The Monster Under The Bed: The Bush Administration’s 11th Hour Unilateral Pakistan Policy
It’s happened twice in recent days – two US incursions into the Pakistani Province of Waziristan, both denied by the United States. The first involved two US helicopters that were, according to Pakistani sources, fired upon, and which returned to Afghan airspace without returning fire. The second incident involved a US drone that reportedly crashed in Southern Waziristan yesterday according to the Pakistani media.
Despite the recent attack on the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad, the Pakistani government’s position regarding the sanctity of its sovereignty remains unaltered – Pakistani forces will use force to repel operations by foreign militaries emanating from Afghanistan. While the attentions of many in the United States, and elsewhere, are focused on the current economic crisis, the potentially catastrophic game that is being played by the Bush Administration has been flying under the radar.
As Robert Baer, a former CIA field officer, pointed out in a recently article for Time…
“As Wall Street collapsed with a bang, almost no one noticed that we’re on the brink of war with Pakistan. And, unfortunately, that’s not too much of an exaggeration. On Tuesday, the Pakistan’s military ordered its forces along the Afghan border to repulse all future American military incursions into Pakistan. The story has been subsequently downplayed, and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, Mike Mullen, flew to Islamabad, Pakistan’s capital, to try to ease tensions. But the fact remains that American forces have and are violating Pakistani sovereignty.
You have to wonder whether the Bush administration understands what it is getting into. In case anyone has forgotten, Pakistan has a hundred plus nuclear weapons. It’s a country on the edge of civil war. Its political leadership is bitterly divided. In other words, it’s the perfect recipe for a catastrophe.”
[…]
“U.S. forces have been entering Pakistan for the last six years. But it was always very quietly, usually no more than a hundred yards in, and usually to meet a friendly tribal chieftain. Pakistan knew about these crossings, but it turned a blind eye because it was never splashed across the front page of the country’s newspapers. This has all changed in the last month, as the Administration stepped up Predator missile attacks. And then, after the New York Times ran an article that U.S. forces were officially given the go-ahead to enter Pakistan without prior Pakistani permission, Pakistan had no choice but to react.
On another level the Bush Administration’s decision to step up attacks in Pakistan is fatally reckless, because the cross-border operations’ chances of capturing or killing al Qaeda’s leadership are slim. American intelligence isn’t good enough for precision raids like this. Pakistan’s tribal regions are a black hole that even Pakistani operatives can’t enter and come back alive. Overhead surveillance and intercepts do little good in tracking down people in a backward, rural part of the world like this.
On top of it, is al-Qaeda worth the candle? Yes, some deadender in New York or London could blow himself up in the subway and leave behind a video claiming the attack in the name of al-Qaeda. But our going into Pakistan, risking a full-fledged war with a nuclear power, isn’t going to stop him.”
What has shocked me more than anything is the fact that reports of a three-phase plan, approved at the highest level of government, have gone completely overlooked. According to an article published by NPR on the 13th of this month, President Bush himself gave the green light to the plan, which includes the use of Predator Drones and US Special Operations Forces to strike targets within Pakistan. One of the first actions taken under this new strategy was a raid by US Navy Seals in which civilians were killed. Further, it has been reported that CIA personnel from various parts of the world are being deployed along the Afghan-Pakistan frontier in an attempt to produce an ‘intelligence surge’ to aid in the selection of cross-border targets.
In the end, the reality, as Baer pointed out, is that the United States is willfully ignoring the sovereignty of Pakistan. Given that, it is empowering both the Pakistani military and local militants to support an aligned cause – the repulsion of foreign military incursions.
Given that President Bush has mere months left in office, the risk of sparking something disastrous is only bolstered by his administration’s repeatedly proven track record of outright stupidity. And while the condemnation of Iran continues to attract more international attention, the fact that the United States is goading a nuclear power is certainly something that should not be excused as Republican political necessity with regards to making an 11th hour attempt to kill or capture high level al-Qaeda figures to feebly justify the administration’s mistakes.
Want to bookmark or share this entry?
This entry was posted on Wednesday, September 24th, 2008 at 1:04 pm. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

September 24th, 2008 at 1:46 pm
This is a complex subject for a neophyte at geopolitics like me – thanks for laying the issues out so clearly. But is the right hand [the Bush administration] not talking to the left [the US military] or is this total disrespect of international law intentional?
Strike One: In his recent (and final) speech to the UN, Bush declares the ‘war on terrorism’ to be “the greatest threat to our civilization”, stating it as a top priority ahead of dealing with the disruption of the global economy and the global hunger crisis.
Strike Two: He goes on to criticize Russia for its August invasion of Georgia quoting the “The United Nations’ charter sets forth the equal rights of nations large and small, even though the US 2003 decision to invade Iraq was made without proper authority.
Strike Three: And now he allows two ‘illegal’ incursions into the Pakistani province of Waziristan?
In what court of law could Bush possibly be tried, sentenced and punished for this?
September 24th, 2008 at 1:55 pm
U.S. military, once again, managed to shoot some civilians in Afghanistan. Let us all applaud their effort.
As far as I know, Pakistani officials refused FBI’s helping hand in investigation of Marriott Hotel bombing.
The policy is unilateral. No doubt about it. A somewhat lengthy article in Washington post, In Hunt for Bin Laden It follows the U.S. number one target pursuit. It came out Sep. 10 - I think that is the date of the official unilateral go ahead (?)
It does come up with at least one worthy point: “Unless you have people who support you, human intelligence will never work”
September 24th, 2008 at 2:01 pm
Pakistan is one of the policy domains where Obama makes me very nervous. He said last year: “The first step must be getting off the wrong battlefield in Iraq, and taking the fight to the terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan.”
http://www.barackobama.com/2007/08/01/the_war_we_need_to_win.php
September 24th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
[quote comment="66284"]Pakistan is one of the policy domains where Obama makes me very nervous. He said last year: “The first step must be getting off the wrong battlefield in Iraq, and taking the fight to the terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan.”
[/quote]
Yes, I also heard him say at an interview, but only once and I couldn’t find it in any articles (so maybe it is all in my head), that he will fully expect Canada to stay there for as long as the U.S. stays there. That statement, along with vague NAFTA “treatment” is just a little scary.
On a more cynical note: Currently, U.S. troops are more involved in killing civilians in Afghanistan than anyone else, does that mean that U.S. will be fighting its own troops?
September 24th, 2008 at 3:53 pm
SO important indeed!!
I’m skeptical to think this possibly could be an attempt to enact the PDD 51 policy???
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070509-12.html
McCain is wanting to post-pond the debate on friday now and these bastards that want
a free hand out from Mommy ,want total immunity. Section 8 of the legislation reads
“Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.”
Paulson would become the most powerful unelected official in the history of the USA.
Strange indeed! …..
September 24th, 2008 at 4:20 pm
[quote comment="66279"]
In what court of law could Bush possibly be tried, sentenced and punished for this?[/quote]
Sadly, none. The US currently recognizes no court of law unless is suits US interests.
Was it Nixon who said America has no friends, only interests?
September 24th, 2008 at 5:43 pm
So … is the Wall Street collapse the distraction away from a war with Pakistan, or …
is the war with Pakistan the distraction away from Wall Street?
So many catastrophes, I can’t tell which is which anymore.
September 24th, 2008 at 8:09 pm
[quote comment="66320"]So … is the Wall Street collapse the distraction away from a war with Pakistan, or …
is the war with Pakistan the distraction away from Wall Street?
So many catastrophes, I can’t tell which is which anymore.[/quote]
Don’t it make you want to lay down and close your eyes?
September 24th, 2008 at 11:17 pm
The Administration could as easily pretend to have killed as many Al Qaeda leaders as they please and nobody could prove otherwise. So I doubt that is their main intention. Perhaps they intend to shake up the Pakistani government into a more pro-US role by destabilizing it.