BUSH HARDENS STANCE AGAINST MUSHARRAF

TIMES OF INDIA ^ | SEPTEMBER 25, 2003 | CHIDANAND RAJGHATTA

[JENNIFER_SMITH]

NEW YORK: Notwithstanding its self-professed role as a frontline state in the war on terrorism, Pakistan finds itself cornered on the issue. The US, India and Afghanistan have come together to warn Pakistan's military government not to mess around in its neighbourhood.

US President George Bush bluntly told Pakistan's military ruler Pervez Musharraf on Wednesday to "stop cross-border terrorism in Kashmir" and "infiltration" into Afghanistan.

Despite effusive public praise for Pakistan for its role in the war on terrorism, Bush appears to have got tough with Musharraf during their meeting on the sidelines of the UN session in the face of complaints from both Prime Minister Vajpayee and Afghan President Hamid Karzai about Pakistan's hostile activities.

"President Bush and President Musharraf had an 'excellent meeting' in which they talked about the challenges in the war on terrorism, talked about the need to stop cross-border terrorism in Kashmir," a senior US administration official told reporters in a background briefing about Bush's engagements for the day.

It was the first time a high-level US official has attributed such a blunt and direct expression as "cross-border terrorism in Kashmir" to Bush. The formulation is of Indian origin and US diplomacy and language in this matter has been a little subtler in the past.

The tougher language was also evident in the context of the Pakistan-Afghanistan problem. The official also said Bush had asked Musharraf "to go back and redouble his efforts" to deal with infiltration into Afghanistan, although she softened the message by elaborating on the difficult terrain in the region and Pakistan's change of heart while insisting there was more to do.

"If you look at where Pakistan was prior to 9/11 and where Pakistan is now, you've had a complete shift in the orientation of Pakistan's foreign policy, of Pakistan's policy towards Afghanistan and the Taliban, and Pakistan's policy towards terrorism," the official said. "It doesn't mean that there isn't more to do, but that has to be acknowledged."

In a separate briefing, External Affairs Minister Yashwant Sinha told reporters that Prime Minister Vajpayee informed the US President that India had not seen any decline in cross-border terrorism or infiltration or in the matter of dismantling the infrastructure of terrorism in Pakistan. As a result, no sustained dialogue was possible because there was no change in the mindset of the rulers of Pakistan.

Pakistan's low-intensity hostility is also being blamed indirectly for India's rejection of troops to Iraq. Vajpayee told Bush that as far as the commitment of Indian troops to Iraq was concerned, New Delhi had to first consider its own increased security demand over the past few weeks.

Washington's hardening sentiment and language against Pakistan follows reports about the country's continuing subversive activities in both India and Afghanistan. Senior US officials in recent weeks have publicly spoken about it.

State Department's Christina Rocca recently stressed the need to contain terrorism emanating from Pakistan, while even the US envoy to Pakistan, Nancy Powell, wondered how Pakistan could not find Taliban activists when reporters from US media were interviewing them all the time.

The open indictment of Pakistan's role in fomenting violence in the region came even as Musharraf was sending mixed signals and tying himself in knots at his various engagements in New York. Sometimes he protested that Pakistan was not involved in terrorism and was not encouraging infiltration; at other times, he suggested terrorism could be contained by talks.

In his speech before the UN, Musharraf initially described the movement in Kashmir as indigenous. Two paragraphs later he admitted Pakistan had the leverage to stop the violence in Kashmir by the renegades he describes as freedom fighters and the rest of the world calls terrorists.

Various statements and developments during this week in New York have virtually nailed Pakistan on charges of terrorism. The Bush's administration outing its ally publicly on Wednesday comes after the US media reported continuing Pakistani complicity or inaction on terrorism.

In its latest issue, Time magazine reports on how serving Pakistani military officials were caught operating with the Taliban. The magazine also reports on how Pakistan has reneged on its promise to close down terrorist camps operating against India while denying their existence, forcing US Deputy Secretary Richard Armitage to produce a dossier of satellite photographs showing the camps last June.

"Musharraf acted outraged and upset," Time quotes a State Department official as saying, but it wasn't clear to the Americans whether he was angry that the camps were functioning or that the US had uncovered them.

Musharraf has similarly protested Pakistan's innocence during his New York engagements, arguing that the border with India cannot be foolproofed and the terrain on the border with Afghanistan is too hostile to completely root out the Taliban and al-Qaeda.

But there are now doubts in the US establishment, endorsed by New Delhi and Kabul, whether Pakistan's change of heart is real or tactical.

[.cnI redruM]

Mushariff seems not to be much of an ally. I hope we don't need him in Afghanistan to the point where he can sabotage the entire process.

[BullDog108]

Index Bump

[Coop]

Mushariff seems not to be much of an ally.

If it weren't for his government's efforts we wouldn't have most of the big Al Qaeda catches - KSM, Abu Zabaydah, Ramzi bin Shibh or Tawfiq Attash Khallad.

[Prodigal Son]

Mushariff seems not to be much of an ally.

Yeah, well, ole Mushy is not in the best situation in the world either. Between the proverbial rock and the hard spot.

[caltrop]

I agree. He's in a mighty tough spot. Two of Pakistan's four provinces have elected governments which openly support the Taliban. All things considered, he's doing a great job. If we aren't careful, we'll force him to do too much and will shortly thereafter have to discuss the problem with his successor, who might not be receptive, at Mushariff's funeral.

[Mr.Clark]

I'd hate to see the alternative. One of the real nightmare scenarios of the world situation is his assassination.

[Prodigal Son]

Yep. Whoever inherits Musharraf's position also inherits those nukes- like a birthright straight from hell. And if the Taliban is what fills the vacuum of his absense, that means the Taliban gets their grubby little mits on those nukes...

If ever a tin-pot dictator needed propping up- it's Musharraf.
Until we figure out something better anyway...

[TADSLOS]

Musharref's a dead man walking. He's hanging on by his fingernails, riding the fence between the U.S. and the terrorists who control large portions of his real estate. His country has nuclear weapons courtesy of North Korea. We are training our soldiers side by side with Indian troops on Mountain warfare techniques for a reason.

[witnesstothefall]

Mushariff seems not to be much of an ally.

That's true enough. On the other hand, I'm surprised he's still alive. The imams want his blood these last two years, let alone his enemies on the right and in India.

This guy is a canny survivor, and he's got the Muslilm a-bomb, something he can lord over the Saudis, the Iranians, the Indians, China, Russia and us. What I'm trying to say is that sooner or later, there's gonna be a big fight in Pakistan, for the self-evident fact that for a Mulsim to have a weapon is to use that weapon. Jihad demands that it be so.

Sooner or later.

[RightWhale]

Mushariff seems not to be much of an ally.

He, himself, is. He's got a tough job to control his unruly country.

[atc]

Many people seem surprised that he's still hanging around...they'd expected that he would have been knocked off. To me, this could very easily mean that he controls the radical elements within the country and can manipulate them at will to make the American hearts flutter.

Sure he has given up a lot of Al Qaeda, probably around 400 - but we have also given Pakistan billions of dollars in aid and writeoffs. I recall reading that their foreign reserves went from around $500m pre 9/11 to over $10 billion. Congress recently approved another $3 billion in aid. $10-15 million per Al Qaeda terrorist seems to be a very generous bounty..lets wait and see if the ISI masterminds and the more deeply entrenched and rabid Islamic terrorists feel any pain. So far they haven't.

[swarthyguy]

>>he controls the radical elements within the country and can manipulate them at will to make the American hearts flutter

You don't say. What a Machiavellian master, so adept at pulling on the pursestrings of America's deep pockets.