Pakistan, in flagrante delicto

WASHINGTON, Dec. 10 (UPI) -- The Bush administration appears to be astigmatically challenged when scanning the geopolitical landscape beyond Iraq. Inspector Blix Clouseau and his merry band of Keystone Kops in the land of the Arab world's Torquemada have produced all-Iraq news-all-the-time networks that are ignoring hair-raising developments in nearby Pakistan.

Last Nov. 16, Fazlur Rehman, a close friend of both Osama bin Laden and Taliban supremo Mullah Mohammed Omar, as well as being the head of a coalition of six extremist politico-fundamentalist groups and a member of Pakistan's newly elected National Assembly, demanded that his parliamentary colleagues offer prayers for the man the United States executed Nov. 14 for killing two CIA agents in Virginia.

The speaker of the National Assembly, with foreign ambassadors looking on from the visitors' gallery, acquiesced. Rehman's pro-Taliban team was just warming up. The prayers were quickly followed by a blistering attack on the United States by other members of the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal coalition. "God, destroy those who handed (Mir Amal) Kasi over to America. May his murderers, whether in America or Pakistan, meet the same fate," said another MMA leader.

Kasi's execution in Virginia turned him into an overnight cult figure in Pakistan -- and opened up the sluice gates of anti-U.S. vitriol. When the plane carrying his dead body touched down in Quetta, the provincial capital of Baluchistan, tens of thousands of people broke through police cordons shouting, "Allah is great." With his coffin draped in a cloak inscribed with verses of the Koran, Kasi was carried through Quetta in the biggest funeral procession Baluchistan has ever witnessed. "America Go Home," "Bush the Butcher of Afghanistan," and other anti-U.S. epithets were either banners waved or slogans warbled.

Next day, Nov. 19, another huge crowd gathered at the funeral venue. In a rare display of altruism, motorized rickshaws and buses ferried people free of charge. Even official Pakistan thought it would be appropriate to pay obeisance to Kasi. Baluchistan Corps Cmdr. Gen. Abdul Qadir Baloch, Baluchistan Chief Minister Amirul Mulk Mengal, and the Pakistani ambassador to the United States led the official delegation.

For the past three weeks, thousands throng to Kasi's gravesite daily and carry earth back as if holy ground. Says Kasi's brother Hamidullah, "Every morning when we go to his grave, we find the soil covering his tomb reduced a few more inches and we have to build up the bulge afresh." Pashto and Baluchi poets are writing odes to the fallen hero, hailing him as second only to bin Laden in the popular pantheon of larger-than-life Muslims.

The foreign office was at a loss to explain the presence of senior officials at Kasi's funeral. The official spokesman explained the ambassador happened to be in Quetta to visit his ailing mother. A former federal Cabinet minister said the response to Kasi's funeral persuaded the intelligence community to free Dr. Amez Aziz, the physician the FBI had been interrogating about his links to bin Laden.

Now that he enjoys parliamentary immunity, Rehman grows bolder by the day. All good Muslims should now "follow Kasi's example," he said Dec. 10, which clearly was a leaf out of bin Laden's fatwa -- "kill Americans."

Officially, Washington says President Pervez Musharraf is a loyal ally of the United States in the war on terror. But with new pro-Taliban, pro-al Qaida provincial governments in the Northwest Frontier Province and in Baluchistan, it has become increasingly clear that the transnational terrorists hunted by the United States have recovered some of the privileged sanctuaries they enjoyed prior to Sept. 11, 2001.

Pakistan is a country where local police are reluctant to antagonize a religious group, however extreme. Many of the extremists detained following Musharraf's pledge to the United States last January to quench terrorism are now free men in a country where a Kalashnikov (AK-47) can be rented for $2.50 a day and any kind of a weapon obtained at one hour's notice.

In the tribal belt adjacent to Afghanistan, automobile salesmen push the envelope with stickers that say, "Buy one vehicle and get a rocket launcher free." The problem, said one former police chief now in the United States, is that "law enforcement in a lawless society where human rights are unknown and guilt is beaten out of those arrested."

A cop on the beat makes $1 a day; an inspector general of police for an entire province, $400 a month. A "fundamentalist" in Pakistani police parlance is a police chief who pays his personal bills out of police funds.

One of India's most influential officials, National Security Adviser Brajesh Mishra, was in Washington this week for talks with senior Bush administration officials. His lunch with national security adviser Condoleezza Rice lasted over three hours. Trying to shift attention from the clear and future danger of Iraq to the clear and present danger of Pakistan was a thankless task.

Mishra's other message was harmonious to Secretary of State Colin Powell and gratingly dissonant to Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz. A U.S. invasion of Iraq without U.N. approval would play into the hands of "crazies everywhere." American lives would be at risk in many parts of the world. Al Qaida would have a new recruiting poster and volunteers would flock to bin Laden's bloody banner.

The logic of war in early 2003 now seems implacable. If Saddam Hussein were to concede a number of weapons of mass destruction, either chemical or biological or both, he's toast. If his 11,807 pages of documents and 60,000 pages on CDs demonstrate he has indeed destroyed all weapons of mass destruction, he's dismissed as an incurable liar -- and still toast. And if President Bush doesn't toast him, Mr. Bush himself is toast -- at least for a second term.

U.S. strategic assets, including four carrier task forces, are still converging on staging areas around Iraq and it is highly unlikely they will be recalled before the Iraqi dictator has been unhorsed. Between now and then, the burden of proof will shift from President Saddam to President Bush. It has to be incontrovertible. Therefore, top-secret intelligence on Saddam's clear and present danger will have to be credible -- and made public. But the CIA remains unconvinced.

Thanks for the ping, swarthyguy. I love it when you two give your views on topics that interest me.

I just read the Amazon.com book review of Pakistan: The Eye of the Storm,by Owen Bennett Jones, Yale Univ Press; (August 22, 2002), and am considering ordering a copy.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0300097603/qid%3D1039569609/sr%3D11-1/ref%3Dsr%5F11%5F1/002-0458191-1778428

One of the customers who reviewed it said the following. What do you think?

"With the Middle East teetering on the brink of nuclear war, nothing could be more timely than this account of Pakistan's turbulent history by a veteran British newsman.

"At the heart of the matter, on the frozen roof of the world, lies Kashmir, a ravishingly beautiful princely state with a Hindu ruler, a Moslem majority and a strategic position bordering India, China, Afghanistan and Pakistan. The roots of the present crisis lie in the 10-year Russian occupation of Afghanistan, eventually ended by a combination of American dollars, Pakistani political support and Afghan valor.

"Pakistan has been under military rule for half of its 53-year national life. No civilian president has completed his term in office. Thus the politics of the army has become the politics of the state, which is to the right of center. Because India has twice the strength of Pakistan's armed forces and usually enjoys the support of the Soviet Union, Pakistan has found it desirable to seek the backing of the United States (both India and Pakistan have small nuclear arsenals).

"There always has been a price for such backing, and it usually has been high. For Pakistan, it has meant abandoning Islamabad's support of the Taliban regime of Afghanistan, a more vigorous fight against terrorism and restraining Pakistani-backed military raids into India and Indian-held Kashmir. For its part, the United States is sending hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to Pakistan, with the promise of more to come, and a softer position on human rights.

"President Pervez Musharraf, a "modernist" who is intelligent, energetic and a good friend of the United States could be forced from power as a consequence of his abandonment of the Taliban. Yet Owen Bennett Jones Jones probably is correct in "Pakistan: The Eye of the Storm" that no more than 15 percent of Pakistanis want Islamic fundamentalism of the Afghan flavor. Most do not want to live in a dour theocracy. "They want their country to be moderate, modern, tolerant and stable," Mr. Jones writes.

"The future of Pakistan probably depends largely on the orientation of the madrasas: private, religious schools usually based at a mosque. Most but not all of these schools are woefully under-funded, poorly equipped and short of trained teachers. Those who attend them tend to be those without money, family, connections or prospects, the rejects of Pakistani society. Learning is largely by rote and limited to religious subjects. The virtue of the madrasas system is that it has deep and widespread indigenous roots.

"When the Russians invaded Afghanistan, there were about 250 madrasas in Pakistan. As a consequence of their success in producing dedicated zealous fighters, by 1987, 2,286 madrasas were producing about 30,000 graduates each year. Today, more than 700,000 students are attending 8,000 institutions. Tuition is free, and students - who may spend seven or eight years in the system - receive a small allowance.

"The best of the graduates go directly to fighting units. They are paid a small salary, but more important is the feeling of glamour and self-worth attendant upon becoming a full-fledged jihadist.

"Those who die know their parents will gain both prestige and a pension.As Mr. Jones observes, "what started as an alternative system for a small number of conservative religious families on the periphery of Pakistani society has been transformed into a countrywide parallel education system, catering for a substantial proportion of Pakistani children."

"Control of the madrasas clearly is a prize worth fighting for, and the Pakistani government already has taken the first steps toward modernizing and reforming it. The trick to doing so is to change without destroying. A litmus test of the popularity of the army's reforms will be provided Oct. 10 when Pakistan holds a general election. ..."

------END customer review at amazon.com-----

I think I'm a typical American with little knowledge of these countries that have "suddenly" become so important to us. Perhaps I'm more curious than most, as my son worked for a couple of years for Bechtel in Saudi (and ended up despising the Saudis), my daughter spent a couple of years in Tunis (and became disillusioned with Arabs, whom she considers "duplicitous"), the best country I've ever visited was Turkey, and I'm quite fond of the Hindu philosophy. And in a few months, I may be going to Syria on a book project, if things hold together that long.

I cannot imagine why USA and India are not the best and closest of buddies, as we seem to share many values.

Please keep me on your ping lists!

One at a time.This operation of remaking a region doesn't happen easily.Take out the big dog first, the nasty man with the nasty weapons, and then see what noises begin to emante from various capitals.The impatience to hitting the weakest military power, ie the Saudis, is a weird fetish around FR.They aren't going anywhere ....Habs4ever

Actually Habs the Saudis are the biggest singular threat in the world today! And if you want to rank the greatest threats in the globe they are first of all the Saudis, followed by the Pakistanis, and then thirdly the North Koreans. To be perfectly honest with you when it comes to the global complex of the proliferation of terror, and a viable opportunity to ease the spread of WMDs, Iraq does not even figure into the equation when compared to the above three!

Anyways let us look at Saudi Arabia! That nation is the prime source of terror as we know it today! If you were to meticulously delve into the proliferation of terror around the globe (the whole globe by the way, from the FARC in S. America to the muraleen Arabs in the Sudan in Africa, to the Chechnyans in Russia) you will notice one interesting thing ...Saudi money plus Saudi demagogic influence! It is was a Saudi source that started to bankroll the FARC (including paying for the IRA to train them for a mortar bomb assasination attempt against the Argentine president). It is Saudi Arabia that has been helping the Sudanese north in its oppression (and murder, rape, and slavery) of the Dinka Christians in Southern Sudan! In Chechnya since 1995 it was a Saudi demagogue that made the Chechnyans take up arms again against Russia (there had been a volatile ceasefire until then), and that was also the same time the same Saudi source that influenced the Chechnyans to invade the neighboring region of Dagestan to try and forcibly convert it into an Islamic republic (the Russian army swooped in and kicked the Chechies out, but you get the point)!

In Asia the abu Sayyef terro group, which has links to Al Queda, is partly funded from Saudi Arabia! One of the major contributors to Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Israel, and Hezbollah in Lebanon, is from Saudi Arabia. And the lisy goes on ad infinitum!

In essence the major threat from the Saudis is not from its military strength (hence negating your point that it has a 'weak military')! Its major ability is the exportation of ideological demagogues (like the spread of Wahhabism to places like the Sudan), and most importantly the financing of terror activities (usually subtly or by proxy, but almost all traceable to Saudi Arabia).

Hence that is why Swarthyguy was right in saying Riyadh is not a US ally but quite possibly the greatest threat to face the US since Kruschev (at least Kruschev, and the USSR at large, were intelligent enough and cared about their kids unlike extremist islamic scum who seem to care only about death and destruction).

As for Pakistan the danger inherent in it is that it is an Islamic nation, with a very large radical element, and a nuclear arsenal! Add to this volatile mix the fact that the ISI (the Pakistani CIA) is in essence not controlled by the president, and in its autonomy it has been known to engage in terrorist logistics, especially in attacks against India (where they finance and train terrorists). Also add to this the fact that certain Pakistani commanders openly call for surprise nuclear attacks on India! However the biggest threat is that in the event of an India-Pakistan war (which all paradigms show India would win) that Pakistan would not only launch nukes against India, it would also give some nuclear material to terror groups to sue against the west which 'abandoned Pakistan.'

This is why the British Foreign secretary said Pakistan is the biggest single terror threat in the globe (although personally i would say the Saudis are first, but that's me).

As for North Korea just look at the reports of what they did TODAY! The news reports for today say a ship from N. Korea was caught transporting Scud missiles. Another said that N. Korea is the world's biggest supplier of Ballistic missile technology! A third said that N. Korea was in the process of taking delivery of certain nuclear weapons tech from China! All this was from todays news, and that is just the stuff i had the time to delve into. N. Korea is a big threat, yet for some reason the international community (apart from Japan and S. Korea which are in dire straits and are thus very concerned) seem to be totally oblivious to the major threat boded by N. Korea!

In comparison to the above three Iraq is analogically tantamount to being a little scorpion with a tiny venomous sting, while the above three are super-lethal vipers and cobras! The scorpion is indeed a threat, however if trapped in a tiny room i would personally tackle the cobras and the vipers before i even took a second look at the scorpion. I believe the word is prioritization!

Iraq is a danger, and it needs to be negated as a threat! However assuming that Iraq is the biggest 'naughty boy' and being oblivious to the Saudis and their cash and ideology; the Pakistani and their nukes, ISI, and radical islamic base; and N. Korea and its vagrant violation of international rules, plus its nuclear program and weapon sales ....that is just sheer stupidity!

We should go after Iraq if need be ..however i hope we will not accept what the Saudi obfuscator (oops, i mean the guy who came on telly last week and said Saudi arabia is a 'misunderstood American ally') as the end of story for Saudi arabia!

And if the Saudis did not have oil, and they did what they are currently doing, i would willingly bet that US B-1Bs and B-2s would be dropping JDAMS over Riyadh as we speak!

You're reasoning is all wrong.Sorry, you put a lot of effort into it, but the strongest power, who has both the weapons, and the will, to cause great harm, is Saddam.The gravest threat is Saddam.Period.

Actually Saudi Arabia has greater intent and has done more actual harm than Saddam (if you factor in that the Saudis bankroll terror activities around the globe). As for the following assertation of yours (but the strongest power, who has both the weapons, and the will, to cause great harm) are you trying to tell me that in the global matrix Iraq is more potent than N. Korea and Pakistan in those respects?

The oil argument is bogus.A fully active Iraq, pumping out oil at a lower cost than the Saudis, eliminates about 80% of any Saudi leverage.Hence, the Saudis equivocate over Saddam.

You are wrong again! If Saudi Arabia did not have vast petroleum reserves, and it did what it has been doing for the last one and a half decades, then the US military would have assaulted Riyadh years ago. And by the way there is a big reason why we are wooing the Russians (who have huge oil reserves of their own) in a bid to try and wean ourselves from Saudi oil (although most of our oil is not Saudi the stuff we get from them is still quantitative enough to ensure the Saudis have considerable control over what we can do. Plus the fact that Saudi crude is 'better' when it comes to calorifics).

The other, more important point, is that in a NWO of asymmetric threats, the nations who have shown hostile intent plus have the means to threaten vital national interests through WMD , terrorism, or even economic warfare such as an invasion of Kuwait, are required to be pre-emptively stopped.The national security requires that those most closely capable of immediate threats be stopped.That is Iraq.

Wow ...you are either blind, bluffing, asinine, or all three! Look at what you posted (in a NWO of asymmetric threats, the nations who have shown hostile intent plus have the means to threaten vital national interests through WMD , terrorism, or even economic warfare )! And you want to tell me that Iraq is higher when it comes to a 'NWO of assymetric threats ...through WMD, terrorism, and economic warfare' than nations like Saudi arabia (which is by far the largest proliferator and financier of terrorism in the world), Pakistan(which has a radical element in its structure, has WMDs, and has terrorist ties ....plus launches the highest number of cyber attacks against the US in the world), and N. Korea (which has a WMD program, and seems willing to export such tech to any nation willing to pay)! And you rank Iraq over them! Ay yi yi! And by the way why does the British government say Pakistan is the gravest danger in the world today! And how come while Saddam is too busy trying to ensure no one usurps his power that the Saudis are financing every terror activity from Saouth America to Southern Asia!

Iraq is the mother of all terrorist nations.Iran will be next.

I hate to burst your bubble, but Iran is actually going through a major transformation as of present! Yesterday and today there were mass protests by Iranian college students against the clerics, and the general atmosphere in Iran has been one towards the west! Hence i do not know why your logic says we are going to attack Iran next, but i think you are stuck in the days of the ayatollah Khomeini ...and the dude has been dead for several years now.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.