Skip to main content

In the ninth circle of hell

On Sunday, the 25th September, Pakistan’s Army Chief, General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, summoned his core commanders for a special meeting, allegedly to discuss the security situation. This is an unusual move as meetings of core commanders are typically scheduled with a prescribed agenda. Pakistan is understandably concerned that in the wake of Admiral Mike Mullen’s comments, America may well intensify drone attacks on Pakistani soil or even worse, send in ground troops.

Admiral Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the United States Armed Forces, in a speech to the Carnegie Endowment for Internal Peace, revealed that Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) Agency had strong ties with the Haqqani militant organisation and effectively supported terror attacks on American targets in Afghanistan. Admiral Mullen’s comments are the most recent indicator of Washington’s toughening stance against Pakistan. Previously, similar sentiments were echoed by US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta, and Cameron Munter, the American Ambassador to Islamabad.

The slide in US Pakistan relations actually began a few years ago when the Americans realised that Islamabad was in fact playing a double game. On the one hand, its troops flushed out certain militant organisations hostile to American interests, provided logistical support for American troops and diplomatically echoed support for America’s war against terror. However, on the other hand, its military establishment in general but more specifically, the Intelligence agencies, continued to nurture several terrorist organisations. The Haqqani network, the most important amongst these, is considered necessary to secure Islamabad’s interest in Afghanistan when the Americans eventually withdraw. However, both Washington and Islamabad maintained a diplomatic fa├žade and things chugged along.

However, the penny dropped a few months ago when US Special Forces raided a compound occupied by Osama bin Laden, a few hundred metres away from Pakistan’s elite military academy, in the wealthy suburb of Abbottabad. The Americans believed that their top fugitive was a guest of the Pakistani army and was provided harbour in their safe house. Several Congressmen threatened to introduce legislation to cut off military aid and sever ties completely with Islamabad. Since then, the relations between the two countries have persistently slipped and are currently at a critical juncture. Things can go either way. The American demand for disbanding the Haqqani militant organisation seems unacceptable to Islamabad, although officially it claims it has no relations whatsoever. Odd, it seems, that diplomatic ties between two allies currently boils down to one simple matter.

The Haqqani network originated in Afghanistan and is closely allied with the Taliban. Initially it received funding from previous US administrations during the Afghan war against Soviet occupation. Maulvi Haqqani rose to prominence, was recognised as a senior military leader, and even visited the White House during the Reagan Presidency. Today, the Haqqani network is well funded by wealthy Arab private donors and the Pakistani Government. In fact, a senior Afghani journalist once reported that President Hamid Karzai had invited Haqqani to serve as Prime Minister in his Government to bring “moderate elements of the Taliban” into the Government. Apparently, the terrorist refused. The organisation carries out activities in Afghanistan and uses Northern Waziristan as its base. Unlike other militant outfits, the Haqqani network has never engaged in attacks within the Pakistani state.

Within the Pakistani establishment, there is a line of thought that enough is enough and that Pakistan should take a firm stand against Washington and refuse to be “bullied”. They believe that Pakistan has other friends, namely China and Saudi Arabia who would substitute Washington for financial support and military hardware. Such a move would be a terrible folly. Pakistan needs the United States to maintain political and economic stability and therefore, in its self interest. Moreover, Washington’s influence over Islamabad is imperative to peace in South Asia. Without American influence, Pakistan runs the risk of morphing into a rogue state.

I believe that eventually voices of moderation, both within the military and political establishments will prevail. It is unlikely that the Haqqani network will be eliminated but in the weeks ahead Pakistan may make cosmetic efforts to comply with America’s demands. Relations between the two countries, for long characterised by the love-hate phenomenon, should at least return to stability – if not familiar friendship. Whilst not ideal for Pakistan, this will ensure harmony in the sub continent. The longer term trend though is clear – betrayal and treachery are becoming the insignia of the Pakistani State, as they are of the Ninth Circle of Hell.


Popular posts from this blog

Uday: a federalist success story

At our 21 st Annual CEO Roundtable in Thimphu last week, there was spirited debate over the performance of the current administration. A participant suggested that the Ujjwal Discom Assurance Yojana (Uday), a scheme to reform India’s downstream power sector, for all its fanfare was actually a failure of sorts and that India’s renewable energy programme, specifically on solar energy, was lacking on many counts. Whilst it was my intuitive belief that both claims were unsympathetic, I thought it would perhaps be in order to examine the facts in detail and subsequently provide an assessment. This paper, accordingly, presents an analysis of the first of the two issues – the Uday programme. The second will be addressed in a subsequent piece. The electricity distribution crisis: background Electricity distribution has been disastrously managed over the last three decades and in 2015 was on the verge of absolute collapse. Under-priced power, operational inefficiency, broken equip

Farm Loan Waivers

Farming damage In 2008, when the Government of India announced a Rs 60,000 crore farm loan waiver, the decision horrified economists and the financial markets. The waiver, amounting to 1.3% of GDP, would cripple national finances and damage the credit culture. The moral hazard of penalising prudent borrowers would be systemic and enduring. However, its proponents argued that it would free farmers ‘from the suffocating clutches of endemic debt’ and, in the process, also provide a quick consumption stimulus to the economy. Subsequent events proved both assumptions awry and the folly of the decision was absorbed in a hard and painful way. Nevertheless, a lesson was learnt and federal Governments have since avoided a repeat. However, it would seem that it is now the turn of state Governments to blunder. In the last few months, Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Karnataka and Punjab announced waivers of agricultural loans in their states to the tune of Rs 80,000 crore. Fortunately, the

The Employment Conundrum

Over the last three months, I have had the opportunity of engaging with our clients across various forums and cities. What provided a platform for this interaction was my briefing on four critical initiatives that we believe will, if properly implemented, serve as game changers with a palpable impact on economic output. The question that consistently came up almost everywhere was on the perception of jobless growth and consequently, rising unemployment within India. This has possibly been based on recent press reports and television debates that consistently cite certain headline statistics. These suggest a fall in employment levels between 2011-12 and 2015-16 compared to vigorous growth in earlier years, since 2004-05. Even on the surface, this conclusion does not gel fittingly with other statistics. For instance, indirect tax collections and consumption expenditure, which are both proxies of aggregate spending and wellbeing, do not corroborate falling employment. Tax collections