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
US privately backs Pakistan's 'Sharia law for peace' deal with Taliban
2009-02-19
American officials have privately backed Pakistan's "Sharia law for peace" deal with Taliban militants in the Swat Valley despite publicly criticising it as a "negative development".

The deal, under which Sharia law will be introduced in the Malakhand and Kohistan districts of Pakistan's North West Frontier Province if Taliban militants end their armed campaign in the Swat Valley, has been met with alarm by Nato chiefs and British and American officials.
The only possible good thing is that it brings the Talibs a little more in the open for the Predators. But for everyone living there it's a terrible idea.
Nato fears the deal would create a new "safe haven" for extremists, said a spokesman on Tuesday night, while a statement from Britain's High Commission in Islamabad said: "Previous peace deals have not provided a comprehensive and long-term solution to Swat's problems. We need to be confident that they will end violence, not create space for further violence."

President Barack Obama's special envoy to Pakistan and Afghanistan voiced the greatest concern about the strength of Taliban militants in Swat as he ended his first visit to the region since taking up his post. "I talked to people from Swat and they were, frankly, quite terrified. Swat has really deeply affected the people of Pakistan, not just in Peshawar but in Lahore and Islamabad," he said, while a Defence Department official described the deal as a "negative development".

On Tuesday night however, US officials in Islamabad privately backed the deal as an attempt to drive a wedge between Swat's Taliban, which is focused on its demand for Sharia law, and the al-Qaeda-linked Taliban led by Baitullah Mehsud, the notorious commander who controls much of North and South Waziristan and other tribal areas along the Afghan border.
This is idiocy. al-Qaeda is the hand and the Talibs are the glove ...
While they expressed fears that the deal might yet be sabotaged by some Swat Taliban militants who support al-Qaeda, they said that if successful, the deal would break up the alliance between the two groups, which has caused alarm throughout Pakistan and in Washington.
Explain to me how this works. The Talibs get Sharia. al Qaeda likes that. The Talibs get to rule the area and extort taxes which they share with al Qaeda. The Talibs make everyone grow a beard. al Qaeda hard boyz already wear beards. So far I don't see the split ...
Of the two Taliban groups, Mehsud's is the most feared -- he has been accused of masterminding the assassination of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto and trained Osama bin Laden's son as one of his commanders -- but it is the alliance with Swat Taliban leader Maulana Fazlullah which alarmed Pakistanis in the country's main metropolitan centres.

Fazlullah, who is known as "Maulana Radio" for the illegal FM stations he uses to broadcast his latest fatwas and justify recent Taliban murders, is the son-in-law of Maulana Sufi Muhammad, the leader of Tehrik-e-Nifaz-e-Shariat-e-Mohammadi (TNSM), who once led thousands of militants to fight US forces in Afghanistan. Mr Muhammad has negotiated the Sharia law deal with local government officials and was on Tuesday night meeting Maulana Fazlullah to finalise their ceasefire.

Some senior Pakistan People's Party leaders have privately condemned the deal as "surrender", but government sources last night said it needed to bring peace to the valley, so that girls could return to school and business return to normal.
The girls are going to be war brides and the only businesses are smuggling and gun running.
The valley had a long history of Sharia law, and its introduction was a popular measure among Swat's long-suffering people, they said.
So let's let them suffer some more ...
American officials in Islamabad said they hoped it would divide Fazlullah's Swat Taliban and his father-in-law's TNSM from Baitullah Mehsud's Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). "The strategy has to be to divide the two groups. The TNSM and Baitullah's TTP found some common cause briefly, but a peace deal will separate them," said one US official, who explained that while Mehsud's TTP is part of the global jihad, Maulana Radio is regarded as more focused on local issues and the campaign for Sharia law.
Again, why would anyone think this? The TTP, TNSM and al-Qaeda all think alike. They work together and want the same things. This is all wishful thinking and a combination of White House stoopidity and Hillary/Holbrooke hubris.
One source suggested it reflected the "smart power" thinking outlined by Hillary Clinton in her Senate confirmation hearing as secretary of state.
How smart is it going to be when Pakistain becomes an al-Qaeda client state?
Mehsud's Taliban on Tuesday night appeared unruffled by the prospect of a peace deal in Swat. "If a true Sharia was enforced, we shall fully support it," said Maulvi Omar, a spokesman, adding that the group backed the involvement of TNSM chief Maulana Sufi Muhammad in any deal.
Golly. The cracks are already starting to show. Success!
Posted by:Steve White

#15  Sharia encompasses jihad. Stupid move.
Posted by: Hupise Brown8031   2009-02-19 16:29  

#14  If the Taliban promise to do that and follow through, I'm willing to let them hang on in Afghanistan.

Because the Taliban never, ever lie. Not even when one group of Taliban is working to steal control from another group of Taliban.

But this is about Pakistan, not Afghanistan. For the moment, however distasteful, it is an internal matter for yet another Pakistani government consenting to surrender another portion of the country to another branch of the ISI-created Taliban monster. At this rate, soon enough what is now Pakistan will be merely a conglomerate of Taliban principalities, much too busy fighting one another to send their sons into Afghanistan.

If the locals don't like it, they're going to have to band together to fight back, which doesn't seem to be a Pakistani skill.
Posted by: trailing wife   2009-02-19 14:24  

#13  "All I want is Czechoslovakia."--Adolf Hitler

"All we want is Sharia in Swat." --Taliban

Posted by: mom   2009-02-19 14:02  

#12  Phil B said: Irrespective of AQ - Taliban links, if the Pashtun want Sharia law then why should we care? I certainly don't.

We should care because Sharia wants to own all of us. Sharia is serenely (or more correctly, malevolently) indifferent to the desires of any group or individual.
Posted by: Seafarious   2009-02-19 13:30  

#11  Ebbang hits it out of the park. Also when it comes down to it, think about the poor women and other humans living under Sharia. For shame.
Posted by: Icerigger   2009-02-19 12:40  

#10  The problem is they won't be satisfied with Swat. It won't be long before they start agitating for more liebensraum...or in support of the poor people next door who also want to share in the benefits of sharia...just like the Paks themselves do in Kashmir. Whatever you give them will never be enough.
Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305   2009-02-19 12:19  

#9  I figure they'l be killing each other again in about two weeks when they figure out that one or the other is Not Muslim Enough.
Posted by: tu3031   2009-02-19 09:21  

#8  Let the barbarian death cult have its stupid little valley. Then, if anyone tries to get in or out......shoot them.
Posted by: AlanC   2009-02-19 08:59  

#7  "Nation building" is a US State Department con job. Kill them that needs kill'n, treat the wounded and scram! If they give us trouble in the future... go back and kill them again.
Posted by: Besoeker   2009-02-19 07:34  

#6  This may be a good step to solving our dilemma in Afghanistan. Afghanistan is a logistically untenable position. We need to declare victory and withdraw. The only thing we really care about in Afghanistan is that al-Qaeda doesn't use it as a base to reform. If the Taliban promise to do that and follow through, I'm willing to let them hang on in Afghanistan.

We worked with Stalin to defeat Hitler. That didn't work well for the Russian people, but they chose to stay under the yoke, we didn't impose it. Likewise, if the indigenous peoples of the region want to throw off the Taliban, fine, lwt's help. But let's deal with whomever can keep al-Q out.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2009-02-19 07:14  

#5  Unnamed American officials of unknown rank have privately backed shariah while under influence of unknown quantities of alcohol and other unknown substances.
Posted by: JFM   2009-02-19 04:51  

#4  But does it feel GOOD?
Posted by: newc   2009-02-19 02:38  

#3  Because it's not just about "Napoleonic Code vs. Common Law." It's also a system of taxation, and if the Taliban/Al Qaeda are running _courts_ (which they will, since to them _sharia_ means they get to decide what sharia means and who's good and who's bad), it's probably also a system of conscription.
Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain   2009-02-19 01:00  

#2  Irrespective of AQ - Taliban links, if the Pashtun want Sharia law then why should we care? I certainly don't.
Posted by: phil_b   2009-02-19 00:51  

#1  On Tuesday night however, US officials in Islamabad privately backed the deal as an attempt to drive a wedge between Swat's Taliban, which is focused on its demand for Sharia law, and the al-Qaeda-linked Taliban led by Baitullah Mehsud, the notorious commander who controls much of North and South Waziristan and other tribal areas along the Afghan border.

Hokay. The Swat Talibs want Sharia law imposed and the al-Q Talibs want...something else entirely, such as...oddly, the article doesn't seem to be very curious as to the alky's ultimate goal. Nor, sadly, is the current Administration.

Funny, that.

Posted by: Seafarious   2009-02-19 00:16  

00:00