Daily brief: website leaks thousands of Afghan war docs
By Andrew Lebovich, July 26, 2010
Monday, July 26, 2010 - 8:09 AM
Share
An incredible flood
The website WikiLeaks.org
released roughly 92,000 government documents related to the war in
Afghanistan from 2004-2010 yesterday evening, after giving the
documents to the New York Times, The Guardian, and Germany's Der Spiegel weeks ago (NYT, Guardian, Guardian, Der Spiegel, NYT).
Composed in large measure of "secret" reports and cables from the U.S.
military, the initial review of the documents reveals new details about
multiple aspects of the war, including civilian casualties caused by
international forces, the increased use of sometimes unreliable armed
drones, Pakistan's alleged role in supporting various Taliban and
militant factions and suspicion of Iranian involvement as well, secret
special operations task forces that hunt Taliban and al Qaeda leaders,
formerly unrevealed reports that the Taliban may have used heat-seeking
surface-to-air missiles against coalition helicopters, and increased
evidence that Afghan government corruption is undermining efforts to win
over the Afghan population (Wash Post, AJE, CNN, Guardian WSJ, Atlantic, Danger Room, Guardian, Guardian).
The collection also documents the alarming rise in Taliban use of improvised explosive devices (IEDs), noting that in the period in question that IEDs alone killed approximately 7,000 Afghans (Guardian).
And C.J. Chivers has a must-read piece closely examining reports from
Combat Outpost Keating, the isolated post in E Afghanistan that would
eventually be nearly overrun by Taliban after it had been ordered to
close (NYT).
Many
of the reports document civilian casualties and links between current
and former elements of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and
the Taliban and al Qaeda (Guardian, NYT, WSJ).
Details of civilian casualties come from 144 reports filed on different
incidents, including last September's U.S. airstrike on a gasoline
truck in Kunduz that killed scores of civilians, and incidents where
American, French, British and Polish forces fired on or shelled Afghan
civilians (Guardian, Guardian).
The reports also note high-level cooperation between the ISI and
militants, from training to supporting plots to assassinate Afghan
President Hamid Karzai, and an allegation that former ISI head Hamid Gul
met with three presumed al Qaeda representatives in South Waziristan to plan a suicide bombing against U.S. forces (NYT, Guardian). However, much of this reporting came from single informants and Afghan officials hostile to the ISI, leading the Guardian's
Declan Walsh to write that the reports, "fail to provide a convincing
smoking gun for ISI complicity," in aiding the insurgency (Guardian).
American and Pakistani officials condemned the document's release (Bloomberg, AJE, AFP, BBC, NYT). The leak comes as House and Senate Democrats are debating how to approve additional funding for the war (LAT).
And the documents also emerge when Afghanistan's neighbors have grown
increasingly worried about closer relations between Afghanistan and
Pakistan, a fact that may change due to political pressure generated by
the documents' release (Wash Post, Guardian, WSJ).
Back and forth
U.S. forces searched furiously this weekend in Afghanistan's Logar province after two U.S. Navy personnel went missing Friday (LAT, Wash Post, NYT).
While U.S. officials said the men were still listed as missing, a
Taliban spokesman said and Afghan officials confirmed that one sailor
was killed in a firefight, while Taliban forces were detaining the other
(CNN, Wash Post, WSJ, LAT, Bloomberg).
The
Taliban took control of the village of Barg-e-Matal in the isolated E
Afghan province of Nuristan on Saturday, for the second time in recent
months (Tolo, Wash Post).
Reports Sunday night indicated that U.S. and Afghan forces were engaged
in combat with Taliban elsewhere in the same district, and the Afghan
Defense Ministry said Afghan forces had retaken the village (AP).And
the Afghan government will investigate reports that an unidentified
rocket struck a village in Helmand province, killing 40-45 civilians (Dawn).
Arrivals and departures
Chairman
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen took a whirlwind trip to
India, Pakistan and Afghanistan this weekend, where he urged a crackdown
on militant groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba and the Haqqani Network, toured
NW Pakistan by air, and expressed the U.S. commitment to Afghanistan
and support for President Karzai's plan to reconcile some Taliban
elements (VOA, RFI, CNN, ToI).
In
a ceremony marked by VIPs, humor, and some regret at the way his career
ended, Gen. Stanley McChrystal retired from the U.S. Army on Friday in a
ceremony at Ft. McNair (LAT, Wash Post).
And a new study of 15 months of data from Afghanistan has concluded
that McChrystal's restrictive rules of engagement curbing air strikes
and operations led to a drop in insurgent violence in some areas of
Afghanistan (BBC).
Drones, drones, drones
Two suspected U.S. drones struck a house in the Angoor Ada area of South Waziristan Saturday, killing at least 16 fighters of unknown nationality (ET, BBC, AJE, CNN). Three subsequent strikes occurred Sunday, one in Shaktoi just inside South Waziristan, another the other near Miram Shah in North Waziristan, killing at least 19 fighters, and a third also reportedly struck targets in South Waziristan (BBC, AP, Dawn, WSJ). These strikes would mark 101 under Obama, and 50 this year.
Elsewhere,
Pakistani forces claim to have killed 34 militants in bombing raids in
Kurram and Orakzai agencies, while in the Naushehra district of
Khyber-Pukhtunkhwa province, the Taliban allegedly killed the son of the
province's Information Minister, who was openly critical of the group (Dawn, AP).
A suicide bomber struck near the minister's home Monday, killing at
least seven but missing the minister, who was not home at the time (AP, Dawn, AJE, ET). Partisan killings continued this weekend in Pakistan's financial capital of Karachi (Dawn, Daily Times, Geo TV).
And Pakistani officials separately acknowledged that failed Times
Square bomber Faisal Shahzad met with Pakistani Taliban leader
Hakimullah Mehsud and other leading figures (AFP).
At
least 30 Pakistanis have been killed in flooding in the southwestern
province of Baluchistan, while the AP reports on Pakistan's worsening
water crisis (CNN, AP).
Peace through fruit
Secretary
of State Hillary Clinton's offer last week to help Pakistan export
mangos to the U.S. is only the latest instance of using mangoes to
bridge gaps between Pakistan and others (ABC).
The U.S. will help finance a $21 million program to upgrade Pakistan's
mango farming and processing infrastructure, though it is unclear if
that will help the image of the U.S. in the country.
Sign up here to receive the daily brief in your
inbox. Follow the AfPak Channel on Twitter and Facebook.
LEON NEAL/AFP/Getty Images
EXPLORE:AFPAK, AFGHANISTAN, AFPAK CHANNEL, AFPAK DAILY BRIEF, BUSH ADMINISTRATION, BUSH'S LEGACY, PAKISTAN, TALIBAN, TERRORISM, U.S. CONGRESS, U.S. FOREIGN POLICY 
Reaction to the war documents leak
Reaction to the war documents leak. The Guardian, the New York Times and Der Spiegel publish huge cache of secret military files detailing war in Afghanistan. Follow the latest reaction here. White House condemns Wikileaks over Afghan war logs. Secret Wikileaks files expose truth of war in Aghanistan. Karzai shocked at size of leak, but not its content. Afghanistan war logs reveal hand of Osama bin Laden. Watch Wikileaks' founder Julian Assange explain the war logs. Explore key events and incidents in our interactive guide. Worldwide journalism: discover the story behind the leak. Editorial: the unvarnished picture of the war in Afghanistan. READ OUR FULL WAR LOGS COVERAGE. Inside the war logs. Files reveal hand of Osama bin Laden . Many threat reports between 2004 and 2009 link elusive al-Qaida chief to full range of insurgent activities. Task Force 373 – hunting top Taliban David Leigh answers your questions. See how the Guardian's investigations editor answered your queries on the Afghanistan war logs. A new journal of disaster. Philippe Sands: US military logs reveal widespread use of targeted killings. But is our aim true? Richard Norton-Taylor: Shattering the illusion War logs reveal 16,000 IED attacks. Interactive: See where the 16,000 improvised explosive devices were and who they hit Pakistan's fingerprints on the war. ISI spies across Afghan border accused of everything from poison beer scheme to Karzai assassination plot. Secret war along the Pakistan border Iran's covert ops in Afghanistan Story behind biggest intelligence leak. From US military computers to a cafe in Brussels: how classified papers found their way to online activists. Julian Assange profile: an uncompromising rebel Wikileaks' founder on the Afghanistan war logs Key events and significant incidents. The full leaked database contains 92,201 records of events or intelligence reports. This is our selection of 300 key ones. Download the key incidents as a spreadsheet Afghanistan war logs: the glossary
lalqila.wordpress.com/2010/07/26/reaction-to-war-documents-leak/
....If you're going to copy/paste huge sections of The Guardian,
...at least have the decency of posting a link.
Its not like you're providing any actual thoughts yourself. Perhaps we should be glad.
"Khan III"??
What happened to I and II? Suicide bombings? Rehab?
In case your eyes averted the link, its right here
lalqila.wordpress.com/2010/07/26/reaction-to-war-documents-leak/
Link needs to be pointing to the source not your own blog
Mr. Khan,
You attribute your cut and paste to original source that's what the good poster chided you for. pointing him/her to your blog is not tantamount to proving a reference to the original source.
This information is new only if you have been in a coma for the past 10 years. You may as well have leaked that the World Trade Center was destroyed in New York city. Most of this stuff has been in the news for years so it is nothing new. I don't even know how this made the news.
I suspect that it will be done to put more pressure on Pakistan to attack more Jihadis in Waziristan. They are doing a good job so far, but can do more. It will also encourage a purge of the ISI and fire all of the Jihadi elemets still lurking within.
The US is doing a great job. The Jihadis are going to sleep with the sound of drones buzzing in their heads. Al Qaeda in Iraq has been crushed so the US army can focus their efforts towards destroying AL Qaeda in Afpak. The Taliban must be getting desperate since they are using more IED attacks (which are becoming more ineffectual due to anti-IED technology the US is perfecting). Besides, the taliban are killing most of the civilians in Afghanistan which will be perfect for allying the natives against them.
Hello Kunino, Thanks for your counterargument. I say that most of the information in the leaks is not new because most websites have been stating this for years. Even on this website (foreign policy) there was an article about how the "leaks" are stating the obvious (yes, the US is using special forces units to eliminate Al Qaeda elements, Drones are striking Taliban leaders, and YES civilian casualties are happening). The leaks also tell us that on one hand the Pakistani government is supporting an offensive against the Jihadis while some elements are supporting those same jihadis (not impossible since the ISI is a state within a state and there are some times where different departments don't know what others are doing). Most of the news channels like Stratfor have been doing a magnificent job of explaining what has been happening for years. The sad truth is that most people get their "facts" by buffons like Michael Moore.
As for AL Qaeda in Iraq, they have been greatly diminished in Iraq since 2007 (I fail to see how I was wrong on this). Even the Jihadi leaders have lamented the loss of Iraq and have suggested migrating the jihad to places like Afghanistan, Yemen, and Somalia. And yes, a great deal of casualties have been by muslims against muslims. That is how the US were able to use the Sunni Awakening to get Sunnis on their side and finally marginalize the Jihadis in Iraq. The same is happening in Afghanistan as Taliban IED's are killing a large number of civilians. Not to mention the Taliban practice of killing anyone who they feel is not 100% loyal to them. Remember, the Pakistanis are now starting an offensive in Waziristan because they see the Jihadis as a threat to the Pakistani state and a threat to civilian rule.
Focusing on Pakistan alone is tantamount to discrimination
Focusing on Pakistan alone is tantamount to discrimination and bias.
The real reason for America’s problems in Afghanistan is America’s OCCUPATION of Afghanistan. If America was not occupying Afghanistan then America would not have any problems in Afghanistan.
This is simple cause and effect.
Whatever country America has invaded and occupied has naturally affected all the neigbouring countries. American occupation of Palestine via Jews has deleteriously affected not only Palestine but also neighbouring Egypt, Lebanon, Syria and Jordan.
American occupation of Iraq for the Jews has deleteriously affected not only Iraq but also neighbouring Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen Lebanon, Syria and Jordan.
Similarly American occupation of Afghanistan for empire building reasons has deleteriously affected not only Afghanistan but also neighbouring Iran, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan.
International borders are not hermetic seals. American invasions and occupations naturally affect and involve all the neighbouring countries to various degrees. To expect otherwise would be living in fool’s paradise.
One should not conveniently forget that the extra focusing on Pakistan alone is also being pedaled by Hindoo India and Hindoo Indian lobbying groups in America as these have 60+ years of animosity against Pakistan and are just grinding their axes.
lalqila.wordpress.com
...all the accusations about Pakistan double-dealing and support of terrorism and using jihadists to attempt assassinations of foreign leaders are *true*, just that you don't think that's such a big deal. Or that their behavior is justified.
With defenders like you, Pakistan doesn't even need enemies. You're certainly not going to win them any sympathy with a rationale like that.
Pakistan is just protecting its interests
and all within legal bounds of International law and understanding.
lalqila.wordpress.com
Pakistan has alot of blood on its hands supporting terrorists and providing haven to Al Qaeda and the Taliban so going after Pakistan is perfectly reasonable. Remember, the United States can always cut off military aid to Pakistan and give it to their new best friend India. What is the sound of 170 Pakistanis crying?
Based on a reading of your blog
you, my dear friend, are a complete idiot. A bigoted, narrow-minded, complete idiot.
Suicide bombing civilians, assassination attempts are not...
"within the bounds of international law"...
I expect you'd probably justify the Mumbai attacks as "in Pakistan's interests".
And I'm not sure how you rationalize Pakistan begging for billions in military aid from the U.S., then going out and funding terrorists to attack civilians in Afghanistan. You may call that "in their interests"... but it certainly doesn't make it the behavior of an "ally".
US deserves to be screwed by Pakistan
After having poured billions of dollars in aid, US deserves to be treated with such contempt by Pakistani establishment (Pakistani Army, ISI and Government) since US does not want to learn.
This NY Times report more or less confirms ‘The sun in the sky’ report published by Harvard Professor Matt Waldman from London School of Economics on 6/13/2010.
That report states that “support for the Afghan Taliban is ‘official Pakistani ISI policy’ and is backed at the highest levels of Pakistan’s civilian administration. Pakistan appears to be playing a double game of astonishing magnitude. There is thus a strong case that the ISI orchestrates, sustains and shapes the overall insurgent campaign in Afghanistan.”
According to Afghan Taliban commanders’ interviews with Matt Waldman, the Pakistani ISI orchestrates, sustains and strongly influences the Taliban insurgency movement. The Afghan Taliban commanders also say that ISI gives sanctuary to both Taliban and Haqqani groups, and provides huge support in terms of training, funding, munitions, and supplies. In the words of these Afghan Taliban commanders, this is ‘as clear as the sun in the sky’.
The ISI is said to compensate families of suicide bombers to the tune of 200,000 Pakistani rupees, claims the report. Thus US AID TO BANKRUPT PAKISTAN FINANCES THE DEATH OF US/NATO SOLDIERS in Afghanistan. So in a way, US is financing the death of its OWN troops in Afghanistan.
Pakistani government issued its usual denials just as it had denied umpteen times the existence of Mullah Mohammed Omar’s ‘Quetta Shura Taliban (QST)’ in the provincial capital Quetta of Baluchistan. But General Stanley McChrystal called QST as the biggest threat to US Afghan mission in his report to President Obama in August, 2009.
The most breath-taking part of this sordid saga is that US is NOT holding Pakistan responsible for sheltering, protecting and supporting Haqqani’s HQN network and Mullah Omar’s QST network all these years while those networks have been causing daily deaths of US/NATO soldiers ever since 2002 even though Pakistan was SUPPOSED to have joined US fight against same Taliban back in 2001!
Can American CIA not know what Matt Waldman knows? How come Obama administration is continuing Bush’s mollycoddling of Pakistan with such incriminating evidence against Pakistan’s double game? How can US mission in Afghanistan succeed if Obama administration continues to ignore such Pakistani duplicity like Bush had done it before Obama?
Natural extent of Greater Pakistan
Natural extent of Greater Pakistan
http://lalqila.wordpress.com/2010/07/23/natural-extent-of-greater-pakistan/
That is an interesting fantasy, but it simply will not happen. The Hindus in the region far outnumber the Muslims. If anything, it will be India which breaks up Pakistan just by sheer virue of its size. Sure this might be a hot topic on jihadi websites among young men who dream of a Caliphate coming into existence as well as fantasies of martyrdom with virgins waiting in heaven. However, in the real world this cannot happen, India is simply to big and powerful. If anything I could see parts of Pakistan being broken off to India.
It was the US which defeated the Soviets
Need I explain the history of the war to you? The Mujihadeen were being slaughtered until the US decided to help them with hi tech stinger missles (watch Charlie Wilsons war if you want to see how it happened). The state of Pakistan only survives due to infusions of cash and military hardware given by the US, without that support, Pakistan would collapse.
It was the US which defeated the Soviets
Need I explain the history of the war to you? The Mujihadeen were being slaughtered until the US decided to help them with hi tech stinger missles (watch Charlie Wilsons war if you want to see how it happened). The state of Pakistan only survives due to infusions of cash and military hardware given by the US, without that support, Pakistan would collapse.
re: Who "Won" Afghanistan vs Russia in the 80s?
Best answer is, "Russia lost; no one won"
It certainly wasn't the US, at least in the sense of our having any control of events there on the ground, despite having spent a lot of money (much through the ISI, some direct)...
Fact is, Saudi Arabia spent more money through the muj than the US did. We didnt get up to their level until the mid 80s, and then they agreed to match whatever we spent, on top of a great deal that was not coming officially from within the Saudi government, but through informal fund raising amongst the rich arab elites.
All that money pouring in was mostly guided through networks where the ISI had some influence; not complete, but more so than any other actor. This was because they had specific relationships with Muj warlords that they could influence. However, they only had influence among the Pashtun fighters; people like Ahmad Shah Massoud in the north, Ismail Khan in the West, and others (like Hazaras in central afghanistan) were pretty much outside the influence of Pakistani leverage, and consequently didn't get a lot of the money floating around. They WERE (cumulatively) doing most of the fighting, however.
So when you look at the details, the people who "beat" the russians out of Afghanistan were not the Pakistanis, or the US, or Saudis, but the disparate collection of Afghans themselves, who while receiving money and weapons from various sources, didn't get as much as a few smaller groups that had less of an impact. The Afghans beat the russians. What the Pakistanis DID do was fund one side of the Afghan civil war FOLLOWING the Russians departure; with the power vacuum following, they supported people like gulbuddin hekmatyar and others, who wanted to form an Islamist government. The fight over power sharing that followed through the 90s was strongly influenced by Pakistan, largely in support of the Pashtun Islamist groups, some of which eventually morphed into the Taliban.
The truth is that outside meddling by foreign powers probably did more to fragment Afghanistan and prevent any pluralistic sharing of power. It also had created a variety of well armed warlord groups that wielded regional authority despite little interest in formal government institutions.
The truth is that no one 'Won' afghanistan, because 'victory' against the Soviets only resulted in another decade of war, and erosion of civic institutions in that country. The 'victory' enabled the rise of the Taliban and nation undoing most of the development it had achieved through the 20th century.
Arabs jihadists love to claim *they* beat the Russians. (even though the represented less than 10% of the fighters in the country, and didn't even get involved until fairly late in the war)... Pakistanis love to claim *they* beat the russians (even though they weren't spending their own money, and even though they mostly only funded/supported small groups out of the total fighters - never all of them, and in fact worked against some at times)... Americans love to think we beat the Russians (through pure $$ and a few hundred stinger missiles), even though we were mostly in the dark about how our $ translated into action on the ground...
The Russians can tell you who beat them; Themselves. It was a dumb boondoggle, and they simply lacked any good reason to stick around and fight a long protracted, disparate enemy.
Just as the US will probably fail to achieve any strategic goals in Afghanistan, it would not be because of the unity or fighting prowess of the Taliban/Insurgents, or because of any tactical failures. It will be because we can't do anything we claim to want to do: the civilian government we ostensibly support are a bunch of feckless criminals; the Afghan police force are mainly a bunch of illiterate cowards; we have not been able to provide any significant improvements to their infrastructure, and the original reason to go there in the first place (kill/capture Osama, and eliminate a 'safe haven') seems to have become moot: He's alive and well in NWFP, and Pakistan seems to be a perfectly reasonable safe haven at the moment.
We will leave in 2012 or so, and someone will be certain to claim victory, but I doubt anyone will really be that much better off for it. The 'victors' will have a moment of satisfaction, then probably go about the same tribal and religious fighting they've been doing for the last few hundred years. And Pakistan will continue to erode from within. Lose/Lose for all concerned. Would staying another 10 years make a difference? Probably not. If we can find a less costly and time consuming method of getting Osama's head on a stick, I think it should be considered as a preferable alternative.
...significant contribution of the Pakistani army in any battle against Soviet forces?
Please, let us know. From my reading the only time Pakistani armed forces were ever formally fighting in Afghanistan were a few air strikes. And even those were extremely limited, according to all accounts I've seen - mostly defensive encounters against Soviet/Afghan attacks across the border.
e.g.
http://www.nytimes.com/1987/05/02/world/afghans-down-a-pakistani-f-16-saying-fighter-jet-crossed-border.html
Playing up Pakistan's role in the conflict as something other than a haven for refugees, host for the Muj, and a disburser of US/Saudi/Chinese money, is mostly fantasy. AFAIK there were no encounters at all between Pakistan's army and Soviet forces. Unless, of course, you can provide examples.
Thanks CEO for a good explanation
anyway, you changed your company to unicom ?
Was there any skirmish between pakistani air force and soviet ground troops ?
Checking all independent historical information of the Soviet/Afghan war, the only documented conflicts between Pakistan military and Soviet/Afghan forces were a few air battles, mostly over Pakistani soil.
If you have any evidence that Pakistani ground forces fought against soviets, please link to it. Stop 'asserting', and show me.
re: Pakistan contribution to Soviet/Afghan war
""Was there any skirmish between pakistani air force and soviet ground troops ?""
Not to my knowledge.
http://www.pakdef.info/pakmilitary/airforce/war/indexafghanwar.html
They (like Khan V6.0) assert that more happened that was "classified", but frankly there are plenty of sources out there and none to my knowledge noted any significant Pakistani military activity on Afghan soil. The Russians strafed refugee camps in Pakistan because they saw them as havens for the Muj (which they were), but never to my knowledge waged any cross-border ground campaigns. Of course, plenty of Pakistani muj crossed over, but the contention was whether any formal Pakistan military members fought. They do not include any mention in their own formal records here:
http://www.pakdef.info/pakmilitary/army/index.html
... while they DO (as noted above) particularly go out of their way to speak about air force skirmishes. You'd think they'd bother to mention their Army's contribution (if there was any), given how much some people like Khan like to brag about it.
From memoirs of the Afghan muj leaders, they repeatedly stated that the contributions of both Arab fighters and Pakistanis was completely negligible on the ground in Afghanistan. There was indeed even some enmity between groups, based partly on ethnic/language/and religious grounds. As noted, the majority of Afghan fighters were not particularly interested in Pakistani 'help', as their was already considerable conflict between different warlord groups, and Pakistani aid was particularly partisan towards selected Pashtun groups in the South, many of whom were not significant contributors to the fight until the very end of the war. People like Massoud had little appreciation for that (given he never got any help from them for years), and saw them as directly working against Afghan national interests (he said so repeatedly to the CIA, according to Gary Shroen). Then again, one should consider that every Afghan warlord was extremely self interested, and were all jockeying for power post-Soviet occupation. There may have been some other versions of the story, its just that I've never seen any from a credible source.
Pakistanis are all for total freedom of all information
Pakistanis are all for total freedom of all information. Julian Assange of Wikileaks is doing a great service. Only when a true picture emerges from freedom of all information and data only then one would have a better understanding of America’s wars against various Muslim countries and other brown and yellow countries for the past 60+ years.
lalqila.wordpress.com
The movie just released publically. It is not new.
Folks
All these documents only prove that the overlords in the US power structure know of this double game. Despite that, they choose to work with these ISI rascals.
There is nothing new here. Amrullah Saleh has been shouting from the rooftop about all this, so have the Indian, the British, the Israeli and the French intelligence agencies.
In fact you do not need "intelligence" to know this. Only common sense.
The fact is that the Pakistani and US interests are NOT aligned in Afghanistan. So no amount of money or pressure will change that ground reality.
The US is stuck there. Obama has his foot in the tar pit as he has described it.
The best idea I have seen floated around is the De Facto, reversible partition of Afghanistan. Secure the North and leave the South to Taliban.
I think it came from Robert Blackwill and I believe Biden may have something along similar line.
Protect the Tajiks and Hazaras. Let the Pashtuns work the rest out with the Pakistanis.
This is a win-win-win. The Pakistanis get the "strategic depth" that they want. The Pashtuns get the Islamic Emirate that they seem to want, the Tajiks and Hazaras can get to the business and start reaping the peace dividends ( grow their orchards, make their shawls and rugs and extract their minerals and get rich.. you know, be baniya, Jinnah's tajik bhais and Jinnahs Hazara bhais).
The NATO maintains a small footprint in the NOrth to dismantale any Al-Queda activity that may happen in the Pashtun part.
When this happens, the ISI loses some of its sheen and luster and the Pakistanis can focus on living their daily lives.
Since this is de-facto partition and not de-Jure, if the Pashtuns get sick of their Emirate and want to be in some kind of semi-secular society, they can always come back into the Northern fold. On their own accord.
They will also have the option of completely merging with Pakistan, which some posters here like Mr. Khan want to be an Emirate any way. Then the Pashtunistan will be another Pakistani province giving it its "stan" part....
Its far better to break up India instead of poor Afghanistan
Focusing on Pakistan alone is tantamount to discrimination and bias.
The real reason for America’s problems in Afghanistan is America’s OCCUPATION of Afghanistan. If America was not occupying Afghanistan then America would not have any problems in Afghanistan.
This is simple cause and effect.
Whatever country America has invaded and occupied has naturally affected all the neigbouring countries.I like wear the ugg classic tall boots grey with black jeans, it is looking amazing, ugg boots is not only beautiful, but also they are comfortable, you will attarcted people. and you can buy the ugg classic tall boots grey at discount price from saleboot.us. American occupation of Palestine via Jews has deleteriously affected not only Palestine but also neighbouring Egypt, Lebanon, Syria and Jordan.
American occupation of Iraq for the Jews has deleteriously affected not only Iraq but also neighbouring Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen Lebanon, Syria and Jordan.
With defenders like you, Pakistan doesn't even need enemies. You're certainly not going to win them any sympathy with a rationale like that.
Jan/Feb 2012
-
Cover Story
-
Feature
-
Inbox
(26)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE