Pakistani intel chief quits
posted at 8:19 am on March 18, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Benazir Bhutto accused four men of plotting to kill her, and told Pervez Musharraf to have them investigated if she was ever assassinated. One of the four resigned from his position as head of the civilian intelligence service IB. Ijaz Shah has already had his first and last meeting with Pakistan’s new Prime Minister, Mohammadmian Soomro, and will soon vacate his offices:
A Pakistani intelligence chief, regarded as a dangerous enemy by assassinated former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, will quit his job before her party comes to power at the head of a new coalition.
Bhutto wrote to President Pervez Musharraf before her assassination on December 27, identifying four members of the civilian-military establishment who should be investigated if she was killed.
Ijaz Shah, head of the Intelligence Bureau (IB), one of Pakistan’s three security services, was believed to be one of the people Bhutto suspected of conspiring against her. …
The government controls the IB, whereas the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) and Military Intelligence are part of the army-dominated military.
Shah leaves just as the new Parliament comes to power, and that may be no coincidence. Bhutto’s PPP has the most seats and controls the ruling coalition, and her accusations will get serious attention in the new session. Ijaz Shah may not be the only departure, either. With almost enough votes to impeach Musharraf, Parliament will likely demand a housecleaning in the executive, and Musharraf may not have enough juice left to resist it.
Will this hurt the Pakistani effort against al-Qaeda and the Taliban? Most of that effort goes through military intelligence and the ISI. The IB has a different mission: to spy on domestic political activities. Interestingly, Bhutto herself had few scruples about using the IB to undermine and collapse the provincial government of the North West Frontier Province in the mid-1990s during her second term as Prime Minister. She then used the IB to go after the ISI and military intelligence, which prompted the response from the military that ended her career and eventually forced her into exile.
For Parliament now, the biggest effort will not focus on chasing people out of their positions, but in putting people back into them. Parliament will likely act quickly to restore the judges Musharraf purged from their positions before the elections to ensure his own status as a presidential candidate. The PPP’s coalition will bring legislation within 30 days to accomplish that, and again, Musharraf hardly finds himself in a position to oppose it. The best for which he can hope is to negotiate a settlement that will keep the restored judiciary from ruling his election invalid, and given the mood of the new parliamentarians, that will be a tough sell.
Meanwhile, NATO prepares for the big spring offensive on the border country. The Taliban may find themselves in a new situation, as the missiles on safe houses this winter have demonstrated, in which the US has less interest in protecting Musharraf’s status. If so, the Taliban will find themselves continuing on the defensive — and perhaps concentrating less of their effort on Afghanistan and more on Pakistan instead.










Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
I sent this in Ed is very important
New terrorist leader seen for the first time.
http://willamos.myblogsite.com/entry146.html#track
William Amos on March 18, 2008 at 8:23 AM
It’s about time we get down to business.
boomer on March 18, 2008 at 8:23 AM
What of the correlation between these men and the lack of intelligence protecting their own governmental agency’s building that was bombed? They could have bombed themselves in order to advance some other ploy–more power.
Also, Bhutto named her enemies in office, but she had more than those. As her common enemies, however, they would have networked. Her own party might have been involved in order to gain public sympathy support and get her out of the way all in one fell swoop. Assassinations are as dark as ever.
maverick muse on March 18, 2008 at 8:45 AM
It’s nice to see that Washington games aren’t strictly confined to our capital. We all know that Bhutto was corrupt, perhaps her finagling was not as blatantly obvious as Musharraf’s was at times, abd I hate to see her, and by extension any political party associated with her, set up on a pedestal. That being said, I don’t mind them playing their internal games and giving Musharraf a political lashing, but I hope they keep their “reforms” out of Pakistani-US policy. Mushaffaf took a lot of risks to help us, to the extent that he did, and I don’t know if this new group in power will be willing to continue the trend.
Is it really better if we step up the offensives into Pakistan as a result of a greater Pakistani unwillingness to cooperate with us? I’m all for blowing the hell out of terrorists in Waziristan, I just don’t want us to be cheering unilateral involvement that was forced because the Pakistani politicians don’t feel like they have to play ball with us anymore.
NeoconNews.com on March 18, 2008 at 9:00 AM
Given that political violence in South Asia is usually an orchestrated happening, it wouldn’t suprise me her death was the result of a botched attempt to garner sympathy.
It matters not how Bhutto’s party actually “rules.” I wouldn’t expect much difference between PPP and Musharaff.
However, her asassination has, for the time being, opened a window opportunity through which we have been able to begin to assert ourselves “Kinetically.” All the while the Pakistani political entities point fingers and blaming each other as US imperialist lackies.
Yes, it is a cynical view…However, if there are bad actors assuming room temperature in larger quantities and with high frequency….
lpierson on March 18, 2008 at 9:35 AM
Does the timing matter?
Earlier this week an Islamabad restaurant was bombed injuring an FBI Operations Chief and 4 other FBI personnel.
http://www.dawn.com/2008/03/18/top10.htm
gabriel sutherland on March 18, 2008 at 10:14 AM
Just hope the Russian supply routes pan out. You don’t need to grab a hold of another Muslim tar baby that is Pakistan. We have NO friends there, NONE.
Does anyone think Pakistan’s Muslims have been any help except for going out of their way to take money? Does no one remember that the ISI/PPP created and nurtured the Taliban?
By the way, Pakistan is a “democracy” planted by the British. Look at Pakistan’s short history as a democracy. This is what you can expect from every Muslim “democracy”, a failed state that needs regular military coups to keep from imploding. If you want to be successful at this game, you have to remove Islam from the equation, but no one is about to do that, so get used to failure in dealing with Islam.
BL@KBIRD on March 18, 2008 at 12:19 PM
Afghanistan and Waziristan – al qaida and the Taliban – should’ve been the focus of our military, from the beginning.
FROM THE BEGINNING.
OhEssYouCowboys on March 18, 2008 at 1:27 PM