Why Solving Pakistan is the Pivot for Obama's South Asian Security Strategy
In the space of 10 days, two terrorist actions in South Asia highlighted why President-elect Obama’s desire to adopt a regional approach to the interlinked crises of Afghanistan, India and Pakistan may ultimately rank among the most strategically significant decisions of his administration.
Last month, the world watched in horror as militants brought the thriving metropolis of Mumbai to a halt with a multi-faceted attack on its hotel, entertainment and transportation system. The attacks, dubbed India’s 9-11, saw 188 civilians killed and hundreds more injured. A few days later militants in Pakistan attacked a market place killing dozens of civilians. Although the attack in Peshawar had a devastating impact on the local populace, it drew less media attention than those in Mumbai, in part due to the lack of international media in that city and also because the Peshawar bombing was one in a long line of attacks in Pakistan in recent months.
Despite the variation in media attention and the way in which they were reported as two distinct stories, it is important that the new U.S. administration looks at the two attacks and the related foreign policy questions holistically. A careful appraisal of the situation suggests that, once in office, President Obama’s administration must adopt a regional approach to the instability in South Asia and also recognize that Pakistan is at the heart of both the crisis and any resolution.The fledgling democratic government of Pakistan is faced with three interrelated challenges. First, they must address the security situation on their border with Afghanistan where the Taliban is in the ascendancy despite a vigorous Pakistani military campaign. Second, the government must also deal internally with the open sore that is Kashmir. Despite the best efforts of both India and Pakistan to deemphasize Kashmir in public and seek to build confidence between the two countries through other measures, it is clear that Kashmir is a priority issue to a substantial number of Pakistanis, including those involved in the Mumbai killings. Third, the authorities must also battle the militancy within its own border that grew quickly during the reign of General Musharraf.
The Obama administration can assist their Pakistani counterparts in all three of these areas. On Afghanistan, it can bolster the Pakistani government in the eyes of its own people by acknowledging the sacrifice of its military fighting against the Taliban. It can also reduce U.S. drone activity, and by extension reduce civilian deaths, by increasing human intelligence cooperation. U.S. non-military aid can also be a valuable tool in the effort to win the battle for hearts and minds in the tribal border region. Additionally, the Obama government can force Afghanistan to accept a fixed border between the two countries i.e. the internationally recognized Durand line. Many regional analysts and commentators have urged the U.S. to pressure Afghanistan to accept the line believing that it will increase domestic Pakistani support for vigorous policing of the border and make it harder for the Taliban and others to move freely between the two countries.
President Obama should assign an envoy to begin a dialogue between the two countries on Kashmir. The best efforts of both countries to deemphasize this issue were ended by the Mumbai attacks and it is time to begin a process that resolves the Kashmir question and removes a grievance that militant leaders use to recruit impressionable individuals to their ranks. It is important to note that by endorsing the Durand line and seeking a resolution to the Kashmir crisis, President Obama would also assuage the fears of Pakistani elites who have been nervously sharing a map drawn by U.S. neo-conservatives that sketches out a truncated Pakistan that had lost land to India and Afghanistan. As Jane Perlez noted in the International Herald Tribune:
“One of the biggest fears of the Pakistani military planners is the collaboration between India and Afghanistan to destroy Pakistan,” said a senior Pakistani government official involved in strategic planning who insisted on anonymity in accordance with diplomatic rules. “Some people feel the United States is colluding in this.”
Finally, early in his administration, President Obama should underscore his support for a democratic Pakistan. Historically, democracy has been an antidote to militancy in Pakistan and it will require the engagement of its people to respond to the militants within its own borders.
No related posts.
This article is totally in air. It appears that the author has read only the books about “terrorrism”, “pakistan”, “india” and “afghanistan” etc. He has not written even a single word about ISI and its role, present vested interests in the administrations of India, Pak and US who prefer the continuation of this menace. There are several other areas without addressing which any article on terrorism is bound to remain incomplete. The learned author should prepare again, but with sincerity this time.
Comment on December 31, 2008 @ 2:22 am
First, let me say this is my first visit here. Sadly, I find what appears simply an extreme Pro-Obama cheering team disguised as a “bipartisan” effort. As I read through some of the various posts all I see is the “Progressive” virus that has infiltrated the USA.
BTW – in this particular article you seemed to have neglected the specifics of the terrorists. The prudent mind should know these were not simply “militants” – these were Islamic terrorists.
When the USA is attacked again it will be by Islamic terrorists. You can hide “Islam” and “Muslim” with labels like “al-Qaeda” and “Taliban” so you don’t feel like you’re being offensive, but then again, the priority of Progressives is to care more for the enemy’s feelings than our nation as a whole.
Comment on December 31, 2008 @ 2:56 am
I disagree with the two comments on the article. I agree with the author who has pointed out the core issues here. Unless these core issues between Pakistan and India i.e. Kashmir and between Afghanistan and Pakistan i.e. Durand Line and related greater Pakhtunistan issue is addressed, nothing will change. I also agree that there are other issues like ISI, RAW, CIA, KGB and others involvement in the region. Also the growing Hindu fundamentalism in India and Growing Muslim Fundamentalism in Pakistan and Afghanistan but these get an audiences as militants use the grievances they have due the core issues described above to recruit people.
I think it is a very balanced and well researched and thought out article.
Comment on December 31, 2008 @ 10:00 am
“Additionally, the Obama government can force Afghanistan to accept a fixed border between the two countries i.e. the internationally recognized Durand line. ”
this is fatuous, and why Obamamaniacs like this author are doomed to failure.
Comment on December 31, 2008 @ 4:56 pm
Once KASHMIR and PALESTINE see resolution, the sigh of releif will be heard worldwide. It will take the fodder away from the fools who cause trouble. It will be like a jig saw puzzle coming together in a hurry.
Comment on January 1, 2009 @ 4:39 pm
I find several of the critiques of this article to be misplaced. For one thing, addressing ALL of the factors involved in the Pakistan-Afghanistan-India dynamic would require a different medium – something more resembling a book than a blog post. The author has effectively and concisely synthesized the salient issues that need to be considered by the Obama administration.
Secondly, this article is not pushing progressivism or making a case for Barack Obama. The election is over – the task at hand is to encourage public discourse on how the new administration might effectively address global crises, which is exactly what Mr. Purohit has done.
Comment on January 2, 2009 @ 1:01 pm
I disagree with several of the critiques of this post. To me this blog post is not a comprehensive solution of all the problems of Pakistan but a constructive suggestion to Obama administration where to begin. Pakistan’s FATA region will be very difficult to control unless there is an agreed upon border with Afghanistan which could be controlled. United States is in a great position to get Afghanistan to ratify the Durand line, which is crucial to controlling Taliban movements between Afghanistan and Pakistan! In addition Obama administration should push Pakistan government to incorporate FATA into Pakistan proper through a constitutional change. Right now Pakistani law does not apply in this region and that remains a major hurdle to bringing peace to this area.
ISI is more an internal problem in which Pakistani government has already made some progress. But it will have to be recognized that decades of policy cannot be rolled back in 8 months. This will be a long term process for which civilian government will have to be strengthened.
Finally, Obama administration can push the Pakistani government to reform education in Pakistan. Right now Pakistan spends one of the lowest percentage of budget on education in Asia. This will have to be changed if long term progress is to be made.
Comment on January 6, 2009 @ 12:33 pm