Has Pakistan gotten serious about terrorism?
posted at 9:55 am on June 29, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Yesterday I noted the sudden shift in approach to the Taliban near Peshawar by the Gilani government in Pakistan, with fresh military action to push radical Islamists away from the city. Today, Pakistan has extended its offensive to retake outposts surrendered for months and to secure lines of communication to Afghanistan in support of NATO. Islamabad apparently wants to show the stick and not the carrot, at least for now:
Paramilitary troops returned Sunday to posts they had been forced to abandon and Pakistani forces widened their offensive against militants operating in a volatile tribal area along the Afghan border, an official said.
The government launched the operation Saturday because the militants in the Khyber region presented an “immediate problem,” Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani said. ….
Troops from the paramilitary Frontier Corps, backed by tanks and armored personnel carriers, quickly cleared militants out of the Bara region, said Muhammad Siddiq Khan, a local official.
A tribal paramilitary force that had been forced to abandon its posts in the region several months ago returned to the checkpoints Sunday, he said. The Frontier Corps met no resistance as it moved into other areas outside Bara, destroying militant bases along the way, he said.
The forces also destroyed a radio station used by the militants to broadcast propaganda and uncovered a torture chamber, said Rehman Malik, head of the Interior Ministry.
At first, the operation appeared aimed at a splinter group in the Taliban, but the main partner in their negotiations believes otherwise. Baitullah Mehsud abruptly suspended talks with Islamabad in the wake of the military operation, ending for the moment the Gilani government’s new strategy of engagement with native radicals. Mehsud threatened to wreak havoc in major cities if the government did not retreat from its new positions and end all offensives against Taliban elements.
Meanwhile, NATO and Afghanistan are jubilant over the new efforts. NATO said with typical understatement that NATO benefited from anything that ties up the Taliban in Pakistan. The Afghan Defense Minister “endorse[d]” the operation, blaming recent Taliban operations in the south on Islamabad’s lack of effort against them at home.
Hopefully, Gilani learned his lesson quickly on appeasement, having allowed Peshawar to teeter on the brink of Taliban takeover before acting. For today, Gilani appears ready to revert back to at least the Pervez Musharraf position.









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
Wherever they are met they lose…we must kill, kill, kill until they have no one left or people get the picture.
tomas on June 29, 2008 at 9:59 AM
For today, Gilani appears ready to revert back to at least the Pervez Musharraf position.
Lets hope not. I would be surprised however if the Pakistani government consistantly goes after the Taliban.
2theright on June 29, 2008 at 10:06 AM
Maybe that was his strategy all along. Maybe he needed to first extend his hand and show the country it would not work. As Thom Friedman said, the good thing about extremists is, they don’t know when to stop. Maybe he had to let the people see that for themselves before he could act. Not so different from what happened in Iraq. People on both sides of the divide had to suffer a little under the extremists to wake up.
TheBigOldDog on June 29, 2008 at 10:06 AM
“quickly cleared”
Announced their presence and watched the ‘enemy’ escape out the back?
Yup.
“met no resistance”
So somebody gave the ‘enemy’ the heads up and left the back door open.
Beagle on June 29, 2008 at 10:10 AM
I think you are missing a “doesn’t” in front of “appear”.
Dusty on June 29, 2008 at 10:21 AM
I wonder if Friedman was including environmentalists when he said that.
Patrick S on June 29, 2008 at 10:31 AM
It’s actually good news when the Taliban attacks Pakistan or al Qaeda attacks Saudi Arabia. Not that Muslims are noted for scientific analysis of cause and effect. But it’s no different than the creature turning on Dr. Frankenstein.
Beagle on June 29, 2008 at 10:39 AM
What exactly does this mean? This isn’t the Paki army.
Did the Taliban/AQ supporters take down one flag and run up another? Its the tribal paramilitary forces that are concealing the Taliban and AQ, since they operate in the former’s territory…
dogsoldier on June 29, 2008 at 11:10 AM
The Frontier Corps are also accused of being penetrated deeply by Taleban sympathizers. I think Pakistan is in this fight but I also suspect we will not see them do anything really meaningful until the tribes have overreached themselves and done something so horrible that most Pakistanis can rally round a real conflict to clean out the frontier of these militants who even now enjoy the support of elements in the security establishment. I think it will be another six months… just a guess but I doubt this is the real deal.
lexhamfox on June 29, 2008 at 11:48 AM
Pakistan is only trying to appease the west with nothing that looks like something. Send more money.
BL@KBIRD on June 29, 2008 at 11:57 AM
The Frontier Corps met no resistance as it moved into other areas outside Bara,
Don’t like the sound of that.
Maybe he had to let the people see that for themselves before he could act. – Big Dog
Hope you’re right, Biggie.
Tony737 on June 29, 2008 at 11:59 AM
Answer to the headline question: No.
If PAK wants to get serious then they need to seal the back door while NATO kicks in the front one. Bar that their home guard style military hasn’t a chance in hell of knocking AQ, the Taliban, or their own grandmothers in the dirt.
Limerick on June 29, 2008 at 12:04 PM
Probably politics. If you look at the recent spate of killings by the Taliban, they targeted some local political bigs. They in turn probably had connections to the current ruling clique so it’s payback time.
JimK on June 29, 2008 at 12:13 PM
I’m hopeful. Time will tell.
backwoods conservative on June 29, 2008 at 12:30 PM
Musharraf position – 9/6/2006
Pakistan signs peace deal with pro-Taliban militants
Again, Ed we must be reading newspapers from different ‘Earths’. . . or at least different Pakistans. I don’t understand where you get the idea that Musharraf wasn’t for ‘total capitulation’ with this group of people. Musharraf’s position in September of 2006 was to leave them alone. This position of ‘confrontation’ is in stark opposition to Musharraf’s position.
Again, I think it is just an act so that they continue to get US dollars to build up their military so they can fight against India (not the Taliban). But to imply AGAIN that Musharraf’s position is confrontation is revisionist history.
I appreciate your posts on Pakistan, but your understanding of Musharraf’s role there is missing something. I guess you believed the same thing that the US military believed when they gave Musharraf 6 billion unaccounted for dollars for their military. Pakistan, nor Musharraf have EVER done anything positive for the USA.
ThackerAgency on June 29, 2008 at 2:09 PM
Here’s a little more information concerning where Musharraf was on the ‘peace with Taliban’ issue. Actually the ‘peace deal’ should be Musharraf’s legacy.
ThackerAgency on June 29, 2008 at 4:20 PM
.
Well said, tomas.
.
Given the babblings of the latest incarnation of Baghdad Bob, they are slow learners.
Right_of_Attila on June 29, 2008 at 5:02 PM
It’ll all work, when if the Pakistanis decide to take no prisoners, and go hard after Osama bin Laden.
byteshredder on June 29, 2008 at 5:14 PM
Pakistan wants to be all things to all Muslims.
Which includes all Muslim fanatics.
One of them being their top nuke thief A. Q. Khan.
We should trust the Pakis about as far as their intelligence services have been penetrated.
Otherwise, they are a new problem: the nuclear-armed semi-basket case.
The transparency of their half-hearted fight against (not-sponsored-by-them) terrorism is indicative of their general brand of Islamo-schizophrenia in this War.
When the survival of the power-holders is threatened by radical Mohammedan maniacs, they will purge their homegrown extremists.
But their own version of the same crippling ideology remains, poisoning all possibilities.
Their more pragmatic strongmen in such murky chaos need to be encouraged to control their god-intoxicated homicidal fools.
Or be warned: we will control them all.
Into a nice, non-discriminating dirt nap.
profitsbeard on June 29, 2008 at 6:02 PM
Remember this is a War on Terror,and thus,
an extermination of evil,the Taliban!
canopfor on June 29, 2008 at 6:45 PM
Obama was right. Pakistan is in no way an ally, and if we need to attack the al Qaeda provinces ourselves, we should. Only thing I’d do – nuke em, and not waste any Infidel lives in trying to avoid collateral damage.
Of course, as long as there are morons who think Pakistan is an ally, none of this is going to happen.
infidelpride on June 30, 2008 at 4:39 AM