| Submit your comments on this article |
| India-Pakistan |
| Pakistan being 'scapegoated' for failure in Afghanistan |
| 2007-03-12 |
| Pakistan is being “scapegoated” in Washington for its failures in the war against terrorism, but lacking here is any recognition of Pakistan’s security concerns or its limitations, according to a commentary published here. Ken Silverstein, who edits the Harper’s Magazine blog ‘Washington Babylon,’ writes that it is now the conventional wisdom in Washington that American efforts to defeat Al Qaeda are being undermined by Pakistan. There are factions within Pakistan’s political and defence establishment, especially in the intelligence agencies, that are sympathetic to the Taliban, and to a lesser extent Osama Bin Laden. He asks: but is Pakistan really to blame for our failures to stomp out Al Qaeda? He quotes former CIA official Michael Scheuer, who told him that one must not look at the world from the same point of view as the United States. “The first duty of any intelligence agency,” he said, “is to protect the national interest. Pakistan is not going to destroy the Taliban because at some point they would like to see the Taliban back in power. They cannot tolerate a pro-Indian, pro-American, pro-Russian, pro-Iranian government in Afghanistan. They already have an unstable Western border and have to worry about a country of one billion Hindus that has nuclear bombs.” According to Silverstein, that point was echoed by a second retired CIA official, who said, “The United States has never recognised the essential security concerns of Pakistan, which are on its eastern border. India can be in Islamabad in three days. We tell them India would never do that, but they have fought three wars against India. Pakistan cannot be put in a position where it might have to fight a war on two fronts, from India and Afghanistan.” Silverstein maintains that the conduct of the Pakistani intelligence agency has been a source of concern, and not without reason. It has “a strong radical Islamist influence due in part to its primary role in protecting Pakistan from India, a conflict framed in religious terms”. Furthermore, the agency has a heavy contingent of Pashtuns, the same tribe that is the Taliban’s base of support across the border in Afghanistan. Partly because of its family, clan, and business ties to the Taliban, the agency, even more than Pakistani society in general, “became increasingly enamoured of radical Islam”. |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #3 RJ, 8-) |
| Posted by: Glolurong Jones1696 2007-03-12 13:28 |
| #2 Well, you're not a scapegoat if you're actually guilty of the charge. Then you're just the enemy. |
| Posted by: Spot 2007-03-12 08:09 |
| #1 You DO know the desired end of Scapegoats? Don't you? |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2007-03-12 05:55 |