Pakistani general refusing to cut ties with “militants”

posted at 8:48 am on May 13, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

The Pakistani government, military, and intelligence service all claim to be outraged over the decision by Barack Obama to keep them in the dark on the mission to get Osama bin Laden.  In response, their military chief has decided to, er, not cut ties with terrorists:

The United States will now push harder than ever for General Kayani to break relations with other militant leaders who American officials believe are hiding in Pakistan, with the support of the military and intelligence service, a senior American official said.

These leaders include Mullah Muhammad Omar, the spiritual leader of the Afghan Taliban; the allied militant network of Sirajuddin Haqqani; and Lashkar-e-Taiba, the group that the United States holds responsible for the terrorist attack in Mumbai, India, in 2008, the American official said. …

But those who have spoken with General Kayani recently said that demands to break with top militant leaders were likely to be too much for the military chief, who is scheduled to address an unusual, closed-door joint session of Parliament on Friday to salvage his reputation and explain the military’s lapses surrounding the American raid.

The American wish list is tantamount to an overnight transformation of Pakistan’s long held strategic posture that calls for using the militant groups as proxies against Pakistan’s neighbors, they said. It comes as General Kayani faces mounting anti-American pressure from hard-line generals in his top command, two of the people who met with him said.

Many in the lower ranks of the military have greater sympathy for the militant groups than for the United States.

Um, yeah, we knew that already, guys.  That’s why you didn’t get the call on May 1st.  Thanks for making that clear and making the American government look like geniuses.

Pakistan is going to have to choose between American financial support and their terrorist pals.  We cannot keep supporting a government that not only covertly works with Mullah Omar and Sirajuddin Haqqani, but openly supports them and the terrorist group that conducted the Mumbai Massacre.  If Pakistan wants to side with the terrorists, we shouldn’t be providing any more funding for their military.

However, let’s be clear on what that means, and that clarity starts with a map of the region.  We don’t have any reliable lines of communication to Afghanistan without Pakistani cooperation.  We would certainly try upping our traffic through the north, primarily through Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, but Russia would have a great deal more influence on those routes and has made it clear in the past that they will play hardball with the US to allow American operations in either country.  To the west is Iran; to the east, China.  Don’t expect either nation to suddenly warm up to American military exercises in their back yards.

Jettisoning our Pakistani alliance would mean the end of the mission in Afghanistan, and likely the end of the Karzai government.  Pakistan and Kayani would waste little time in pushing a Pashtun coup, with Haqqani and Mullah Omar running the show in Kabul all over again.  The Pakistanis liked having hard-line Islamists in charge as a bulwark against what they perceive as their greatest security threat in India. The problem for the Pakistanis is that their little Islamist monster is just as likely to turn around and eat them next, especially if they lose American support — or failing that, the military will seize power once the the Islamist threat gives them enough of an excuse to do so.

This is a problem for both the US and Pakistan.  They are rightfully angered by the US invasion to get bin Laden, but the Pakistanis gave us no choice in the matter thanks to their double-dealing with the terrorist groups we’re fighting in Afghanistan.  If they want to get serious, we’re ready to help, but we cannot keep funding a government that gives shelter to the likes of bin Laden, Omar, and Haqqani.

 


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

Is anyone getting these annoying effin ads on this site? It drives me nuts and makes me want to quit HotAir. Any way to block them or mute them? Help.

hip shot on May 13, 2011 at 8:52 AM

Unbelievable. How many Pakistanis were murdered today by the Taliban?

SC.Charlie on May 13, 2011 at 8:53 AM

There is no “Pakistan”, just rival warlords pretending to play together.

More predator drones need to be coming off the assembly lines, and Hellfire missiiles galore.

A job creation move I support.

profitsbeard on May 13, 2011 at 8:55 AM

How much of the staging is done overland? Have they considered staging from India? Pakistan is skinny.

ProfessorMiao on May 13, 2011 at 8:55 AM

Not one more dime

cmsinaz on May 13, 2011 at 8:56 AM

How much of the staging is done overland? Have they considered staging from India? Pakistan is skinny.

ProfessorMiao on May 13, 2011 at 8:55 AM

Probably not a lot of it is done overland, if any at all. You’d have to drive through Waziristan. These are mostly overflight clearances.

Passage from India overland would force us to go through Kashmir and then the highest mountain ranges in Pakistan. Not a good choice.

Ed Morrissey on May 13, 2011 at 8:59 AM

Is anyone getting these annoying effin ads on this site? It drives me nuts and makes me want to quit HotAir. Any way to block them or mute them? Help.

hip shot on May 13, 2011 at 8:52 AM

Foxfire browser, add on apps like adblock plus. I never see these annoying effin ads, no pop ups, nothing on every site. Switch you will love it. :)

IowaWoman on May 13, 2011 at 9:00 AM

“Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists”
Why am I sensing President Obama to soon be switching over President Bush’s foreign policy”?

HarryStar on May 13, 2011 at 9:00 AM

IowaWoman on May 13, 2011 at 9:00 AM

Thank you, I’ll try it.

hip shot on May 13, 2011 at 9:03 AM

Is anyone getting these annoying effin ads on this site? It drives me nuts and makes me want to quit HotAir. Any way to block them or mute them? Help.

hip shot on May 13, 2011 at 8:52 AM

I don’t see any of the ads people are complaining about. I use firefox browser with adblock plus add-on from firefox. The only ad I see on this page is for The Ed Morrissey Show.

lexhamfox on May 13, 2011 at 9:03 AM

I never see the ads either. Pop up blocker works.
WHY are we giving these idiots money. 80 pakis dead today because of 2 lone wolf suicide bombers/
They kill us and kill each other. Pakistan was protecting OBL.
Cut off money. Who cares if they have nukes. They’ll nuke themselves first at this rate.

ORconservative on May 13, 2011 at 9:08 AM

You are either with us, or you are against us. Nuetron bombs will leave the buildings standing.

paulsur on May 13, 2011 at 9:13 AM

I am not getting any ads, guess you got a virus. Stop going to porn sites.

paulsur on May 13, 2011 at 9:14 AM

Cut off money. Who cares if they have nukes. They’ll nuke themselves first at this rate.

ORconservative on May 13, 2011 at 9:08 AM

India has nukes, too. If anything it might make sense to continue to strengthen our relationship with India. I don’t see any way to deal with Pakistan other than to cut them off. A’stan? How long are we planning to be there? That seems to be up for debate.

Cody1991 on May 13, 2011 at 9:16 AM

I agree with strengthening ties with India. It gets us a strong partner for trade and tweaks Pakistan at the same time. That’s a win, win baby.

search4truth on May 13, 2011 at 9:19 AM


… Kayani faces mounting anti-American pressure from hard-line generals in his top command …

Next target for JSOC – Pakistan’s nukes!

Tony737 on May 13, 2011 at 9:20 AM

but we cannot keep funding a government that gives shelter to the likes of bin Laden, Omar, and Haqqani.

Excellent point!..Very good blog post Capt Ed!..:)

Dire Straits on May 13, 2011 at 9:20 AM

Pakistan’s long held strategic posture that calls for using the militant groups as proxies against Pakistan’s neighbors,

Pakistan’s neighbors? Don’t see the militants going against Iran, or any of the other ‘stans. Which leaves India. So Pakistan is allied with militants who are fighting the two biggest democracies in the world.

the thing is, there is a sizable segment within Pakistan that genuinely wants democracy. But we aren’t cultivating that.

rbj on May 13, 2011 at 9:23 AM

I agree with strengthening ties with India. It gets us a strong partner for trade and tweaks Pakistan at the same time. That’s a win, win baby.

search4truth on May 13, 2011 at 9:19 AM

When India was partitioned in 1947 in order to give the Muslims their own country over a million, iirc, people were slaughtered. Pakistan was formed, and the Muslims got what they wanted. Despite attempts to modernize over the years the country is dysfunctional.

India has had, and still has, enormous challenges, but they are making amazing progress. If we’re going to toss aid dollars around, shouldn’t we help those who are more inclined to be our natural allies?

Cody1991 on May 13, 2011 at 9:25 AM

Pakistani general refusing to cut ties with “militants”

…who just killed 80 of this clown’s subordinates.

Akzed on May 13, 2011 at 9:27 AM

SEALs, the solution.

MikeA on May 13, 2011 at 9:28 AM

Cody1991 on May 13, 2011 at 9:16 AM

The solution seems simple, though it’s brinksmanship at its finest. Designate Pakistan as a state sponsor of terrorism due to its serial sheltering of jihadist elements, and claim that justifies the utter confiscation of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons – with our new ally India’s help, of course.

Announce publicly that all funds that were earmarked for Pakistan foreign aid will now be diverted to develop India’s military technology. Let them be our anchor in the region.

Could it plunge Asia into chaos? Yeah, maybe. But the entire region’s destabilizing at an alarming rate, and if the Brotherhood gets control of half of the Arab states, we’re at the gates of hell anyway.

KingGold on May 13, 2011 at 9:29 AM

Akzed on May 13, 2011 at 9:27 AM

That would be introducing logic and apparently Pakistan can’t go down that road.
Good idea, take our borrowed cash and give it to India. It sure is not doing one bit of good in Pakistan. It didn’t even pay for a housekeeper for OBL. You’d think for the billions we give them, they could find a way to keep the compound clean.

ORconservative on May 13, 2011 at 9:31 AM

KingGold on May 13, 2011 at 9:29 AM

Got kind of a nice ring to it.

a capella on May 13, 2011 at 9:32 AM

This reminds me of a workman who just misappropriated all the considerable money I advanced him in order to pay doctors’ bills to treat a cancer he’d assured me he’d beaten. The pathetic liar is too poor to be sued usefully, and putting him in jail wouldn’t help since he can’t pay me back from there and might not even live long enough for criminal proceedings to give satisfaction anyway. So I must fish or cut bait, and either way I’m sick with hatred and distrust. My patience is at the snapping point. The best I can realistically hope for is to squeeze some work and a relative pittance in “loan” payments out of him before he shuffles off the stage. Sometimes you just bet on the wrong horse and it’s time to find
another mount. But it doesn’t make you sleep better.

Seth Halpern on May 13, 2011 at 9:35 AM

Could it plunge Asia into chaos? Yeah, maybe. But the entire region’s destabilizing at an alarming rate, and if the Brotherhood gets control of half of the Arab states, we’re at the gates of hell anyway.

KingGold on May 13, 2011 at 9:29 AM

Exactly. The trends are alarming. My view may be simplistic for a complicated situation. Nevertheless, India may require more support, and I see no reason to continue send billion of ‘aid’ to a country (or any country) that actively works with terrorists.

We can also cut aid with the sound reasoning that we simply cannot afford to be as extravagant as in years past. It’s true, but it won’t be seen as anything other than cutting Pakistan off. That’s fine with me. They will keep killing their own and others until they realize that they have to change.

Cody1991 on May 13, 2011 at 9:36 AM

Just installed adblock, popups no mo’.

Akzed on May 13, 2011 at 9:40 AM

Pakistan needs to be isolated– its population is a collection of angry jihadis who hate us and would be perfectly happy to see us destroyed; their government is keeping its people in line by mollifying or ignoring (when they don’t actively assist) the terrorists, and we need to stop writing checks to finance that. If this results in the Islamists overtly seizing control of the Pakistani government, then at least we’ll know where to drop the bombs.

morganfrost on May 13, 2011 at 9:45 AM

I am not getting any ads, guess you got a virus. Stop going to porn sites.

paulsur on May 13, 2011 at 9:14 AM

Wow, can’t a guy have any fun anymore?

hip shot on May 13, 2011 at 9:55 AM

Let’s announce military exercises with India.

slickwillie2001 on May 13, 2011 at 10:03 AM

KingGold on May 13, 2011 at 9:29 AM

So we are going to secure all their nukes at the same time? I don’t think that’s even remotely possible.

WisCon on May 13, 2011 at 10:05 AM

KingGold on May 13, 2011 at 9:29 AM

I’d like to subscribe to your newsletter.

teke184 on May 13, 2011 at 10:06 AM

Man, I wish Bush had bombed these bozos after 9/11. I know we’re scared of their nukes. But we should have hit them hard and kept hitting and dare them to use their nukes. We need to stop being cowed just because some tinpot country has a nuclear popgun. We need to let them know that we will hit them with H-Bombs until they are vaporized if they trot those things out and laugh at them. It’s time to show these idiots who really has the biggest di*k.

fleiter on May 13, 2011 at 10:06 AM

fleiter on May 13, 2011 at 10:06 AM

Paks would never ‘use’ their nukes on us, they would leak them out to al Qaeda or some other terror group like Hamass and plead innocence when one of our cities is destroyed.

slickwillie2001 on May 13, 2011 at 10:11 AM

I’d like to subscribe to your newsletter.

teke184 on May 13, 2011 at 10:06 AM

Similar thoughts from the Belmont Club

http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/2011/05/12/trading-places/

a capella on May 13, 2011 at 10:25 AM

Directly pressuring Pakistan’s military is probably not a good approach at this time, compared with going after ISI jihadis. There are much more subtle ways to influence the situation. I haven’t seen anyone here talking about RAW’s role. Instead, it’s all high-profile meetings with and assistance for India’s military.

Christien on May 13, 2011 at 10:44 AM

What I don’t understand is why the Pakistanis accept this? Suicide bombers killed about 80 recruits earlier.

BohicaTwentyTwo on May 13, 2011 at 10:47 AM

It would probably be a better military strategy to quit Afghanistan and attack Pakistan!

MaiDee on May 13, 2011 at 10:48 AM

This is a problem for both the US and Pakistan. They are rightfully angered by the US invasion to get bin Laden, but the Pakistanis gave us no choice in the matter thanks to their double-dealing with the terrorist groups we’re fighting in Afghanistan. If they want to get serious, we’re ready to help, but we cannot keep funding a government that gives shelter to the likes of bin Laden, Omar, and Haqqani.

….this game will continue on because any real escalation by the US that would actually make a difference would involve a serious military action against a nuclear powered country.
Iran knows this is the key and it is one of the reasons they are so he!! bent on having a nuclear weapon.
To eradicate the terrorist threat that is embedded in the countryside of Pakistan would involve war with them.
It’s going to happen anyway because this threat is not going away….but the political will is not in the White House or in the American people to open up this front right now.
We have people from all walks and political affiliations yelling for withdrawal in Afghanistan.If this happens we will leave them stronger and more dangerous than they were when we first invaded.We are quickly coming to a turning point that will determine if we going to fight the growing jihadist threat while we still have some leverage, or if we are going to retreat back to our borders and hope that we can stop every attack and handle the economic consequences of foreign trade being dictated by radical islamist.
We will soon have a nuclear Iran to go with the nuclear armed Pakistan.We have the jihadist making serious gains in Egypt…Yemen….Syria…Lebanon….Somalia..and soon in Libya.
Algeria and other African nations will follow suit.

The price to pay in launching against Pakistan seems huge right now….but it will be a drop in the bucket compared to what we will face in the near future with the massive rise of the jihadist and their march to the modern Caliphate.

Baxter Greene on May 13, 2011 at 10:48 AM

I’ve never quite been able to figure out how having Islamists in control of Afghanistan provides a buffer for Pakistan against India. Afghanistan is on the other side of Pakistan.

LarryD on May 13, 2011 at 10:58 AM

Baxter Greene on May 13, 2011 at 10:48 AM

Yep. Like paying vig to the Mob. It gets more expensive the longer you go. If we keep getting bogged down in worthless endeavors like Libya, national energy and focus is lost regarding where the real force should be applied.

a capella on May 13, 2011 at 11:09 AM

a capella on May 13, 2011 at 11:09 AM

….and then we will spend years talking about why we didn’t “connect the dots”……

Baxter Greene on May 13, 2011 at 11:15 AM

>>>Is anyone getting these annoying effin ads on this site? It drives me nuts and makes me want to quit HotAir. Any way to block them or mute them? Help.

hip shot on May 13, 2011 at 8:52 AM<<<

Don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out.

JustJP on May 13, 2011 at 11:25 AM

Is anyone getting these annoying effin ads on this site? It drives me nuts and makes me want to quit HotAir. Any way to block them or mute them? Help.

hip shot on May 13, 2011 at 8:52 AM

If you have IE9, read up on Tracking Protection. Basically, you turn it on and then install several lists of ad sites that will be blocked.

I installed EasyPrivacy, IE Tracking from Abine, Privacy Choice for all Companies and Privacy Choice for Companies without NAI Oversite. (be careful installing others. At least one will bring back many of the sites blocked by the above.)

For over 3 months I’ve seen virtually no banner ads now. Just gray boxes where the ads used to be.

elfman on May 13, 2011 at 11:42 AM

Probably not a lot of it is done overland, if any at all. You’d have to drive through Waziristan. These are mostly overflight clearances.

Passage from India overland would force us to go through Kashmir and then the highest mountain ranges in Pakistan. Not a good choice.

Ed Morrissey on May 13, 2011 at 8:59 AM

Actually, we do have a land bridge to Afghanistan as evidenced by the occasional closing of the border points and destruction of trucks and cargo by angry Pakistanis. You’d have to ask the DoD what the percentages are but there’s no way to supply and equip 100K+ troops purely by air. Stepping up the air bridge is a nonstarter as we are already wearing out the C-17′s just bringing in what we are. Not to mention that air rights are just as susceptible to political shenanigans as the land bridge. The choice is to continue to manage the Pakistanis as best we can or pull out of Afghanistan. I’m not particularly wedded to either choice but I don’t see any president willingly laying himself open to the “cut and run” charge by pulling out anytime soon. I think the Pakistanis are contemptible but they are playing their hand rather well.

jnelchef on May 13, 2011 at 11:45 AM

Pakistan is going to have to choose between American financial support and their terrorist pals.

I would make them choose between their own survival or the survival of their terrorist pals.

FloatingRock on May 13, 2011 at 12:05 PM

They are rightfully angered by the US invasion to get bin Laden


WHAT?!
WTH are you smoking?

1) They gave us permission 10 years ago to do it.
2) They were harboring him and everyone knows it.

Hard Right on May 13, 2011 at 12:06 PM

Passage from India overland would force us to go through Kashmir and then the highest mountain ranges in Pakistan. Not a good choice.

Ed Morrissey on May 13, 2011 at 8:59 AM

True, but it does open up an interesting possibility. With our support, India could take back that segment of Kashmir (they’d be happy), and we’d have a land bridge, and an excuse to fight the Pakistanis if they violate sovereign Indian territory. Or perhaps it’s time for India to take a bite out of Pakistan’s territory for a few decades, somewhere where the mountainous terrain isn’t so challenging.

liberty0 on May 13, 2011 at 12:17 PM

IF we weren’t broke, and IF the US public was up for a big war, we’d have more choices.

Meanwhile, “Arab spring” is happening, rebellions in Syria and Iran (our real concern).

So the question boils down to, do we want to pull out of Afghanistan to satisfy our pique with Pakistan?

I think it’s more important to keep troops in Afghanistan, not because we are getting a tremendous amount done there, but because the proximity to Iran could be VERY useful, VERY soon.

So I would vote to pacify Pakistan. We know they are dirty tools, but they are still useful.

jodetoad on May 13, 2011 at 12:55 PM

As jodetoad points out the US is trying to use pakistan as a counter to iran… this has nothing to do with terrorism – the US has known about pakistani perfidy for the longest time… and this goes all the way up to kiyani and pasha… this rubbish about low level military officers alone supporting osama/alquaeda/taliban jihadists needs to stop.

what kind of an army is it if the chain of command is not respected ? if the man at the very top of the military is a jihadi terrorist then so will be the personnel “lower” down in the command..

So why does the US still stick with pakistan ? because this is not about jihadi terrorism any more…frankly it has never been… this is geostrategic politics – the US DOES NOT want to leave Afghanistan… and it will do anything to stay there – including watching its sown soldiers getting killed by paki jihadists and then pay the same jihadists money to “fight terrorism”… What a Sick Joke !

The US and Pakistan deserve each other and i hope the relationship goes beyond the breaking point. I pray to God that America LEAVES AfPak very soon – in the name of “fighting” terrorism it openly turns a blind eye to the biggest state sponsor of terrorism – yes, a bigger terror supporter than Iran and continues to fund and arm pakistan – weapons which we all know will be used against us Indians.

Sorry about the long rant but the US Govts from Bush to obama leaves me exasperated… you probably need another major terror attack emanating from pakistan before you do what you should have done on 9/12/2001.

nagee76 on May 13, 2011 at 2:05 PM

It’s not just the Afghanistan consideration. Abandoning Pakistan means letting China cut a swath the Chinese are already working hard on through Central Asia. Pakistan and China are making out like teenagers, not just alarming India and giving Russia fits, but importing Chinese troops into disputed areas of northern Pakistan (see Gilgit-Baltistan and Kashmir), building roads for them, excavating for a railway and dams, “railroading” the locals in a political sense, and blighting the landscape.

Pakistan is becoming China’s path of least resistance westward across Asia, something China wants badly but has never had. If we want to avert wars in the future — wars that will affect our security and drive us to take sides and fight — preventing Asian power from getting out of balance now is essential. Marching out of Pakistan in a huff is the opposite of looking like the strong horse — and however annoying it is, looking like the strong horse now can be done much, much more cheaply in terms of blood and treasure than the cost of doing it later.

J.E. Dyer on May 13, 2011 at 2:26 PM

Seth Halpern on May 13, 2011 at 9:35 AM

File the suit. Even people who appear to be poor may turn out to have considerable estates. Once he’s gone, he won’t need his house, car, etc.

unclesmrgol on May 13, 2011 at 3:06 PM

I hear there is a movement in Baluchistan to secede from Pakistan.

agmartin on May 13, 2011 at 3:12 PM

So the question boils down to, do we want to pull out of Afghanistan to satisfy our pique with Pakistan?

jodetoad on May 13, 2011 at 12:55 PM

Afghanistan is just another one of Pakistan’s terrorist proxy wars, same as Kashmir. If we want our efforts in Afghanistan to have any chance of success we need to take out the hive in Pakistan.

FloatingRock on May 13, 2011 at 3:19 PM

“We’ll NEVER give up the Kingpin’s suitcase!”
– Big Trouble

mojo on May 13, 2011 at 3:41 PM

but we cannot keep funding a government that gives shelter to the likes of bin Laden, Omar, and Haqqani.

We freed Iraq for similar reasons. Pakistan is not our ally nor is that country or it’s people our friends.

dogsoldier on May 13, 2011 at 5:04 PM

A simple formulation: he cuts ties he dies (and his little family too.) Yes, but we’re not required to feed his Swiss bank account either. Pakistan might have served a purpose as a semi-ally back in the day. Not now. Cut ‘em loose.

curved space on May 13, 2011 at 6:37 PM