Replies

The Guns of August . . .

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-alqaeda20jul20,1,47411.story?track=rss

Al Qaeda widespread in Pakistan

Anti-terrorism officials and experts say a U.S. report incorrectly focuses on the group’s strength in border areas.

By Josh Meyer, Times Staff Writer
July 20, 2007 (excerpted)

WASHINGTON — Al Qaeda has strongholds throughout Pakistan, not just in the areas bordering Afghanistan that were emphasized in a terrorism assessment this week, according to U.S. intelligence officials and counter-terrorism experts who say Osama bin Laden’s network is more deeply entrenched than described.

The National Intelligence Estimate on the Terrorist Threat to the U.S. Homeland, which reflects the consensus of all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies, described Al Qaeda as having “regenerated key elements” and freely operating from bases in northwestern Pakistan. But several officials and outside experts interviewed since the document’s release this week say the situation is more problematic. These analysts said the Bush administration was blaming Al Qaeda’s resurgence too narrowly on an agreement that the Pakistani government struck in September with militant tribal leaders in the country’s northwest territories.

In recent years, U.S. intelligence and counter-terrorism officials who focus on South Asia say they have watched with growing concern as Al Qaeda has moved men, money and recruiting and training operations into Pakistani cities such as Quetta and Karachi as well as less populated areas. Militant Islamists are still a minority in Pakistan, commanding allegiance of a little more than 10% of the population, judging by election results. But Al Qaeda has been able to widen its sway throughout the country by strengthening alliances with fundamentalist religious groups, charities, criminal gangs, elements of the government security forces and even some political officials, these officials said.

Bin Laden’s network also has strengthened ties to groups fighting for control of Kashmir, most of which is held by India, a broadly popular cause throughout Pakistan that has the backing of the government and military. “It is a much bigger problem than just saying it is a bunch of tribal Islamists in the fringe areas,” said Bruce Riedel, a South Asia expert who served at the CIA, National Security Council and Pentagon and retired last year after 30 years of counterterrorism and policymaking experience. . .

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/08/10/pakistan.nuclear/index.html

Sources: U.S. assessing Pakistan nukes if Musharraf falls

From Barbara Starr
CNN Washington Bureau (excerpted)

WASHINGTON (CNN) — U.S. military intelligence officials are urgently assessing how secure Pakistan’s nuclear weapons would be in the event President Gen. Pervez Musharraf were replaced as the nation’s leader, CNN has learned. . .

The current review is a result of recent developments in that country, including the prospect that Musharraf could still declare a national emergency that would give him sweeping powers. Although the Pakistani government ruled out the declaration Thursday, the three sources told CNN that the United States thinks Musharraf may still impose those measures. . .

The United States has full knowledge about the location of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons, according to the U.S. assessment. But the key questions, officials say, are what would happen and who would control the weapons in the hours after any change in government in case Musharraf were killed or overthrown.

Musharraf controls the loyalty of the commanders and senior officials in charge of the nuclear program, but those loyalties could shift at any point, officials say. The United States is not certain who might start controlling nuclear launch codes and weapons if that shift in power were to happen.

There is also a growing understanding according to the U.S. analysis that Musharraf’s control over the military remains limited to certain top commanders and units, raising worries about whether he can maintain control over the long term. The U.S. officials also say one of the key problems for the U.S. military is what restrictions on U.S.-Pakistani military cooperation could be imposed if Musharraf were to impose heavy security restrictions in his country.

http://www.carlisle.army.mil/usawc/Parameters/03spring/malik.htm

The China Factor in the
India-Pakistan Conflict

MOHAN MALIK

From Parameters, Spring 2003, pp. 35-50.

(excerpted)

War Scenarios

It is said that each conflict simply prepares the ground for the next one or every war contains the seeds of another. The Afghan War of the 1980s against the Soviet occupation culminated in the war on terrorism in 2001. Whether the war on terrorism will lead to another war or a clash of civilizations or a nuclear jihad in South Asia, only time will tell. Pakistan is, in the words of former Italian Foreign Minister Gianni De Michelis, “the fuse of the world.” . . .

One Chinese national security analyst argues that “what worries China more is the possibility that it could be drawn into a conflict, not between Pakistan and India per se, but between Pakistan and the United States, with the latter using India as a surrogate.”48 With the top al Qaeda and Taliban leadership fleeing into Pakistan’s Wild West and Pakistani-held Kashmir, Beijing knows full well that Pakistan is no longer the “frontline state” in the war on terrorism that it once was; it is, in fact, the battlefield in the war on terror.49 Should the India-Pakistani conflict escalate into a nuclear one, neither the geopolitical nor the radioactive fallout will remain limited to South Asia. Indeed, the most worrisome scenario would be one where Pakistan is losing a conventional conflict and uses tactical nuclear weapons in a desperate effort to win or to salvage a face-saving defeat that would allow the regime to survive. (The risk-taking nature of the Pakistani military leadership suggests that such a scenario cannot be completely ruled out.) Should India respond by launching strategic nuclear strikes resulting in the complete destruction of the Pakistani state, China would find it difficult to sit idly by.

The next India-Pakistan war also could bring the United States and Pakistan on a collision course, with or without India acting as a US partner. Such a development would obviously present China with difficult choices. Open support for its closest ally would jeopardize China’s relations with the United States and India. But nonintervention on Pakistan’s behalf could encourage India to solve “the Pakistan problem” once and for all, with or without a nuclear exchange, and thereby tilt the regional balance of power decisively in its favor. . .

Should post-Musharraf Pakistan disintegrate or be taken over by Islamic extremists, a new level of instability would rock the region and increase tensions among Pakistan, India, and China. Another dreadful scenario is one in which Chinese-made Pakistani nuclear weapons fall into the hands of the United States, Israel, or even India in the event of a civil war should al Qaeda or the Taliban declare jihad against Pakistan—the weakest ally in the US-led anti-terrorism coalition.51 India would be tempted to militarily intervene in Pakistan if Islamists gain control over the nuclear weapons of its neighbor, either through a coup or civil war.52 Such a scenario could reveal information regarding China’s own nuclear program and the extent of help provided by Beijing to Islamabad. The scenario of Pakistan in splinters, with one piece becoming a radical Muslim state in possession of nuclear weapons, can no longer be simply rejected as an alarmist fantasy. . .

In the final analysis, Beijing’s response to the next India-Pakistan war will be shaped by its desire to protect Chinese national interests, no matter what the cost. Geostrategic concerns require China to covertly side with Pakistan, while publicly calling for restraint by both sides and appearing to be even-handed. In the triangular power balance game, the South Asian military balance of power is neither pro-India nor pro-Pakistan, it has always been pro-China. And Beijing will take all means possible, including war, to ensure that the regional power balance does not tilt in India’s favor. . .