5 years ago
Here is yet another example of the now infamous double-game being played by Pakistan, our so-called ally in the war against Islamic fundamentalism:
Twice in the last few weeks, US intelligence officials have provided the Pakistanis with the coordinates of bomb factories in the rugged tribal region of Waziristan, on the Afghan border — only to see the info leak to the enemy, who evacuated the sites before the Pakistani military arrived.
Incoming Defense Secretary Leon Panetta arrived in Pakistan Friday to discuss “rebuilding” the Pakistan-US relationship, and reportedly confronted his hosts with the evidence that they’d tipped off the Taliban about the bomb sites.
This is just getting tiresome beyond words.
Is it even worth keeping score any longer? Why does the U.S. continue to allow the Pakistanis to get away with this kind of thing?
There is only one reason I can find: we just can’t face the consequences of putting the screws to Pakistan.
The Obama Administration is afraid that even a hint or threat of even reduced aid will push the Pakistanis over the edge and into the arms of the Islamofascists. Which is to say that Pakistan would openly embrace the terrorists rather than just discreetly.
As the Captain pointed out years ago, if the U.S. had any strategic sense, it would have developed alternative logistical routes to Afghanistan that did not depend upon Pakistan. As it is, we are precariously reliant upon the Pakistanis keeping the land route open for the bulk of supplies coming into Afghanistan.
Other than having to find a new route to keep the campaign supplied, the other consequence of denying aid to Pakistan would be the loss of what little presence Pakistan still allows to CIA operatives who help to track down and target terrorists inside Pakistan. Is this limited capability so vitally important that we are willing to fund a government that actively works against us as much as it does with us? Given the increasing restrictions placed on operations within Pakistan, it is doubtful that the gains at this point are worth the losses. Would a drone strike from a CIA base in Pakistan really have much of an effect on the Afghan Campaign? If the death of Bin Laden made no impact, what would?
Then there is the benefit of clarity. Having Pakistan as a declared enemy in the Afghan Campaign would certainly not be welcome, but at least the U.S. could take actions in the porous border areas that it cannot with an “ally” that acts like an enemy. Clarity can be a wonderful thing. Ambiguity in this regard has left us in strategic knots, knowing where the Taliban are getting re-supplied and trained but unable to effectively do anything about it.
Finally, the U.S. may have far more to gain by cutting Pakistan loose and allying closely with India. As it is, the U.S. must temper its cooperation and policies with India due to Pakistani sensitivities. If Pakistan is determined to act like a rogue state, then the U.S. is far better off developing closer ties to India, not only in regard to Afghanistan (where India could become a major player and partner) but also as a strategic counterweight to China and Russia.
It is high time for Pakistan to decide whether it belongs to civilization or to the barbarians. By the same token, it is high time that the U.S. faced up to the hard truth: Pakistan, for whatever reason, is not willing to remove the terror bases from their territory and must be treated accordingly.