You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
India-Pakistan
Pakistan could defeat militants in months
2008-09-27
But first, you have to fight them.
For the past six weeks Pakistani troops supported by helicopter gunships, tanks and heavy artillery have begun to drive Taliban militants out of the tribal area of Bajaur.

The action was visible as Cobra helicopters pounded positions outside the village of Tang Khatta, a short distance from Khar, Bajaur's main town, and ground troops fought an hour-long gun battle. Militants have regularly attacked the village compounds with rockets since they were pushed out two weeks ago.

The sound of explosions and machine guns were audible from behind Tang Khatta's thick mud walls as soldiers traded fire with the Taliban across fields hemmed in by barren mountains. The army claims it has killed over 1,000 militants in Bajaur, a place described by commanders as the "centre of gravity of the insurgency".

"The threat from Bajaur radiates in all directions," said Maj Gen Tariq Khan, the commanding officer of the Frontier Corps, a paramilitary force engaged in the bulk of counter-insurgency operations in the tribal areas. "If we dismantle this here and destroy its leadership then 65 percent of militancy will be controlled. If they lose this, they lose everything."

Khar and its surroundings are deserted. Soldiers have taken over the area's numerous schools and nearly a third of Bajaur's one million people have fled the fighting. At Tang Khatta militants took cover in fields of half-harvested maize, caves and dried-up ravines a mile away.

"I wish I could take you there but they are in the nullahs [ravines]," Colonel Javaid Baloch told a group of journalists taken to the village on a visit organised by the military.

But fighting did not all go the army's way. Three officers - one of whom lost both his legs - were seriously injured.

The battle for Bajaur began only after 2,000-3,000 militants overran a paramilitary post at Loi Sam, which the military has not yet retaken. "It was like putting your hand into a wasp's hive," said Maj Gen Khan.

Militants have dug into areas with fox-holes, tunnels and trenches and over 65 troops were killed and 200 wounded. The Taliban have gathered reinforcements from the Waziristan tribal areas. Others are coming from Afghanistan. "We caught 200 crossing the border with rocket launchers from Afghanistan," said Maj Gen Khan, who appeared angry at America's failure to control the frontier. "But there is no such effort to stop them".
It's your frontier. Why don't you control it?
Posted by:Steve White

#9  Civil Wars suck. Killing your own is never easy. Pakistan, even without all the Islamic baggage, is in a world of hurt.
Posted by: Minister of funny walks   2008-09-27 19:53  

#8  Whether Pakistan is up to the task is a big, big question mark.

Sadly, Pakistan will not begin to be up to the task until as a society they decide that it is not only worth doing, but that they themselves must do it, not us as their servants/dupes. They are not anywhere near that point, even if a few of the intelligencia are willing to say that the jihadis are now attempting to conquer Punjabi Pakistan as well as the tribal territories and Afghanistan. I've no idea how to square that circle with the fact that for the nonce we need the transport corridor to Afghanistan even more now that the fight is moving there from Iraq.
Posted by: trailing wife   2008-09-27 13:34  

#7  Counterinsurgency wars are not easy. By this time our military knows quite a bit about successful counterinsurgency efforts from both training and experience. Aghanistan and Pakistan are bundled together. We don't win in Aghanistan unless we control things in Pakistan. That means having the support of the larger population and government of Pakistan, having good intelligence, and isolating the militants (terrorists) from the larger population. This is a tall order. Whether Pakistan is up to the task is a big, big question mark. The Pakistan military shooting at our helicopters is not a good sign of their willingness to do something about their terrorist problems.

To win in Afghanistan and Pakistan, our military has to have the support of our government. Many in our Congress and the main stream media torpedoed the war effort in Vietnam and they would like to torpedo the effort in Afghanistan and Pakistan. We cannot win in these hostile areas if we can't win the hostile areas in the U.S. I remember seeing patent hostility that some of our Democratic Senators showed when they questioned General Petraeus when he testified before Congress. I remember, the moonbat left Soros-backed MoveOn.org referring to General Petraeus as General Betrayus. That is very sad, treacherous, and downright evil. I will remember this traitorous behavior when I vote in the upcoming Presidential election. Despite what BO says, I don't believe that he is ready, able, or has the willingness to address our terrorism problems. So in order to win in Afghanistan and Pakistan, we must win two wars. I never, ever want to see our buildings toppling and our skyline on fire and 3000 of our citizens murdered before our eyes on television.






Posted by: JohnQC   2008-09-27 12:53  

#6  As Fred has pointed out, while the various players are members of different  tribes and thus hate each other, they're in agreement on the broad principles of Pakistain: 1) Hindus are evil and must be put down 2) Sharia is the only natural law 3) Afghanistan is the preserve and pasture of Pakistain and 4) everyone is out to get them. The only questions are how much Sharia and who gets to wear the bejeweled turban. 

So of course the Pak army doesn't want to fight the rubes frontier people. They're cousins. Close cousins.
Posted by: Steve White   2008-09-27 11:38  

#5  "We caught 200 crossing the border with rocket launchers from Afghanistan," said Maj Gen Khan, who appeared angry at America's failure to control the frontier. "But there is no such effort to stop them".

well, since they were returning home, don't you Paks think you have a responsibility here?
Posted by: Frank G   2008-09-27 10:08  

#4  ...another of the smallest books in history - Pakistani Battlefield Victories*.


*occupying the President for Life position does not qualify as a 'battlefield' victory.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2008-09-27 08:33  

#3  Months???? Huh? - They've had 721 months and haven't made visible progress, not that the British did all that much better in roughly two centuries before them, Sir Charles Napier excepted.

Took a few centuries to close the frontier in North America, if Mexico is considered "closed".
Posted by: Halliburton - Asymmetrical Reply Division   2008-09-27 07:56  

#2  Of course Pakistan could beat them in months. They don't want to, there's the catch.
Posted by: gromky   2008-09-27 04:14  

#1  I'll wait to pass judgment on the troop transport trucks, it's those two on point that are not instilling any confidence - is that a bicycle built for two?
Posted by: Last Breath Farm Resident   2008-09-27 03:05  

00:00