That's the whisper in some diplomatic circles, but Dinah won't believe it until she sees it. Pakistan's agenda clearly isn't the same as the American agenda. IOW, they're playing us like a fiddle.
From the Daily Times:
US officials say while Pakistani officials cooperate more in private, there are definite limits. The US wanted Pakistan to move forces deeper into the tribal belt before winter. It did not happen, and might not at all.
Hint: A senior US diplomat hinted at a separate agreement that would allow the US itself to take on some of the hidden war against the terrorists.
Speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive talks with Pakistan, the diplomat said last week that more US action is expected against the Haqqani network, led by long-time resistance fighter and former US ally Jalaluddin Haqqani. His network, based in North Waziristan, reportedly has strong ties with Al Qaeda and targets US forces in eastern Afghanistan from across the border.
The diplomat said the stepped-up US action would only come with Pakistani support, but would not elaborate on the nature of the potential cooperation. Pakistani officials claim they have targeted the Haqqani leadership, albeit unsuccessfully, and will go after the network when the time is right. Some US officials believe that, others do not.
Military officials say the Haqqani problem illustrates how the US sometimes needs Pakistan more than the other way around. The US military now counts the Haqqani network as the single gravest threat to US forces fighting over the border in Afghanistan, and badly wants the government to push the militants from their border refuges. But the Pakistani answer seems to be that unless and until the Haqqanis threaten Pakistan, they won’t be a priority.
Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, was the latest US official to make the case in a visit to Islamabad last week.
Hint: A senior US diplomat hinted at a separate agreement that would allow the US itself to take on some of the hidden war against the terrorists.
Speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive talks with Pakistan, the diplomat said last week that more US action is expected against the Haqqani network, led by long-time resistance fighter and former US ally Jalaluddin Haqqani. His network, based in North Waziristan, reportedly has strong ties with Al Qaeda and targets US forces in eastern Afghanistan from across the border.
The diplomat said the stepped-up US action would only come with Pakistani support, but would not elaborate on the nature of the potential cooperation. Pakistani officials claim they have targeted the Haqqani leadership, albeit unsuccessfully, and will go after the network when the time is right. Some US officials believe that, others do not.
Military officials say the Haqqani problem illustrates how the US sometimes needs Pakistan more than the other way around. The US military now counts the Haqqani network as the single gravest threat to US forces fighting over the border in Afghanistan, and badly wants the government to push the militants from their border refuges. But the Pakistani answer seems to be that unless and until the Haqqanis threaten Pakistan, they won’t be a priority.
Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, was the latest US official to make the case in a visit to Islamabad last week.
Here's how Admiral Mullen made his case in Kandahar recently...
A CBS news report filed by Kimberly Dozier states that U.S. Navy Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, met in Kandahar with five Afghan tribal elders. Pulling out his notebook, the admiral asked the Afghans what they need. Apparently the new fashionable counterinsurgency introductory question is "What do you need?" rather than "Are you fighting on our side?" or "Are we winning?"
No comments:
Post a Comment