Warned, Repeatedly
"We have been here before. But this time it's much more serious. The government has taken a very stern view. It's not quite clear at this stage what more Pakistani authorities can do, apart from suspending supplies to NATO forces in Afghanistan.? Farzana Sheikh, associate fellow, Asia program, Chatham House, LondonWell, how about retaliation? This is what steaming mad Pakistan is hinting at. Retaliation? This time, an up-front attack on U.S. troops, rather than the usual covert attacks presumably emanating from Pakistani Taliban, but ably led by the Pakistani military. Which is precisely what occurred to begin with, to elicit a counter-attack by NATO forces.
Despite the outraged howls of denial by Islamabad and the military, this was no unprovoked, mindless attack by NATO forces. It was a response, called in by Afghan military forces that were being bombarded across the border from Pakistan. NATO doesn't do a bad job at all, in its military expertise-and-response, in pinpointing the precise area where attacks come from.
As it did on this occasion, much to the chagrined anger of the regime, who now claim through Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani that "Business as usual will not be there. We have to have something bigger so as to satisfy my nation." The humiliation, the insult to the honour and the sensitive sovereignty of Pakistan, a proud, nuclear-owning, terrorist-clinging-supporting state is simply insuperable.
Insult after assault, assault after interminable insults. Forcing a face-loosing assault on a proud nation by mounting an intrepid undercover attack on Osama bin Laden's look-alike who just happened to be living unobtrusively adjacent a prime elite military training barracks. And now, this intolerable attack on the sovereign authority of the country.
Pakistan certainly has its defenders, who are simply aghast at this turn of events. China has declared itself to be "deeply shocked". And it takes quite a lot to deeply shock culture-and- sovereignty-sensitive China. As for Russia, whose own peril-laden invasion of Afghanistan ended with its maimed troops limping back to the motherland defeated, Russia expressed its view that it was simply "unacceptable" to violate the sovereignty of states, even, they emphasized, when on the prowl for "terrorists".
Russia knows all about hunting for terrorists; it has them galore in Chechnya, which it handles thoughtfully with sensitive gloves of kid leather. And, oh yes, that little spat with Georgia over South Ossetia and Abkhazia, in 2008, that too. But of course, that was then, this is now, is it not? But all is certainly not lost. Cash infusions always help to ameliorate hurt feelings.
And the U.S. withdrawing its billions in treasury promises for Pakistan is surely equal to the threat of its removal as an ally in the fight against terrorism? The United States and NATO remain anxious to enlist Pakistan's co-operation in 'pacifying' Afghanistan. Which isn't likely to happen as long as Pakistan continues to support the Taliban whom they directed in their mission in Afghanistan.
So this remains an interesting stand-off. One that fairly well represents the usual tide of events that occur between Western states and those of nations governed largely by growing swells of Islamism.
Labels: Afghanistan, Islamism, NATO, Pakistan, United States
posted by Pieface @ Tuesday, November 29, 2011
<< Home