Held To Ransom

By K Subramanyam

Attacks on supplies show up vulnerability of NATO troops

Yet another convoy carrying essential supplies to the US and NATO forces deployed in Afghanistan has been attacked near Peshawar. This is the second attack in the past week and took place close to the corps headquarters and the provincial capital. These attacks happened when successive visits by the US secretary of state, defence secretary, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and deputy secretary of state were taking place in Islamabad. It appeared as though it was being clearly demonstrated to the US at the highest levels how vulnerable the supply lines to the US and NATO forces deployed in Afghanistan are.

One wonders whether it is a coincidence that this message is being communicated to the US even as General Petraeus is preparing his plans for a surge in Afghanistan with additional US forces. It is possible that the US and international community are being told that they need the Pakistani army’s cooperation for their campaign against the Taliban and therefore there are limits to what the US and its NATO allies can do to curb international terrorism originating from Pakistani soil. Surges of forces and increased missile strikes by the US and NATO forces can be countered by strangulation of supply lines from Karachi port to Kabul. General Petraeus did not face similar problems while sustaining surges in Iraq.

If the US and NATO do not take adequate steps to respond to such devastating attacks on supply convoys it would have an adverse impact on the truck operators leading to further disruptions in the US and NATO logistics. It would also embolden the Taliban to step up its attacks. It would appear that the leadership of the Pakistani army and the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) are testing the will of the incoming Barack Obama administration. The international crisis foreseen by vice-president-elect Joseph Biden within the first 100 days of Obama’s presidency may well prove to be Pakistani disruption of supply lines to US and NATO forces in Afghanistan.

Pakistanis, as evidenced from the pronouncements of their defence minister, are sensitive to the consequences of their being branded as a terrorist state and its impact on their country’s already crippled economy. They should also have taken note of the fact that the resolution in the UN Security Council declaring the Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD) a terrorist organisation did not face any reservations from China and Russia. Even as the Pakistani government nominally accepted the Security Council resolution, the Pakistani army and ISI appear to be testing how the US and NATO would react to the disruption of convoys to Kabul.

The trap they set out to provoke India into a military confrontation on the Operation Parakram model has not worked and therefore they cannot use the Indian alibi not to fulfil their obligations to cooperate with the US and NATO forces in Afghanistan. President Asif Zardari’s pathetic denial that the captured terrorist in Mumbai is not a Pakistani has been rebuffed by the Pakistani media itself. More evidence of Pakistani involvement in the Mumbai terrorist attack will be available not only from Indian but also from US and UK sources, largely from communication intercepts.

In these circumstances Pakistan may try to bargain for being let off the hook on terrorism against India, ask the US and the West to put pressure on India to make concessions in Kashmir and pledge continued large-scale military and civil aid to Pakistan in return for uninterrupted supply lines to Kabul to aid US and NATO operations. The Pakistani army’s interest is not in allowing an early military victory for US and NATO forces. Its interests are served by a prolonged war, which would provide Pakistan aid over a longer period of time. It would also tire US and NATO forces in Afghanistan compelling them to consider the withdrawal option. That will only lead a triumphalist al-Qaeda and its associates — such as the Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammed, Lashkar-e-Taiba and JuD — to step up their Islamist jihad all over the world.

Terrorist cadres recruited for jihad believe that they are destined to win as a civilisation though individually they may become martyrs. The jihadi fanatic poses threats to Russia and China as well. The stabilisation of Afghanistan is in the interest of not just the US, NATO and India but also of Russia, China and Central Asian republics and most of the Islamic world. In this context, the war against terrorism — of which Pakistan is now the epicentre — has become a global war. The attacks on Mumbai, Ahmedabad, Jaipur, Hyderabad and other Indian cities fall into the same category as those on New York, Washington, Bali, Madrid and London and constitute a jihadi offensive against civilised nations and values.

A major mistake was committed in the global war on terrorism by attention being diverted to Iraq. The beneficiaries of this mistake are the supporters of jihadi terrorism. Obama has advocated that Afghanistan and its neighbourhood should receive primary attention in battle against terrorism. The crucial need today is for him to build a coalition including NATO, Russia, China, India and moderate Islamic countries to contain terrorism in the Pakistan-Afghanistan region and then lend global support to Pakistan so that it can salvage its much-mauled democracy.