Pakistan officials wary of Obama's strategy for Afghanistan
Washington Post Foreign Service
Wednesday, December 2, 2009; 11:45 AM
ISLAMABAD -- Pakistan's government expressed confusion and concern Wednesday about President Obama's new Afghan strategy, which calls for Pakistan to step up its cooperation against terrorism in exchange for a pledge of a long-term partnership "after the guns fall silent."
Obama's long-awaited speech at West Point was broadcast live on TV here just after dawn, but the Pakistani Foreign Affairs Ministry waited nearly 12 hours to issue a cautious response that stressed the "need for clarity" in the new U.S. policy and sought to "ensure that there would be no adverse fallout on Pakistan."
The Pakistani government is fearful that this country could be further destabilized by a reinvigorated military campaign in next-door Afghanistan. A growing tide of urban bombings and terrorist attacks have killed hundreds of people in Pakistan in the past several months.
Just after noon Wednesday, the capital was shaken by a suicide bombing at the entrance to National Naval Headquarters in an affluent, highly guarded neighborhood. A teenage boy blew himself up as a guard approached him, and horrified drivers watched from a few feet away while waiting for a traffic light to change. Officials said the blast killed the bomber and two guards.
Even though such violence has become commonplace, many Pakistanis would disagree with Obama's observation Wednesday that Pakistan and Afghanistan share "a common enemy." Instead, they blame the United States for creating the conflict in Afghanistan and are reluctant to be drawn into it.
"The U.S. is seen as an occupier in Afghanistan, and there's no way that can be turned around," said Pervez Hoodbhoy, a nuclear physicist and defense analyst. He said that a Taliban victory in Afghanistan would be "terrible for Pakistan," but that the United States has to "clean up the mess before it leaves."
A major worry here is that the surge of 30,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan announced by Obama will send thousands of Afghan insurgents fleeing into Pakistan and further disturb volatile areas in both southwestern Baluchistan and the northwestern tribal region where Pakistani troops have been waging war against local Taliban forces for the past six weeks.
Although Pakistan has received significant military and economic aid from the United States, many of its citizens and leaders remain suspicious of Washington's motives in the region, in part because of its strong friendship with India, Pakistan's larger rival and neighbor. People here were stung by the high-profile state visit of Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to Washington last week.
Obama made no mention of India in his speech, and he praised the Pakistan army for its campaign against the domestic Taliban. But he also stressed U.S. concerns about the existence of al-Qaeda sanctuaries inside Pakistan, asserting that the United States "must deny al-Qaeda safe havens in Pakistan" and that the United States needs Pakistani help to eliminate them.
Pakistani military and intelligence officials have been accused of favoring an unofficial two-track policy in which they pursue violent extremists who oppose the Pakistani state but ignore or even assist those whose target is across the border.
"For the first time, Obama was very categorical about these safe havens and sanctuaries. It's now going to be much more difficult for those in Pakistan who have been in a state of denial about it," analyst Ahmed Rashid told Dawn Television here. "It's really crunch time."
Pakistani officials said Wednesday they are committed to uprooting terrorism and bringing about stability in Afghanistan. They also cautiously welcomed Obama's "reaffirmation of partnership." But private analysts said the United States needs to be more sensitive to civilian-military tensions, national pride and other internal challenges to Pakistan's weak democracy.
"Our military and civilian leaders need to speak with one voice, so the Americans can see we mean business," said Imtiaz Gul, a political analyst. "But we have to keep our own long-term interests in mind, while taking on the extremist groups that are of concern to them."
