Pakistan Objects to U.S. Expansion in Afghan War

[laststeamtrain]

Source: NYT

July 22, 2009
Pakistan Objects to U.S. Expansion in Afghan War
By ERIC SCHMITT and JANE PERLEZ

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Pakistan is objecting to expanded American combat operations in neighboring Afghanistan, creating new fissures in the alliance with Washington at a critical juncture when thousands of new American forces are arriving in the region.

Pakistani officials have told the Obama administration that the Marines fighting the Taliban in southern Afghanistan will force militants across the border into Pakistan, with the potential to further inflame the troubled province of Baluchistan, according to Pakistani intelligence officials.

Pakistan does not have enough troops to deploy to Baluchistan to take on the Taliban without denuding its border with its archenemy, India, the officials said. Dialogue with the Taliban, not more fighting, is in Pakistan’s national interest, they said.

The Pakistani account made clear that even as the United States recommits troops and other resources to take on a growing Taliban threat, Pakistani officials still consider India their top priority and the Taliban militants a problem that can be negotiated. In the long term, the Taliban in Afghanistan may even remain potential allies for Pakistan, as they were in the past, once the United States leaves.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/22/world/asia/22pstan.html?hpw

[timeforpeace]

1. Somehow I don't see India being a problem like the Taliban.

[Winterblues]

7. Were the Taliban a problem for Pakistan before America attacked Afghanistan

:shrug: India most certainly was.

[Dennis Donovan]

2. Cambodia, anyone?

:(

[Rhiannon12866]

3. And then there's Iran (Sh'ia), enemy of The Taliban (Sunni)...

Bush* totally squandered that possible ally after 9/11, by refusing to engage in unilateral negotiations and declaring them part of his "Axis of Evil..." The enemy of my enemy and all that... :-(

[jwirr]

4. IMO Pakistan is finally realizing that we are VERY close to their borders. nt

[InfiniteThoughts]

5. lame excuses!

Seriously, Pakistan is running out of excuses. They need to hire some good PR agency to come up with good excuses!

If military strength was the problem, all they had to do was ask India nicely or get US to ask India nicely and i am sure India will reduce a good size of it's military on their side of the border.

and by the way, does Pakistan realistically believe that India will invade them now if troops were re-deployed? And US will allow that?

Time and again, the Bush bunch erred in accepting these stupid excuses. I hope the Obama administration uses the stick to beat the Pak military on this issue.

[formercia]

6. Pakistan doesn't want the US to kill Taliban 'friendlies.'

Pakistan is still supplying aid to Taliban forces fighting the US in Afghanistan.

[Flaneur]

8. Link?

[formercia]

9. Here ya go...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8118373.stm
--snip--
But he was quite clear on another point as well:

"Jihad against America and its allies in Afghanistan would continue as well."

But was not the point of the operation in South Waziristan to stop such activities? Apparently not, as far as Misabhuddin is concerned.

"Pakistan's government only has problems with the foreign militants in the area. They have always supported us in the jihad in Afghanistan."

[Flaneur]

10. If that is true, it is mindboggling that the US would allow it.

Our ally is also supporting our enemy?

This whole Southwest Asian imperial misadventure is even more fucked up than I thought.

[formercia]

12. It has always been that way

When I was there, training the locals in the early 80's, everything went through the ISI. They took their 50% cut and the rest went to who they decided should get assistance. It turned out to be the most radical groups.

[Mari333]

11. get us the f out of there asap

what a clusterfck.

[No Elephants]

13. So many nations, so few troops. One of the most profitable growth industries right now must be

mercenary contracting.