criticise the peace deals and call on Pakistan to clamp down on the extremists, which he says pose a domestic threat to Pakistan.
"There is no question that when the Pakistanis do not put pressure on the insurgents that are located in their north-west frontier provinces then the untoward acts inside of Afghanistan and in the vicinity of the Pakistan border go up."
Husain Haqqani, the new Pakistani ambassador to Washington, says Islamabad "has made a political decision that we want to improve the co-ordination with Afghanistan, Pakistan and coalition forces in the border areas". But the mistrust between the countries was on show recently when Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, threatened to send Afghan troops into Pakistan to deal with the insurgents.
Mr Haqqani insists that any deal will include provisions against the tribal areas being used to host Taliban or "foreign fighters" or to launch suicide attacks. But the US says such safeguards may not be enforced unless there is a substantial Pakistani military presence in the area.