Middle East Bulletin
Advancing a Strategy for Stability in Pakistan
Today's Feature:
Pakistan: Learning the Right Lessons from Iraq
by
Certainly, we cannot deny that Iraq’s Sunni Awakening offers some useful lessons for Pakistan. … Ultimately, Pakistan’s tribal leaders need to be integrated into any successful plan to defeat extremists.
To do so effectively, the United States must understand and exploit the cleavages among the different tribes and the various extremist groups. In essence, the United States should take the right lessons from Iraq and apply them to Pakistan, recognizing the serious differences between the two countries. …
One key principle … is the recognition that the United States needs to have an integrated strategy that uses all components of power. A short-term and long-term political and economic strategy must accompany any military approach in the tribal belt as it has in Iraq. Access the full article>>
Setting the Record Straight
Keeping Focus on Long-Term Objectives
“[W]hile we do need to have a cooperative approach that involves many of our friends and allies in meeting with the Pakistanis, … as we work out with them a rough division of labor, the U.S., I believe, ought to be taking the lead in addressing the issues in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas. And given the difficulty of doing so, I suspect that we will not have a great deal of difficulty in convincing them to allow us to take the lead there. But as we all know, there is a real tension between our short-term tactical aims in trying to capture or kill terrorists across the border and militants in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas and our longer- term counterinsurgency pacification goals. We very much need to be focusing on the end state. What is it that we want this area to look like? ... In that context we need to have a common agenda with the Pakistani government and very much to include the military on counterinsurgency in that area. There needs to be, therefore, a focus on combining military efforts with economic, development and political development in those areas.”
—Robert L. Grenier, managing director and chairman for Global Security Consulting, Kroll, event, “Partnership for Progress: Advancing a New Strategy for Prosperity and Stability in Pakistan and the Region,” Center for American Progress, November 17, 2008
News
U.S. Strike Reportedly Killed Five in PakistanStriking for the first time beyond Pakistan’s tribal areas, a U.S. pilotless aircraft fired missiles at a village well inside Pakistani territory on Wednesday, killing five foreign militants, a Pakistani intelligence official and local residents said.
The attack appeared to represent a widening of the U.S. campaign aimed at killing militants with Al Qaeda and the Taliban, who use safe havens in Pakistan as a springboard for attacks against NATO and U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan.Access the full story >>
U.S. Seeks New Supply Routes Into AfghanistanA rise in Taliban attacks along the length of a vital NATO supply route that runs through this border town in the shadow of the Khyber Pass has U.S. officials seeking alternatives, including the prospect of beginning deliveries by a tortuous overland journey from Europe. …
About 75 percent of NATO and U.S. supplies bound for Afghanistan—including gas, food and military equipment— are transported over land through Pakistan. The journey begins in the southern Pakistani port city of Karachi and continues north through Pakistan's volatile North-West Frontier Province and tribal areas before supplies arrive at the Afghan border. The convoys then press forward along mountain hairpin turns through areas of Afghanistan that are known as havens for insurgents.Access the full story >>
Pakistan Seeks Crackdown on Tax EvasionPakistan was in the spotlight again this week over its need to reform the tax system as the government and potential donors worked on a plan to help the state in the face of a financial crisis. Just one percent of tax is collected in Pakistan. ...
Under the IMF loan, Pakistan is seeking to borrow $7.6bn until the last quarter of 2010 to stave off a crisis on forthcoming debt payments. The government’s net liquid foreign currency reserves, which are below $3bn, are just enough to pay for about two to three weeks of imports.Access the full story >>
NATO: Pakistan Fired on Rebels on Afghan BorderPakistan fired on militants who attacked a NATO outpost on the Afghan border, the alliance said Thursday, an example of the cooperation seen as vital against the rising power of the Taliban and Al Qaeda.
Relations between Pakistan and the United States are under strain because of a wave of U.S. missile strikes on militant strongholds in Pakistan, including one on Wednesday that the government condemned as a "grave provocation." However, NATO and U.S. officials say coordination between security forces along both sides of the mountainous frontier between Afghanistan and Pakistan is improving.Access the full story >>
Taliban Reject Afghan Peace OvertureA Taliban spokesman said Monday that Afghan President Hamid Karzai did not have the authority to make a peace offering to its reclusive leader, Mullah Omar.
Karzai said over the weekend he would "go to any lengths" to provide protection to Mullah Omar if the militant leader agrees to enter peace talks. Taliban spokesman Qari Yousif told CNN that Karzai's offer is meaningless because he has to rely on the British and the Americans to provide his own security.Access the full story >>
Analysis
Partnership for ProgressThe United States needs to make a shift in its approach to Pakistan, recognizing both the importance of Pakistan to regional and international security, as well as the limitations of U.S. power. U.S. policy must recognize that the military component alone is insufficient to build stability and security in Pakistan. Military operations alone will not defeat Pakistan's militant groups; addressing some of these groups will require a diverse approach, including strengthening governance and rule of law, creating economic opportunities, and exploring political negotiations.
Furthermore, Pakistan's instability extends beyond the immediate threat of militancy in the country. Even if Al Qaeda were to be destroyed in Pakistan tomorrow, Pakistan would face other challenges to its stability including domestic militancy, fragile governance, regional tensions, and economic turmoil. The United States must integrate all the elements of American power to engage more deeply on these sources of instability. …
The United States must recognize the limitations of direct U.S. influence in Pakistan and continue moving toward a multilateral approach, with Pakistan as a full partner. At this point in time, Pakistani perceptions of the United States are so dismal that efforts to pursue change in Pakistan with the United States in the lead may automatically discredit the effort. The United States needs to work with Pakistan's neighbors, other global powers, and international organizations such as the World Bank, IMF, and the United Nations in order to assist Pakistan over the long term. Access the full report>>
Dealing With Pakistan Is Risky BusinessThe United States needs a comprehensive plan to promote stability in the region with integrated security, political and economic components. Even then, the United States cannot achieve success and eliminate terrorist sanctuaries in the tribal areas without Pakistani help.
In recent months, tribal militias, or lashkars, have fought back against the Taliban. But the Taliban has killed hundreds of tribal elders in the last four years. The United States needs to discreetly help Pakistan defend traditional forms of tribal governance and the elders who could form the backbone of indigenous resistance to the Taliban. In dealing with the tribal areas, the United States must differentiate its enemies. Some factions want to recreate the hellish Taliban rule of the 1990s. Others may be amenable to a political settlement. …
Finally, India remains Pakistan's national security obsession. To Islamabad, Afghanistan represents an opportunity to achieve "strategic depth" vis-à- vis India. The United States should support rapprochement and a settlement over Kashmir, while encouraging Pakistan to view its regional security challenges more broadly.
But, even with the right military, economic and political resources, the United States faces an enormous challenge, nation- building in a country of 170 million people. The United States needs a unity of effort in support of the Pakistani government, the Pakistani people and our own national security interests. Access the full article>>
How Not to Lose Afghanistan (and Pakistan)As much as Pakistan suffers at the hands of Islamist insurgents, the country's powerful military intelligence agency, Inter- Services Intelligence (ISI), has tolerated the Taliban, which it views as a backup force for asserting control of Afghanistan if the United States suddenly decides to cut and run. … [O]nly a long-term U.S. commitment will convince Pakistan's government to end its tolerance for the militant groups headquartered on the country's western border. …
To help tamp down the insurgency in FATA and other areas of the NWFP, the United States should help the Pakistanis build up their counterinsurgency capabilities. The Pakistani army is built for a land war with India, not for fighting terrorists and insurgents. Pakistani officers should be encouraged to attend counterinsurgency courses at U.S. war colleges, and the United States should support such courses at Pakistan's National Defense University. None of this would cost a lot of U.S. dollars and would yield potentially large results, as the new U.S. counterinsurgency strategy has done in Iraq.
Small amounts of U.S. aid in support of deradicalization programs for jailed Pakistani militants could also yield large returns. Such programs have had some success in Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, and Singapore, but have not been tried in Pakistan. Pakistani officials would benefit from learning about best practices in countries that have already spent years in building up their own counter-radicalization programs. Access the full article>>
Heard on the Street
Transformational Approach Needed Steve Coll, president & CEO, New America Foundation, and a staff writer at The New Yorker, event, “Partnership for Progress: Advancing a New Strategy for Prosperity and Stability in Pakistan and the Region,” Center for American Progress, November 17, 2008:
"I know this administration is going to have an enormous draw on its capacity at home and abroad. But I do think that one challenge that this subject raises is that incremental leadership is not going to be good enough. This is a time for a transformational approach in U.S. relations with Pakistan because the crisis in Pakistan is that grave. I wish it weren't, but I think it is. I do think that on subjects like trade and the structure of the international engagement with Pakistan, and even on subjects like Kashmir, it is a time for big thinking because otherwise this problem may slip away from the international community."
Background Basics
Enhanced Partnership with Pakistan Act of 2008 (S. 3263)The United States has provided Pakistan with at least $11 million in aid since 2001. As a result of continued problems in the region, U.S. officials have begun to examine ways to provide aid to Pakistan more effectively. One bipartisan effort, the Enhanced Partnership with Pakistan Act of 2008, introduced in the Senate this past summer aims to set a framework for revamping not only development assistance but also the nature of the U.S.-Pakistan relationship.
Introduced by: Senators Joseph Biden (D-DE) and Richard Lugar (R-IN)
Additional cosponsors: Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Thomas Carper (D-DE), Robert Casey (D-PA), Hillary Clinton (D-NY), Christopher Dodd (D-CT), Richard Durbin (D-IL), Chuck Hagel (R-NE), John Kerry (D-MA), Barack Obama (D-IL), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI)
Status: Introduced July 15, 2008; referred to Committee on Foreign Relations July 29, 2008, passed unanimously without amendment; placed on Senate legislative calendar
Purpose: “To authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2009 through 2013 to promote an enhanced strategic partnership with Pakistan and its people, and for other purposes.”
Non-military aid
Funding levels: The bill authorizes annual appropriations up to $1.5 billion in non-military assistance for fiscal years 2009- 2013 and encourages annual authorization of appropriations up to $1.5 billion for fiscal years 2014-2018 on the condition of an improvement in the political and economic environment. These figures more than triple the current level of U.S. non-military aid.
Uses: The funds should be directed towards projects that support the Pakistani people, strengthen democratic institutions, promote economic freedoms and encourage investment in the agriculture, education and infrastructure sectors.
Additional notable provisions:
1) Aims to build local capacity by encouraging the enlistment of Pakistani companies in making use of the funds;
2) Allows seven percent of the funds to be used for budgetary purposes, including administrative expenses and U.S. audits;
3) Encourages a larger portion of the funds to be directed towards education, healthcare and other sectors as the Pakistani government outlined in the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper; and
4) Promotes the use of aid to the utmost extent as direct expenditure on projects and programs
Oversight: The president must submit an annual report to designated congressional committees to include expenditures, intended purposes, recipients of funds and other provisions.
Security-related aid
Funding levels: The bill does not specify the amount of military aid; rather, the legislation allows for this assistance to be determined on an annual basis of need and cooperation.
Limitations: The act sets out conditions for certain types of U.S. government military assistance in the future. The Secretary of State must provide certification, after consultation with the Director of National Intelligence and the Secretary of Defense, that Pakistani security forces have demonstrated efforts to:
• Stop Al Qaeda and related terrorist groups from operating within Pakistan’s borders;
• Prevent the Taliban from using Pakistani territory as a base for attacking Afghanistan; and
• Refrain from meddling in Pakistani political or judicial processes.
The Secretary of State can waive the limitations without providing certification of the abovementioned efforts if it is determined to be in U.S. national interests.
Coalition Support Funds (CSF): Starting in 2001, the United States created these funds to reimburse countries for costs incurred in support of U.S. military operations. Pakistan has received 81 percent of overall CSF as of May 2008. The bill acknowledges the importance of these funds and calls for greater Defense Department oversight for Pakistani claims consistent with the findings of a U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) report from June 2008. The GAO report found that additional accountability is needed to ensure the accuracy of Pakistani claims, which have not been verified thus far.
Joint Afghanistan-Pakistan strategy
The legislation calls on the Secretary of State, in consultation with other U.S. agencies, to develop a counterterrorism and counterinsurgency strategy along the Pakistani-Afghani border. This approach must include a plan to work with governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan, NATO and other U.S. allies. This provision also requires the Secretary of State to present Congress by June 1, 2009, a comprehensive strategy for combating insurgents in Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas.