Submit your comments on this article | ||||
India-Pakistan | ||||
Why Bush was frosty in Pakistan | ||||
2006-03-06 | ||||
![]() The lack of warmth during his interactions with the Pakistani leaders in general and Musharraf in particular stood in sharp contrast with the geniality displayed by the American President during his interactions with everyone, big and small, he met in New Delhi and Hyderabad. Bush's admiration -- which he expressed frequently -- for India, its democracy, its civil society and its people stood in similar contrast with his noticeably pro forma remarks in Islamabad. A US rethink on Musharraf? His words of praise in India were spontaneous and came from his heart. His restrained words of praise in Pakistan were uttered out of politeness by a guest to a host. The change in Bush's demeanour was very striking and took his Pakistani hosts by surprise. The bonhomie that he had displayed towards Musharraf at Camp David two years ago was no longer there. The American president that Musharraf encountered in Islamabad was disturbingly different from the Bush he had met earlier in New York, Washington and Camp David. Even before embarking on his tour of South Asia, Bush had many warm words of praise for Musharraf in the media interviews given and statements made by him at Washington. He even referred to Musharraf as his buddy. What happened between his departure from Washington and his arrival in Islamabad, which led to this change in attitude? Reliable sources in Pakistan and Afghanistan attribute this to the briefings on the ground situation in Afghanistan, which Bush received in Kabul on March 1 from Afghan President Hamid Karzai and his officers, as well as from American military officers. Since the beginning of this year, Afghan Army and intelligence officers had been openly criticising Pakistan for helping the Taliban to stage a comeback in Afghanistan, for giving sanctuaries to Mullah Mohammad Omar and other Taliban leaders and cadres in Pakistani territory and for providing them with training and arms assistance. The Afghans were also pointing out that the majority of the suicide bombers in Afghanistan since the middle of last year were Pakistani nationals. The Afghans also claimed that trained and jihad-hardened Al Qaeda members were being sent by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi from Iraq into Afghanistan through Pakistani territory to help the Taliban. Afghan intelligence officials also said that whereas the jihadi terrorists observed total communication silence while they were in Afghan territory, they resumed communications with each other and with their headquarters once they retreated into Pakistan. This, according to them, reflected their confidence that no action would be taken against them in Pakistan even if their communications were intercepted. During a trip to Pakistan before Bush's visit, President Karzai had brought these reports to Musharraf's notice. The Afghan president had also handed over to Musharraf a summary of these reports prepared by Afghan intelligence officers and a list of Taliban sanctuaries in Pakistani territory. After Karzai returned to Kabul, the Pakistan foreign office spokesman dismissed these reports as unreliable and out of date. In interviews to the BBC and other Western television channels, Musharraf made sarcastic references to these reports as inaccurate and unreliable. Musharraf also alleged that Karzai was trying to cover up the incompetence of Afghan intelligence agencies and security forces by blaming Pakistan. Musharraf's references were reported to have angered Karzai and his officers, who gave Bush a detailed briefing on the Pakistani involvement with the Taliban and Al Qaeda remnants operating in Afghan territory from Pakistan. President Karzai and Afghan Foreign Minister Abdulla Abdulla reportedly accused General Musharraf of insincerity and told President Bush that so long as the Pakistani involvement continued, the ground situation would not improve in Afghanistan. The Afghan briefings were totally corroborated by American field officers in Afghanistan during their separate briefings for Bush. It is said that Bush was taken by surprise and disturbed by the details of the Pakistani involvement. Before his departure from Kabul for New Delhi, he had told the media that President Karzai had mentioned to him about the activities of the Taliban and Al Qaeda from Pakistani territory and that he would be taking this up with Musharraf. This set off some concern in Islamabad, which immediately
In view of the continuing activities of the BLA in Balochistan, the Pakistan Army has not yet been able to move back to Waziristan all the troops it had shifted to Balochistan.
It is said that even Musharraf was shaken up and worried over Bush's security in Islamabad. He reportedly told his officers that they should accept -- without making it a prestige issue -- whatever suggestions their American counterparts had for strengthening Bush's security. In New Delhi, the American officials reviewed the situation and decided that Bush should go ahead with his visit. At the same time, they ordered a number of additional security measures. Bush's plane arrived and took off from Pakistan Air Force's Chaklala airport at night in total darkness -- with all its lights switched off. Pakistan was told that it would not be necessary for Musharraf or Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz to come to the airport to receive or see off Bush since the American officials were afraid that their movement to the airport in their security convoys could alert the terrorists. Bush stayed in the American ambassador's house instead of a local hotel, which had been reserved for him and his party. The American President was taken by the US Air Force in one of its helicopters to the ambassador's house and back as well as to the place of his meeting with Musharraf and back. The air cover over Islamabad was provided by planes and helicopters of the US Air Force based in Afghanistan with officers of the Pakistan Air Force sitting in them to assist the American crew. The Pakistan Air Force was asked to ground all its planes and helicopters till the Bush visit was over. American secret service officers took over all the responsibility for the close-proximity protection of Bush. Their Pakistani counterparts were not kept in the picture. These developments and the additional security measures necessitated by the Karachi explosion reportedly made Bush and his advisers realise how fragile the situation is in Pakistan and how unsatisfactory Musharraf's much-vaunted counter-terrorism operations have been. Another development, which took place even as Bush was in South Asia, contributed to the onset of the disenchantment. Since 9/11, Musharraf has repeatedly reiterated his determination to close down the jihadi madrasas in Pakistan, expel all foreign jihadis studying there and to modernise the curriculum in the madrasas not associated with the jihadi terrorist organisations. He has not implemented any of these commitments under some excuse or the other despite receipt of liberal grants from the US and other Western countries for modernising the education system. The US and the United Kingdom again took this up strongly with Musharraf after the London explosions of July last year.
Just before Bush's visit, the Pakistani interior ministry decided to keep in abeyance the orders expelling the foreign jihadis on the ground that at a time when violent demonstrations were taking place all over the country over the Danish cartoons, the expulsion of the foreign jihadis could further provoke fundamentalist elements. The seriousness with which Bush viewed the situation -- and his stern rebuke to Musharraf -- became evident in the US President's remarks at the press conference in Islamabad jointly addressed by him and the general on Saturday. Bush said part of his mission was to determine whether Musharraf 'is as committed as he has been in the past to bringing these terrorists to justice -- and he is.' 'He understands the stakes, he understands the responsibility and he understands the need to make sure our strategy is able to defeat the enemy,' Bush added. Well-informed Pakistani sources say that for the first time Bush and his advisers have started nursing misgivings about Musharraf's sincerity and his willingness or ability to help the US against Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Has Musharraf outlived his utility for the US as a frontline ally in the war against terrorism? That is the question which must be troubling the minds of Bush and his advisers now. | ||||
Posted by:lotp |
#21 john - I was questioning the credibility NS (sarcastically) gave to our MSM....purely |
Posted by: Frank G 2006-03-06 21:48 |
#20 Pakistan ever needed outside help to brew trouble?!? |
Posted by: trailing wife 2006-03-06 21:23 |
#19 His contacts in Pakistan are unrivaled.. this is a man who used to run spies and forment trouble within Pakistan. |
Posted by: john 2006-03-06 20:12 |
#18 The author is B. Raman, a former Indian spymaster. He has close links with his fellow spooks throughout the world. |
Posted by: john 2006-03-06 20:08 |
#17 *beverage alert*!!! f&*king Spembles... |
Posted by: Frank G 2006-03-06 19:33 |
#16 TW, this is coming from an Indian newspaper and I doubt their media are as objective and factual as ours. |
Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-03-06 19:05 |
#15 This is one of those fights that can be started without us, but I suspect needs us to finish. The tone of this article, though... I find it very hard to believe that, while Rantburgers have been discussing Musharref's double dealing for years, President Bush was unaware until after he landed in Afghanistan. I think he's actually been playing Pakistan, waiting for India to come around. After all, he's had India in his sights since before he started his first run for the Presidency, by all accounts. |
Posted by: trailing wife 2006-03-06 19:02 |
#14 It would not be us who would be dealing with Pakistan but Afghanistan, India and Pakistan's own minorities. |
Posted by: JFM 2006-03-06 17:43 |
#13 JFM, There's nukes in them thar hills. we'll be involved. |
Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-03-06 17:38 |
#12 It would not be us who would be dealing with Pakistan but Afghanistan, India and Pakistan's own minorities. |
Posted by: JFM 2006-03-06 17:36 |
#11 Let's finish with Iran before we go getting Pakistan as an enemy. Every country in south west Asia and north Africa is a potential enemy. It'll be easier if we deal with them serially rather than in parallel. |
Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-03-06 15:49 |
#10 THe problem is that Pakistan is notb a real state. It exists only because of a religion. Were its citizens stop becoming fanatic muslims then part of them would start looking either to India or to Afganistan. It would implode and its elites would lose provileges. That is why from its creation they have pandered to Islamists, have supported the Deobandi inspired madrassas and tried to help them in brainwashing the population. The end result is that Pakistan is a Since Pakistan only reason to exist is opposing India it goes without saying taht it is the structural ennemy of India but it is also a structural ennemy of Afgahnistan both because part of its territor belongs legally to Afghanistan after the expiration of the Durand treaty but also because its conquest or at least its subjugation through a puppet regime (read the Taliban) would greatly increase its strategic depth against India, an obssesion of Pakistani generals. So Pakistan is our ennemy, and it has two other ennemies India and Afghanistan. The ennemy of my ennemy is my friend. Could be a good idea to support Adganistan about those Durand treaty territories. After all I cannot see how Afghan rule on tyhe North Western Frontier Provinces could be worse that Pakistani unrule. I suspect that Afghns would hold them with atighter leah and not allow it to remain a terrorist nest. |
Posted by: JFM 2006-03-06 15:38 |
#9 CA, possible, but. Will he still have access to his nukes? Will the Chinese help him when the newly allied Indians get fed up? Does he really want the Afghan Army to get technical support when they pursue Taliban in hot support? There's a lot of down side for Perv and Pak if they lose our friendship. They'd love to, but they can't. |
Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-03-06 14:47 |
#8 Mushie only goes on the attack when it is policially expedient for him to do so. I predict a hugh build-up in the relationship between the ChiComs and Paki-Waki. |
Posted by: Captain America 2006-03-06 14:08 |
#7 Was W offereing anything or just sending a message? |
Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-03-06 13:49 |
#6 Musharaff is indeed the man in the middle, with everybody gunning for him. Unlike the typical dictator who spends all of his time cultivating his loyal underlings like a mob boss, Musharaff doesn't seem to have as much juice. He can only push so far in any direction before he gets pushed back, and harder than he can push. Were he to have studied his dictator manual better, he would have known that he could never, ever stop reinforcing his position *or* oppressing his enemies. He can never have friends or allies, only those that either work for him, and those he seeks to eliminate. It doesn't matter what Bush offers, beyond a certain point, it doesn't matter, it will neither strengthen Musharraf's hand nor weaken his enemies. The only alternative left to Bush is to do that himself, directly. Which is not easy. |
Posted by: Anonymoose 2006-03-06 13:17 |
#5 back then ... meaning way back then, not 2003 |
Posted by: 2b 2006-03-06 10:56 |
#4 There was a really good article on rantburg around 2003, about the rise of the Taliban and Musharraf was quite the double-dealer back then as well. He's basically a Hillary Clinton. He'll do whatever he needs to do to stay in power. The reason he cooperates with the US is that he uses the power of the US to his advantage. I think that's why he's a bit shook up now. He knows we have the power to keep him in power or get him out. I bet we'll see more cooperation from him now that he realizes the game is going to turn hardball. |
Posted by: 2b 2006-03-06 10:56 |
#3 Interesting article, lotp. "These developments and the additional security measures necessitated by the Karachi explosion reportedly made Bush and his advisers realise how fragile the situation is in Pakistan and how unsatisfactory Musharraf's much-vaunted counter-terrorism operations have been.” It shouldn’t have taken this for us to realize it, but thank God we're coming around. “The madrassas continued to flout his instructions without any action being taken against them.” We're being played. |
Posted by: Jules 2006-03-06 10:48 |
#2 Misunderestimation on Musharraf's part, methinks. Dubya's cowboy boots have steel reinforcements and extra pointy toes. |
Posted by: Seafarious 2006-03-06 10:45 |
#1 Hmmm...could this be nuance? |
Posted by: Grunter 2006-03-06 10:41 |