Pakistan’s inability to fight the Taliban

[Bluelight]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7071098.stm

By Monday, however, they had retreated to their fortified positions. In Kabal, the police and the Frontier Corps troops had to retreat inside the large police station compound and build fortifications to ward off attacks by local fighters.

 

In sharp contrast, armed local Taleban man a check-post in full strength, barely 50 metres down the street from the police station.

 

 

"In battle, government troops are only trained to run away," remarks Akbar Hussain, the Taleban commander for Kabal region.

 

To put it bluntly, from my perspective it appears that the Taliban are going to win, and win pretty easily.

 

I don't know much about Pakistan, or its military. However, if the Taliban decides to go south, is there anything that can stop them?

 

Pakistan has nukes, is there anything we can do to prevent those from falling into Taliban hands if they do turn their attention to Pakistan?

 

Is there anything we can do to prevent the governments fall if the Taliban decides to take it out? Deploying non-Pakistan troops there would appear to have a greater negative effect then bonus effect.

 

This whole item is very worrying, as it appears that the Taliban militias will be able to roll over the Pakistan government forces if they want to, making the whole democracy drama and the rest irrelevant.

[Archie Pellagio]

The idea of 'The Taliban" taking over the government of Pakistan as some sort of neo-Vietcong is laughable.

 

Its just not going to happen.

 

Pakistan has a very complex, very vibrant, very volatile political culture, and a taliban style government simply isn't on the cards.

 

The Tribal mandated areas within NWFP are a whole 'nother world.

One step off the road, you're no longer in Pakistan, you're in the real world Derka-derkastan - the wild west.

 

The pashtun tribes, who have a very incestuous relationship with the taliban.

The balance of political power in the tribal areas has been the same since the days of the raj, the modern Pakistan simply inherited the system.

For all intents and purposes it is its own area.

They are allowed to grow and process drugs, manufacture massed of weapons (All types of small arms, MG's, RPG's you name it)

 

Don't worry about that article, continue with your life...

[Bluelight]

The idea of 'The Taliban" taking over the government of Pakistan as some sort of neo-Vietcong is laughable.

 

Its just not going to happen.

 

Pakistan has a very complex, very vibrant, very volatile political culture, and a taliban style government simply isn't on the cards.

 

Now I will freely admit I am no expert on pakistan, or anything military. However, I find it hard to believe that any political culture is going to mean a thing to the guys with the guns. To be more specific, no matter what political inclination one might be, when one is staring down the barrel of a gun ones political leanings become very flexable.

 

This isn't a completily isolated report however:

Pakistan military officers surrendered their force to Taliban without a fight:

http://63.99.108.76/forums/index.php?showtopic=22774

Taleban in Pakistan says they will continue fighting until Islmaic law is enforced: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7070640.stm

Suicide Bomb: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7068670.stm

Suicide Bomb: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7072428.stm

Suicide Bomb: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7052742.stm

Suicide Bomb + Abandoning Checkpoints to Taleban: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7039661.stm

 

The interesting thing about this report: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7039661.stm is that it referances Taleban as fedayeen, and reports an attack I have not seen elsewhere in the western media. Taking individual items and tossing them together seems to indicate that the Pakistan goverment is fighting an war, and attempting to play down the conflict both domestically and abroad.

 

With the militants saying they are fighting for sharia law, combined with the attacks in parts of pakistan that are in non-tribal areas, surely you can see how I would get the impression it doesn't seem to be just a tribal problem.

Edited November 1, 2007 by Bluelight

[swerve]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7071098.stm

To put it bluntly, from my perspective it appears that the Taliban are going to win, and win pretty easily.

 

I don't know much about Pakistan, or its military. However, if the Taliban decides to go south, is there anything that can stop them?...

 

A standing army of 550,000 well-trained men, plus the same number of reserves & 300,000 paramilitaries. >2000 tanks, almost 2000 artillery, almost 400 jet fighters, etc., etc. Pilot skills reckoned pretty good.

 

If the Pakistani army had marched into Afghanistan in 2001, the outcome would have been identical: Taliban ousted damn quick. In a conventional war, it's no contest. The Taliban can maintain a presence in the Pashtun tribal areas by hiding among the locals, but in the Punjabi/Urdu/Sindhi-speaking plains, it has no roots, & the likes of the Bhutto family can & do keep their fiefs clear of Taliban. Suicide bombings like the attempt on Benazir Bhuttos life (not that I'm attributing it to the Taliban, but the perpetrators may have been ideologically similar) are the limit of their & their friends abilities in Pakistan proper.

[swerve]

...

 

With the militants saying they are fighting for sharia law, combined with the attacks in parts of pakistan that are in non-tribal areas, surely you can see how I would get the impression it doesn't seem to be just a tribal problem.

 

Two separate (though not completely unconnected) things here.

1) Taliban in the tribal areas. All the stand-up fights are in tribal areas.

2) Terrorist attacks elsewhere. Not by Taliban, though many are probably by groups with similar viewpoints. However, supposedly mainstream political parties in Pakistan have been known to use terrorism. Bomb /= Islamic militant in Pakistan. Can be secular ethnic faction.

 

See the difference? Being able to plant a few bombs is not the same as being able to storm army checkpoints. Most of these groups are completely identified with a particular ethnic or religious group, & region.

[Bluelight]

hmm, glad to know I am way off the ball on this one.

 

...

 

I wonder why they don't move their army into the tribal areas in a massive way then? I know there used to be concerns with India, but I can't imagine that still applies. Some sort of internal political thing I guess.

Edited November 1, 2007 by Bluelight

[Guest JamesG123]

Yes, internal political/cultural/even familial thing. The tribal areas only vaguely acknowledge being within the state of Pakistan. To storm in there with the whole PA would be for them to kick over a hornets nest and perhaps ignite a civil war.

 

Remember when you are reading media reports that they are both naive westerners who only know as much about the "real" situation as their local "fixers" or handlers tell them, and they often have a bias themselves.

 

They also tend to not put a story in context. Like in your leading story, yeah the bad guys found a single point that they could attack either because they cased the joint and found it vulnerable or they have a guy inside. The "Taliban checkpoint" was probably the outer cordon to warn/delay any reinforcements. Its not all Pakistani facilities were under attack at the same time and that the great Taliban Panzer Army was roaming the country side at will.

[Josh]

hmm, glad to know I am way off the ball on this one.

 

...

 

I wonder why they don't move their army into the tribal areas in a massive way then?

 

You mean in like, say, Iraq?

[JWB]

hmm, glad to know I am way off the ball on this one.

 

...

 

I wonder why they don't move their army into the tribal areas in a massive way then? I know there used to be concerns with India, but I can't imagine that still applies. Some sort of internal political thing I guess.

It is a matter of loyalties. Much of the PA holds similar political views as the tribals. The tribals just want to be left alone and keep their anarchistic trabalist customs. If Mush tries to push the PA to hard he is likely to see a refusal of orders. That would destroy his credibility and possibly lead to his downfall.

[Colin]

However with the NWF and the taliban fighting what is roughly a 2 front war with limited resupply options, it might be the begining of the end for the Taliban. The PA only has to seal off the NWF to prevent supplies getting through, do the same in Afghanistan and the winters will be long and hard. I suspect the taliban will also go to excessive lengths to promte their brand of Islam, which will errode their support base even in this area.

[JWB]

Yes, the Taliban have certainly not endeared themselves to the population in the Borderlands. The organization is run by a lunatic who likes to boast and make threats. So far his threats have been hollow except where the tribals get irritated and challenge his impudence. He has become a laughing stock as his promises of glorious battlefield victories have only turned into disastrous defeats. He keeps his power through narcotics production using the income to pay off tribal leaders and Pakistani officials. The tribals are not pleased about this for a variety of reasons including the increasing problem with opium addiction in Pashtun youth.

[Archie Pellagio]

Now I will freely admit I am no expert on pakistan, or anything military. However, I find it hard to believe that any political culture is going to mean a thing to the guys with the guns. To be more specific, no matter what political inclination one might be, when one is staring down the barrel of a gun ones political leanings become very flexable.

 

This isn't a completily isolated report however:

Pakistan military officers surrendered their force to Taliban without a fight:

http://63.99.108.76/forums/index.php?showtopic=22774

Taleban in Pakistan says they will continue fighting until Islmaic law is enforced: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7070640.stm

Suicide Bomb: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7068670.stm

Suicide Bomb: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7072428.stm

Suicide Bomb: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7052742.stm

Suicide Bomb + Abandoning Checkpoints to Taleban: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7039661.stm

 

The interesting thing about this report: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7039661.stm is that it referances Taleban as fedayeen, and reports an attack I have not seen elsewhere in the western media. Taking individual items and tossing them together seems to indicate that the Pakistan goverment is fighting an war, and attempting to play down the conflict both domestically and abroad.

 

With the militants saying they are fighting for sharia law, combined with the attacks in parts of pakistan that are in non-tribal areas, surely you can see how I would get the impression it doesn't seem to be just a tribal problem.

 

 

You have to understand the difference between the Tribal Areas and Pakistan as a whole.

 

The Tribal areas are a non-state nation. They are nominally under Pakistani sovereignty but for all intents an purpose are their own little region.

The system of governance used by the modern state of Pakistan is exactly the same as that of the British - hands off. There is an Administrator to converse with the local jurga, and dole out the cash, but there is no administrative control of these areas.

But following pressure from the Us and other western nations, the pakistani military has been venturing into these wild lands - and paying a heavy price for it.

These soldiers are in complete injun' country.

 

Recently the area has become the base for a lot of the domestic islamist terrorists in Pakistan, who for the most part are receiving at least support from these areas, whether material or financial. Smuggling is BIG business.

Go to the Smugglers bazaar outside peshawar (just across the "border" in the tribal lands) and you can pick up a key of heroin, coke, an AK some hash and a nice little pen gun amongst other things.

This cash doesn't go towards good health care, education and public works...

 

Don't worry about it though, pakistan isn't going to become a new Talib. run nation.

[Archie Pellagio]

hmm, glad to know I am way off the ball on this one.

 

...

 

I wonder why they don't move their army into the tribal areas in a massive way then? I know there used to be concerns with India, but I can't imagine that still applies. Some sort of internal political thing I guess.

 

 

They've tried, this is the result.

 

Its not an easy land to enter, especially when the locals aren't friendly.

 

The problem is the locals are the taliban, they are so intermingled the only way to remove them is a) kill everyone with a penis or b ) don't bother with anything more than current efforts...

 

Another consideration is that Pathans (Pakistani pashtuns) are one of the major contributors of troops to the PA.

 

Anyway, stress less...

[Simon Tan]

The upshot is that this is straining the old ISI-Kashmiri militant-Taliban nexus that gave tremendous leverage to the jihadis. Perhaps the clearest indications of this was the operation to clear the Lal Masjid, which would have been quite unthinkable not long ago. The Pakistan Army and intel agencies have now started to realise that their pet projects have now gone out of control and are more of a liability than an asset.

 

I can only hope that the jihadis continue their campaign against the Pakistani military and really start gnawing on the hand that feeds them. The PA is a blunt sledgehammer.....pretty useless for small cuts but if swung properly, pretty brutal in effect.

[Archie Pellagio]

The upshot is that this is straining the old ISI-Kashmiri militant-Taliban nexus that gave tremendous leverage to the jihadis. Perhaps the clearest indications of this was the operation to clear the Lal Masjid, which would have been quite unthinkable not long ago. The Pakistan Army and intel agencies have now started to realise that their pet projects have now gone out of control and are more of a liability than an asset.

 

I can only hope that the jihadis continue their campaign against the Pakistani military and really start gnawing on the hand that feeds them. The PA is a blunt sledgehammer.....pretty useless for small cuts but if swung properly, pretty brutal in effect.

 

Don't count on it.

 

Pakistan is so faction ridden odds on they're simultaneously trying to stop them legitimately with the left hand and supporting them with the right, and thats not going to change any time soon.

 

Like I keep saying, Pakistan isn't black, white or grey, but its full of zebras...

[Rubberneck]

Pakistan is another Iraq - in terms of being a "real country." As Luke states, it's beyond black and white, grey and every combination of the three. They will have civil strife - because they've always had it. It depends on how bad the situation gets. The Waziristan and Baluchistan areas are de facto states - the Pak Army routinely gets its ass handed to them in Waziristan.

[Archie Pellagio]

Actually Baluchistan is Pakistan proper, just so remote and the locals are a little 'spirited'.

 

And the two Warizistans are only two of seven 'agencies' within the 'federally administered tribal areas'

[Guest JamesG123]

Things are getting more "interesting" in Pakistan...

 

Pakistan's ousted top judge urges revolt

[Gabe]

Things are getting more "interesting" in Pakistan...

 

Pakistan's ousted top judge urges revolt

 

The activist Supreme Court is at odds with him over the terrorist suspect detainee issue. The SC wants these people (about a thousand of them) released and to nullify Musharraf's recent electoral win. If Musharraf is ousted US will miss him sorely. He's the only guy who can lead a war against extremism. Bhuttos talks the talk, but I seriously doubt she would be effective in office. The Pakistani Supreme Court, along with most of the population sees the war on terror as none of their business. If Musharraf goes it will be a major victory for the Islamists.

[DougRichards]

The activist Supreme Court is at odds with him over the terrorist suspect detainee issue. The SC wants these people (about a thousand of them) released and to nullify Musharraf's recent electoral win. If Musharraf is ousted US will miss him sorely. He's the only guy who can lead a war against extremism. Bhuttos talks the talk, but I seriously doubt she would be effective in office. The Pakistani Supreme Court, along with most of the population sees the war on terror as none of their business. If Musharraf goes it will be a major victory for the Islamists.

Not quite: The Supreme Court was about to rule on whether Musharaff could continue as President even though prima facie the constitution says that he cannot. He sacked the Supreme Court so that they could not boot him out of office.

 

So what does the USA want? A tin-pot dictator who starts as a friend to the west but finishes up like a Saddam Hussein in order to try to deal with the resurgent Taliban in the Pushten tribal areas? Or a democratically elected president?

 

If the answer is that the USA wants a strongman for stability and anti-terrorist activity then they should have left Saddam in place. He ensured greater stability than any so-called democracy.

 

Democracy doesn't work very well in areas where tribalism is more important than good governance.

[Bluelight]

<conspricy theory>

Assumption:

Its a setup, the people are supposed to overthrow Musharraf and bring a new age of democrasy to Pakistan.

 

Reasons this seems true:

1. Outside looking in, it appears that Bhutto is being setup to take over. She is the only one allowed to speak her mind freeily, and oddily enough Musharraf isn't moving against her.

2. If the people take over via protests it is likely that the democratic institutions will be much stronger then if Musharraf relents and allows democrasy to passivily assert itself. This type of democrasy if it chooses so will probably be in a much better position to fight the extreemists.

3. Even if Musharraf let democrasy take over passivily, it will not solve the perception that the goverment is weak, and inable to fight the militants.

4. The military chain of command has already been set to fall to Gen Ashfaq Pervez Kiyani, and avoid any chaos in the defense forces

 

Reasons I am wrong:

1. The forces of democrasy are losing

</conspricy theory>

Edited November 7, 2007 by Bluelight

[Josh]

The activist Supreme Court is at odds with him over the terrorist suspect detainee issue. The SC wants these people (about a thousand of them) released and to nullify Musharraf's recent electoral win. If Musharraf is ousted US will miss him sorely. He's the only guy who can lead a war against extremism. Bhuttos talks the talk, but I seriously doubt she would be effective in office. The Pakistani Supreme Court, along with most of the population sees the war on terror as none of their business. If Musharraf goes it will be a major victory for the Islamists.

 

Its hard to gauge with the information void we have here concerning ops in tribal areas, but I was getting the impression that US interests in Pakistan were basically lost anyway. The army seems unable to get any traction and I haven't heard any big names getting capped like use to trickle down the pipe now and again. From this distant vantage point it seems like it behoves the US to opperate independently in the tribal areas without Pak interference. My only concern if power changes hands is that control of the nuclear arsenal is maintained in non Jihadi hands, which I assume is what the quiet general in the corner is for.

[Guest JamesG123]

<conspricy theory>

Assumption:

Its a setup, the people are supposed to overthrow Musharraf and bring a new age of democrasy to Pakistan.

 

Is possible, but not really in the typical cultural norm or mindset of leaders in that part of the world.

 

If Musharraf were maneuvering things for a way out of this without it involving a coup or civil war, then he could wait until things got a bit more agitated and then before serious blood begins to spill, he magnanimously resigns from the Presidency and/or Army CoS for "the good of Pakistan and its people". Butto or whom ever wins the election then takes over with the understanding that Musharraf is immune to any prosecution, and he gets to sail off into the sunset as a "good guy".

 

But its more likely that he will try to hold onto power to his last breath and ride the country into chaos.

Edited November 7, 2007 by JamesG123

[Bluelight]

But its more likely that he will try to hold onto power to his last breath and ride the country into chaos.

 

If the place goes into chaos, I am worried about what might happen to the nukes. (I know I should be worried about the fate of the Pakistan people, but I tend to worry about my own self before others) I know their is a General setup and all, but when things go sideways such things don't always hold together.

 

I wonder if they could be taken out with non-nuclear airstrikes? .. Then again, that might cause more harm then good, especially if they fail.

Edited November 7, 2007 by Bluelight

[Josh]

If the place goes into chaos, I am worried about what might happen to the nukes. (I know I should be worried about the fate of the Pakistan people, but I tend to worry about my own self before others) I know their is a General setup and all, but when things go sideways such things don't always hold together.

 

I wonder if they could be taken out with non-nuclear airstrikes? .. Then again, that might cause more harm then good, especially if they fail.

 

Rest assured there is a plan for that, but I suspect it would require a complete overthrow of the government and army by Islamic fundamentalist factions. A lot of the current stress seems to come from more mainstream elements, and more over I have a hard time seeing the Pak army tolerating that level of shinanigans before they just started slaughtering the populace if necessary. I suspect the army leaders have a keen understanding of how serious the US or India would take a nuclear inventory falling into unknown hands.