Article

2004-03-11 Afghanistan/South Asia

Wolfowitz says Pakistan ignoring Taliban activity

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Dan Darling 2004-03-11 1:02:18 AM|| || Front Page|| [3 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Wow, old Wolfie is making it public. Funny thing about certains parts of the world: you can make almost any deal, and everyone will figure it out and know that there is a quid pro quo - but you're not allowed to speak it aloud or publicize it in any way. Even PakiWaki's have a "face" game.

Wolfie's throwing down the gauntlet, methinks.

Expect Strenuous Denials in 5...4...3...2...1

Posted by .com 2004-3-11 5:31:39 AM|| 2004-3-11 5:31:39 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 throwing down the gauntlet ....

Or maybe providing cover for Pak actually cooperating in tracking Taliban - If I was Perv, and I WAS cooperating against the Taliban, Id WANT Wolfie to say this, for obvious reasons.

Posted by liberalhawk 2004-3-11 9:46:15 AM|| 2004-3-11 9:46:15 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 And what about Pak's help in getting the Afghies rid of former USSR and later being being dumped and left high and dry w/o any support against the indies? And the American's leaning towards the Soviet's former biggest aly and stopping the sale of F16s and Awacs to Pakis? Although Pakis did receive few F16s despite paying for the full order.

Since they again require Pakis help so they r now showering them with favors, albeit quite vocal about scratching each others back kinda thing.

Posted by sakattack 2004-3-11 9:53:59 AM|| 2004-3-11 9:53:59 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 Obvious? Wha? Sorry, but I think not. ISI was certainly quick to disclaim any quid pro quo for US soft-peddling on Khan -- right?

So how is it obvious that Wolfie putting Perv on the spot will help?

On the contrary, IMO - the PakiWakis are VERY big on being a major player and being shown major player respect. They want to sit at the Big Table VERY badly. Saying this looks like the US is ordering Perv and PakiWakis around. Or am I missing some nuance here?

Show me where I'm wrong - I really want to know. In 2000 words or less, please! :-)

Posted by .com 2004-3-11 9:58:25 AM|| 2004-3-11 9:58:25 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 dot com

Perv has little real support outside the army, and thats limited. He is threatened by the Islamists. The more it appears that hes helping the US against the Taliban, the more certain elements in the population rally around the Islamists. This way he can say - see im NOT helping the Americans, look how mad at me they are. Now if you think anyone in Pakistan who might at all dislike Pak army going after the Taliban is already firmly anti=Perv, then my analysis makes no sense of course.

Posted by Liberalhawk 2004-3-11 1:28:30 PM|| 2004-3-11 1:28:30 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 So we agree (I think) that Perv cannot be seen helping us against Taliban - else it will be acceeding to Wolfie's (angry) charge / assertion that the Pakis owe it to US.

So - where the hell can it go from here that helps US if Perv doesn't fess up to the deal made over Khan? That's what confused me.

But now that's not all that is confusing. Your last sentence is an interesting riddle... I break it down and answer with:
a) the Islamists wouldn't like the Paki Army going after the Taleban
b) and they're not Perv's buddies

Lol! You wanna reword something here?

Posted by .com 2004-3-11 1:43:12 PM|| 2004-3-11 1:43:12 PM|| Front Page Top

13:03 lyot
12:39 Anonymous
12:37 Anonymous
12:36 Anonymous
12:36 Anonymous
12:36 Anonymous
04:00 Howard UK
00:10 .com
00:08 11A5S
23:59 CrazyFool
23:52 CrazyFool
23:42 Anonymous2U
23:42 tu3031
23:39 Anonymous2U
23:39 tu3031
23:36 tu3031
23:24 John F. Kerry
23:21 GK
23:19 Sherry
23:18 tu3031
23:10 Fred
23:09 tu3031
23:03 Aakash
23:00 tu3031