Remember a trillion dollar war started by a President and financed by a public which didn't know Sunni from Shia? When pouring money into foreign endeavors, it is best to know approximately what you are doing and not leave it entirely to the government. After all, it is your money being spent, and the consequences of such expenditure will perhaps be borne by you.
Lately, the US has been contemplating raining down even more billions of dollars on Pakistan. Good for Pakistan, hope its civilian population gets to see some of such aid and the largess doesn't end up in more dangerous hands.
This diary attempts to inform you about how Indians perceive the actions of the Pakistan military, the latest recipient of US generosity. (Even the most jingoistic Indian is able to see a clear distinction between the Pakistani military brass and less empowered Pakistani civilians).
For the last several years (since about 1989, the end of the Afghan jihad), the Pakistani military has functioned like an unreined horse - blinkered and so far unstoppable in pursuing its 'strategic goals' with respect to Afghanistan and India using armed jihadists and meanwhile dragging the Pakistani state and nation behind it, regardless of their consent or otherwise.
A large part of Pakistani military's cussedness in the last 8 years has derived from being flush with funds from its beleagured Western allies like the US while continuing to do exactly as it pleases.
UPI Asia : Kayani : Arsonist disguised as firefighter
U.S. backing for Kayani has ensured that the Pakistan military's double-faced policy of secretly helping the Taliban while publicly backing NATO continues. Now that the Clinton team is back in office, courtesy of President Barack Obama, the United States is returning to the 1994-96 policy of backing the Taliban.
Meanwhile the Taliban has separated into "moderate" and "hard" elements, the distinction being as illusory in practice as the 1893 Durand Line that sliced "Pashtunistan" into two parts, with the north belonging to Afghanistan and the south coming under British, and now Pakistani, rule.
Kinship and opium link these presumed two segments of the Taliban together in a tight embrace, with the "hard" section benefitting militarily from the concessions now being showered by a panicky NATO on the "soft" Taliban.
Fortunately for Kayani, the current U.S. administration seems to be even more gullible than the previous one, which facilitated the escape of key al-Qaida and Taliban leaders from the northern Afghan city of Kunduz in 2001, and gave nearly US$3 billion to the Pakistan army to distribute among "moderate" Pashtuns. The money went to the Taliban and funded its revival.
Kayani has ensured that several of the "freedom fighter" camps in Pakistan-held Kashmir have been shifted to the Swat Valley, one of numerous gifts delivered by a grateful Taliban to the Pakistan army in exchange for the sanctuary it has been given in the valley.
Several hundred "fighters" of the kind that terrorized Mumbai during Nov. 26-28, 2008, are being trained in these camps by serving officers of the military. Of these fighters, a large number are Indian nationals, many recruited from the Middle East.
It was not a coincidence that recent terror attempts, such as the failed 2007 attack on Glasgow Airport, included Indian nationals. Kayani is intent on ensuring that India is identified by the international community as a breeding ground for terrorists, similar to Pakistan. Nepal and Bangladesh are the other South Asian states whose nationals are being trained by elements of the military.
Since the Mumbai fiasco, when communications equipment and explosives used by the terrorists were traced back to the Pakistan military, it has been careful to create firewalls to mask its involvement in the training of jihadis.
Kayani is hopeful that most of Afghanistan will return to the control of his allies within the next two years, so that he and his successors can then concentrate on their declared objective of "avenging the 1971 breakup of Pakistan" by creating chaos in India.
Meanwhile in Bangladesh
The Times of India : Jittery Pak instigated Bangla mutiny?
Top intelligence agencies, including those representing the western powers, now see a strong link among a series of significant developments in Dhaka prior to the unprecedented BDR mutiny at its Pilkhana headquarters on February 25. The agencies suspect the whole episode was part of a Pakistani plot — helped by Bangladeshi collaborators — to fuel revolt in the armed forces for upstaging the Sheikh Hasina government.
Just nine days before armed BDR jawans went on the rampage, ruthlessly killing their superiors from the army, Pakistan president Asif Ali Zardari had sent one of his emissaries — Zia Ispahani — to Dhaka to request Hasina not to open war criminal cases. This, expectedly, did not find much favour with the Bangladesh prime minister.
It may be recalled that soon after coming to power this time, the Awami League-led alliance had decided to prosecute war criminals responsible for killing and torturing thousands of people during the country's liberation war, 38 years ago.
The Telegraph UK : Barack Obama told: help Pakistan or risk a repeat of 9/11 in America or Britain
A team headed by Bruce Riedel, a former CIA Middle East expert, asked to overhaul US policy on Afghanistan and Pakistan, has concluded that stabilising Pakistan is now the higher priority, a source familiar with the discussions has revealed.
The report, prepared in conjunction with the National Security Council, will focus on the need to co-opt moderate Taliban elements and shut down militant safe havens in Pakistan's the lawless northwest border region. It will also urge a sharp increase in military and civil assistance.
"What we've been seeing in recent weeks is truly apocalyptic warnings from the analysts, which suggest that that is now a live possibility. The Pakistani government seems unable to control its own military or intelligence people. The tribal areas are already a failed state and a safe haven for terrorists..."
And yet
The review, due to be circulated to senior officials early this week, will recommend that non-military aid to Pakistan quadruple. In return, the Pakistani government will be expected to agree to a wholesale overhaul of its military which will see US special forces re-train Pakistani soldiers in counter insurgency warfare.
The army is currently configured to fight a conventional war with India. The US has 200 special forces ready to deploy and there is even talk of taking Pakistani officers to training camps in the US.
So here's the thing. It appears that this US government-sponsored report by Bruce Riedel will declare that the Pakistani (civilian) government cannot control its own military and intelligence. Will the report say why exactly that is so? Or is it simply presumed that NOW, after 8 years, when the US is on the back foot in Afghanistan, money given to Pakistani civilians will change minds and strategic aims in the Pakistani Army?
Well, whatever, as a consequence the report will recommend that the US government turn around and quadruple aid to Pakistan - "non-military" aid, yes, but how would the US control where the money finally ends up if its recipient, the Pakistan civilian government, has insufficient control? Is the US now going to audit the Pakistani government? The whole Pakistani defense budget, while a big fraction of the national budget is virtually a single line item, the details of which even the Pakistani parliament cannot demand that the Pakistani Army explain.
The US will also train Pakistani military officers on its good faith that they would NOW, 8 years later, not only change their strategic aims but finally begin to fight their former Al Qaeda and Taliban allies. How's the US going to ensure that? Review the battle records after every battle?
Meanwhile, even with the whole nature of the US alliance and quantum of US aid up in the air during the Presidential transition, the Pakistani military has presumably felt free enough to plot a serious and wide ranging armed forces mutiny in Bangladesh on one hand and terrorist attacks in India on the other.
The Pakistani military has clearly felt secure in the knowledge that whatever it does, US taxpayers will not only underwrite its expenses, but also (I guess) remain in blissful ignorance of its actual actions.