Pakistan cuts deal with militants in “victory for Osama bin Laden”
posted at 12:45 pm on May 21, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
We can’t say we didn’t expect it after the marginalization of Pervez Musharraf in the last Pakistani election, but the deal between Islamabad and the radical Islamists still comes as a blow to American strategic interests. The Pakistanis will retreat from the Swat region, where al-Qaeda and the Taliban have gathered, in exchange for Baitullah Mehsud’s promise to cough up foreign fighters and end suicide attacks. The Taliban will likely do neither, as ABC reports:
Pakistan’s new government has signed a peace deal with pro-Taliban militants, in what some U.S. officials call a “victory for Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda.”
Under the terms of the 15-point plan, signed Wednesday in the city of Peshawar, the Pakistani army will withdraw thousands of troops deployed to the Swat Valley region, an area where officials believe bin Laden and other al Qaeda figures could be hiding. The militants have promised to stop suicide bomb attacks and hand over any foreign militants, according to Bashir Bilour, a senior minister of Pakistan’s Northwest Frontier Province.
“While the deal sounds good, it’s likely to be implemented badly,” said Richard Clarke, an ABC News consultant and former White House counterterrorism chief. “What this means is that the United States will continue to be threatened by an al Qaeda that has a safe haven where it can attract people from around the world, be trained and equipped and sent out to the United States and other countries around the world.”
A taliban spokesman, Muslim Khan, told ABCNews.com, “We accept the writ of the state and will no longer challenge it.”
This is actually worse than the deal Musharraf cut with the radical terrorists in the Waziristans and North West Frontier Province. At that time, Musharraf held the Swat valley, a popular tourist area until Mehsud and his henchmen started squatting in the region. This essentially concedes even larger swaths of territory to the sovereignty of the terrorists, who claim to accept the writ of the government while pushing the nation’s army out of its own soil.
Under these conditions, does anyone in their right mind believe that Mehsud and his gangs will ever turn Osama bin Laden and the rest of the foreigners over to the Pakistani Army? Of course not. Mehsud continues to operate training camps in the federally-administered tribal areas (FATA) for foreigners interested in pursuing violent jihad through terrorism. Osama, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and the rest of the AQ network ensconced in Pakistan are brothers in arms to the radical Islamists, as well as potential sources for funding.
Nor can we expect that the Taliban will end their push to reclaim power in Afghanistan. This agreement allows the Taliban to secure their rear and their lines of communication through the frontier in order to increase the intensity of their missions. That will force NATO to put more combat troops into southern and eastern Afghanistan at the moment when NATO nations have begun resisting that exact move.
Pakistan just folded. They may keep their nuclear weapons safe from Islamists for the short run with this deal, but they have given the terrorists safe haven for their bases from which they will launch innumerable attacks against Afghanistan and the West.










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 question the timing – and not in a good way. It could just be coincidental, but it is worrisome that Hezbollah “legitimately” takes over Lebanon almost the exact day that al-Qaeda takes part of Pakistan. Again, “legitimately.” I don’t know if it’s a sign of the times or something strategic, and I don’t know which answer is worse for us and for Israel.
elladeon on May 21, 2008 at 12:50 PM
surprise?
ThackerAgency on May 21, 2008 at 12:51 PM
Never going to happen…. It is like wondering if your neighbor will ever stop being a jerk and not mow over your garden.
upinak on May 21, 2008 at 12:52 PM
Through it all we will continue to do what we have been doing. If we have actionable intel on the Pak side of the border we will act–unless Obama is elected.
patrick neid on May 21, 2008 at 12:53 PM
America itself is backing down in the WOT hard to blame the Pakistanis for cutting and running.
Obama is a gift for Osama in the sense it sends a message to the world that Jihad works
William Amos on May 21, 2008 at 12:54 PM
At least BO said he’s going to bomb ‘em. After he takes their side? He does take totally contradictory sides to every issue. Is that a new triangulation strategy?
kirkill on May 21, 2008 at 12:55 PM
I’ve got an idea, lets give them more money. After all, you are either ‘for us or against us’. Pakistan is definitely for us.
Musharraf would have supported this if he could have without upsetting the USA. Pakistan is an enemy. They always were. Musharraf just pretended he wasn’t so that he could get money from the USA. Musharraf started this trend. This is worse than Musharraf, but he would have done it eventually even if he kept power. They were always just waiting until the US would stop pressuring them to attack the NW Province.
We should have treated Pakistan like Iraq – nuclear weapons or not. Now our efforts in Afghanistan over the past 6 years are essentially wasted because of our ‘friend’ Pakistan. They still have terrorist camps, and we do nothing about it because of our ‘friends’ who are ‘with us’.
ThackerAgency on May 21, 2008 at 12:55 PM
Pakistan folds.
Lebanon folds.
Israel folds.
Democrats fold.
What’s next? McCain on immigration?
faraway on May 21, 2008 at 12:56 PM
Green light for cross border incusions?
VolMagic on May 21, 2008 at 12:57 PM
Just need to buy that Jericho missile from Stark Industries :P
lorien1973 on May 21, 2008 at 1:00 PM
I think it’s a good idea! Now they will all be in one place. Maybe President Obama will go after them there, or more likely, sit around the campfire and talk to them.
http://originalpechanga.blogspot.com
originalpechanga on May 21, 2008 at 1:01 PM
Kumbaya!
Obama + Jihadis + NW Pakistan =
Vatican Watcher on May 21, 2008 at 1:07 PM
I’m glad that the United States did not sign the 1997 Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction–known informally as the Ottawa Treaty. (China, India, and Russia also haven’t signed.) We should mine the Afghan-Paki border.
thuja on May 21, 2008 at 1:08 PM
This will allow the militants to cut our land supply routes through Pakistan to Afghanistan. How we deal with that will be dicey. I suppose we can try to support NATO via an airlift or try to get back in good graces with Uzbekistan and Russia to support NATO’s mission but that will cost us and not just in jet fuel.
KW64 on May 21, 2008 at 1:14 PM
Lesson for Barry…
Islamic terrorists protected by nuclear umbrella. Now about that tea and crumpets you want to have with Dinnerjacket….
Limerick on May 21, 2008 at 1:17 PM
2nd lesson for Barry…
Pakistan conducted their five nuclear tests in 1998, a full two and a half years before the hanging chad became America’s greatest security threat.
Limerick on May 21, 2008 at 1:26 PM
Don’t pay attention to those savages behind the curtain. Remember, “democracy” has taken hold in the Middle East [takes a time-out to vomit] and all is well.
Now, on a serious note – the troops who were and are, now, in Iraq, should’ve been killing the Taliban and al qaida in Afghanistan and Waziristan.
Bin Hidin’ should be under 20 tons of rubble in Tora Bora.
Oh well, at least “democracy” has taken hold in the Middle East and all is well.
OhEssYouCowboys on May 21, 2008 at 1:30 PM
Get the nukes outta there.
indythinker on May 21, 2008 at 1:37 PM
I wonder how much the political situation here at home is influencing all of these deals with the extremists. Lebanon cedeing control to Hezbollah, Pakistan giving up in its fight against the Taliban/Al Queda, Israel talking nice with Syria.
Do these countries see a day in the not too distance future when they will no longer have the support of Americas muscle and also will not be able to use the Big Satan as a screen for their desire to stamp out the militants?
Have these countries just given up in trying to fight the virulent Islamic gangs and are now getting ready for the every man for himself phase?
Just A Grunt on May 21, 2008 at 1:39 PM
Damn! Were going to have to attack them in Pakistan.
ronsfi on May 21, 2008 at 1:42 PM
I personally think they folded some time ago. IMHO it is past time our military and its leaders face the reality of this situation and do what Pakistan won’t do in the tribal regions, and that is to cut off the head of AQ and the Taliban once and for all.
Since Pakistan considers these tribal regions as being “autonomous” then our military conducting operations in these areas should not be considered a threat to Pakistan’s sovereignty.
Enough is enough, our military needs to be given the green light to go in there and get them. Many Americans (me included) have been waiting almost 7 long years to see Osama and his butt-buddy Zawahiri’s heads on a stake!
Liberty or Death on May 21, 2008 at 1:57 PM
That should give us free reign to strike in the Northwest Frontier Province, then. Pakistan claims sovereignty there, but refuses to exercise it, giving free reign to forces attack an allied nation and the Coalition military there. This part of what used to be Pakistan is de facto terra nullius, and we and our allies have every right under several treaties to take action there.
It’s open season.
irishspy on May 21, 2008 at 2:01 PM
The Paki’s think their ‘safe’ now. Wait until they find their partners pushing the envelope each day. The camel’s nose is under the tent flap. Won’t be long before the entire camel is in the tent.
GarandFan on May 21, 2008 at 2:23 PM
Er, a posthumous victory for Osama bin Laden. Or in his case a post-HUMUS victory.
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on May 21, 2008 at 3:31 PM
Hmmm, maybe the world will end in 2012.
ThePrez on May 21, 2008 at 5:00 PM
A Pakistani paper’s editorial is against Wahabi and highlighting the danger of having them get more power: “The militants might get emboldened to start intervening in the private affairs of the general population and take action such as banning television, closing down Internet cafes, shutting down girls’ schools, forcing barbers to stop their business and preventing anything that is modern to be accessed by the enlightened population of the valley.”
Marc01 on May 21, 2008 at 5:18 PM
Ummmm, does this mean we can go in and give bin ladin a bath?
allrsn on May 21, 2008 at 5:19 PM
We just were. Get the popcorn, ‘cuz I can’t wait for
theirI mean, the roasted nuts.NightmareOnKStreet on May 21, 2008 at 5:39 PM
Hearts and flowers and paved roads in Swat. And have some contractors build some schools. And schedule an election.
Mister Ghost on May 21, 2008 at 6:25 PM
I think the real question is:- why is Syria (now) prepared to talk to Israel?
OldEnglish on May 21, 2008 at 8:07 PM