Which Side Is Pakistan On?

The self-evident answer is: It's own.

In looking at the US-NATO-Afghan National Government efforts against Taliban and al-Qaeda, the answer is not so self-evident. Neither is the answer self-evident when considering the larger question of the confrontation between Islamist/jihadist groups and those in opposition.

At least some members of the government in Afghanistan hold Pakistan, specifically the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) responsible for the continued presence and strength of Taliban and al-Qaeda. Beyond that, Sibghatullah Mijaddedi, the Speaker of the Afghan Senate, argued in a speech in New Delhi that "eighty to ninety per cent" of all terrorist attacks world wide can be traced back to camps located in Pakistan. The report can be found on line at http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/000200806012176.htm.

While the Speaker bemoaned the apparent lack of effort on the part of US or NATO forces in his country to neutralise the recruitment depots and training camps located in Pakistan, he leveled his biggest rhetorical guns on the ISI. "The ISI is exporting terrorists trained in their terror camps."

Zeroing in on the situation in Afghanistan, Mijaddedi added, "We are suffering because of the interference of ISI in our country; everyday we lose our people, young and old, indiscriminately."

The Geek leans toward agreement with the Speaker's contentions. ISI, as the US has known for at least twenty years, is riddled with Islamists (to use the accurate term currently frowned upon by various agencies of the US government.) When the Reagan Administration ordered the turn over of our resistance assistance efforts to the Pakistanis, specifically ISI, a major mistake was made.

No. It was worse than a mistake. It was a blunder.

It was also the source of many of our current problems, not only in the "good war" in Afghanistan but elsewhere in the world.

ISI put the Taliban on the map. ISI personnel funneled US money, US provided weapons and equipment and other goodies to the "students" at assorted ISI sponsored and maintained madrassas. ISI provided both military and political guidance to assure the Taliban success in the multi-party internal war which ensued upon the departure of Soviet forces.

After the US backed Northern Alliance did the heavy lifting and major fighting to remove Taliban, ISI kept up its intimate relationship with the remnants of the shattered government. This meant ISI kept its relationship with Taliban's "guest" and ideological soulmate, al-Qaeda.

Over the next six years and despite the pumping of gigabucks into the coffers of the Pakistani military--most of which went to weapons systems notably unuseful in counterinsurgency or counterterrorism--the protective ISI cloak spread over the numerous camps, "charities" and religious institutions which existed and exist only to provide support, assistance and recruits for the varied types of "fighters" who do the dirty work for Taliban, al-Qaeda and akin bodies.

ISI will continue to perform its role of sponsor, facilitator and protector of these jihadists regardless of the nature of the Pakistani government. ISI, like other clandestine services in other states over many, many decades is a power onto itself. The government has (and probably has desired) only the most tenuous of formal authority over ISI.

There is no reason to expect this to change.

One of the most grave deficiencies in whatever passed for planning prior to the invasion of Afghanistan was the failure to properly and effectively appreciate the role of ISI in assuring the survival of Taliban (and al-Qaeda.) It could or at least should not have come as a surprise when American personnel encountered ISI officers in the company of "fugitive" Taliban leaders.

When decisions at the policy level not only allowed the ISI officers to be flown out of Afghanistan but permitted the Taliban figures to board the aircraft as well, the ultimate success of our campaign was placed at risk. Any justification based on the cruciality of Pakistan as an "ally" in the Great Global War on Terror is simply silly.

Even sillier was the initial unwillingness to either strike directly at the camps in North and South Waziristan or, considering our leverage on the Pakistani government five and six years ago, to insist on their military taking less ineffective action. That wouldn't have been a mission impossible. Recall that we were able to lever Musharraf into placing A.Q. Khan under house arrest. (Yes, the Geek knows Khan has recanted his confession.)

We didn't even bother to do an imitation of the Big, Bad Wolf, huffing and puffing, threatening to blow down the house that ISI built.

Now. Get a grip on a companion (or at least contemporaneous) development.

According to Reuters-India the Darool-Uloom Deoband (DUD) seminary, a very conservative Islamist institution controlling many smaller seminaries has issued a fatwa against terrorism. (http://in.reuters.com/article/topNews/idINIndia-33848320080601.)

"Islam rejects all kinds of unjust violence, breach of peace, bloodshed, murder and plunder and does not allow it in any form," or so the DUD rector, Habibur Rehman said.

Yeah. Right.

Regardless of the objective truthfulness of the statement, it and the fatwa are important. India has the third largest Muslim population in the world after Indonesia and Pakistan.

Several other facts are equally important. Officially secular India is overwhelmingly Hindu in religious affiliation and the historical record shows that Hindus can become very fervent slayers of Muslims. Of late there has been a very, very irritating uptick in terrorist actions linked to Muslim actors.

Before we break our arms patting the DUD clerics for their courageous drawing a line in the sand against terrorism, take a closer look at the document.

The fatwa reads in part, "It is proved from clear guidelines provided in the Holy Quran that allegation of terrorism against a religion like Islam, which preaches world peace, is nothing but a lie."

That's not exactly news. It is precisely what many Muslims--including apologists for terror--have been saying throughout the world.

A prominent cleric and leader of a major Islamic group added his own gloss to the fatwa while reading it. "At present, there is a propaganda to equate Jehad with terrorism. Jehad is basically for establishment of peace, which is a fundamental right of human beings. Terrorism, meanwhile, is the gravest crime as held by Quran and Islam.”

In attempting to parse meaningfully between "jihad" (very, very good) and "terrorism" (very, very bad) the cleric, Maulana Qari Sayeed Mohammad Usman, president of Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind, added nothing new. His interpretation has been standard around the world for years now.

If none of this is stop-the-presses hot news, why bother with the fatwa? Wasn't the denunciation of terrorism by the DUD president last February enough?

No.

Undoubtedly the clerics of DUD are well aware that Islamist rooted acts of terror are not going to suddenly halt as a result of the fatwa any more than they did in the wake of the denunciation. The issuance of the fatwa gives Indian Muslims generally and the Islamists of DUD in particular political cover.

The next time a bomb goes off and a group with a jihadist name claims responsibility, the good folks at DUD can foist the blame off to "outside agitators."

Outsiders, like, can we say, ISI?

The long running contretemps between India and Pakistan is grounds enough to find the hand of Islamabad behind any destructive loud noise in India. The intelligence and clandestine service of India is well aware of ISI's involvement with Taliban and al-Qaeda as well as other groups active not only in the disputed Kashmir but throughout India.

ISI will get the blame. Quite possibly it will deserve it.

At least in the dead of night, in a dark room with locked door and drawn drapes, the US should do the same.

Perhaps the US should go further. Perhaps our better interests to say nothing of the interests of the Afghans and even the average Pakistani would be served by showing the new civilian government what we know of ISI's machinations.

We can add, "You can do something about it."

"Or we will."