Pakistan: You May Want to Notice This

The story only gets one paragraph in The New York Times, and I haven't seen it elsewhere in US and British newspapers:

Thousands of antigovernment protesters demanded Thursday that Pakistan shut the route along which supplies are ferried to American and NATO forces in Afghanistan. The demonstration, staged by more than 10,000 people in the city of Peshawar, also focused on a recent series of American missile strikes against targets suspected of belonging to Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Pakistan’s tribal areas. Leaders of the demonstration drew links between the missile attacks and the supply line, saying the equipment was being used for attacks on Pakistani soil and vowing to shut down the convoys.

So now it's not just "Taliban", attacking NATO warehouses and destroying hundreds of trucks, who are threatening the US-led supply operation for the forthcoming "surge" in Afghanistan. (Take note, Washington Post, which is still catching up with that story.)

And why might thousands of demonstrators in Pakistan take to the streets against the US/NATO campaign in Afghanistan? Before you say "extremism", "Taliban sympathiser", etc., consider:

A deadly United States military raid on a house near Afghanistan’s border with Pakistan became a new source of tension on Thursday, with the Americans calling it a successful counterterrorism strike and the Afghans saying it left three innocent civilians dead and two wounded.

Iraq and Al-Qa'eda: Bush's Grand Strategy --- "So What?"

Perhaps the most interesting idea on fighting the "War of Terror" was the "flypaper effect": invade a country so all the terrorists would flock to it and then you could easily whip them.

Turns out that this was President Bush's grand strategy on "how to protect the American people", as he explained in a Farewell Interview to ABC's Martha Raddatz on Monday:

[youtube]http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=iCW-Su2NG2w&eurl=http://crooksandliars.com/[/youtube]

Update: Pakistan and Al Qa'eda --- How Not to Cover the News

Only a couple of hours ago I blogged on the UN report warning of the extended reach of the Pakistani group Lashkar-e-Taiba and wrote, "The misleading read of this report would be that LeT is now a branch of Al Qaeda."

Step up, Daily Telegraph, which begins its story:

Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the [United States] joint chiefs of staff, said members of the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and other Pakistan groups were able to operate at a much higher level.

War on Terror Strategy: Let's Make Stuff Up

In today's Washington Post, Richard Clarke, formerly Counter-terrorism Coordinator under Presidents Clinton and George W. Bush, takes on the War on Terror in a different way: instead of considering the present, he projects the future.

Clarke, who left the Bush Administration in 2002, later said --- in publication and before the 9-11 Commission --- that Bush and advisors paid little attention to the terrorist threat before September 2001 because they were focused on a showdown with Iraq. After 11 September, they got that showdown in part by creating a fantasy alliance between Iraq and Al-Qa'eda.

So it is hyper-ironic that Clarke, to advise the US where to strike next, creates a fantasy alliance between Al-Qa'eda, the Taliban, other Pakistani insurgent groups, and elements of the Pakistani Government:



Perhaps the leaders of al-Qaeda, the Taliban movement that is again on the march in Afghanistan and some Pakistani terrorist groups obsessed with Kashmir [will] also come together...in a safe house owned by a sympathetic retired Pakistani leader of the country's powerful and shadowy military intelligence agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate (ISI).

Clarke the Clairvoyant then creates a conversation led by Osama bin Laden and joined by Taliban leader Mullah Omar, "Hakimullah Mehsud, a leader of a Pakistani group also known as the Taliban" (which, to say the least, is a bit confusing for the reader), "the red-bearded Sayeed" of the Pakistan-based militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba, and Al Qa'eda Number Two Ayman al-Zawahiri.

The climax of the discussion?

Bin Laden raises his head, and a wry smile passes briefly over his face. "[Obama's] economy is badly ill. If it gets much worse, he will have to bring all of his troops home. So . . . we may have to increase their pain level. We have done that before."

While I love a good story, I wouldn't have recommended, say, Tom Clancy as a guide for dealing with the Soviets in the Cold War or J.K. Rowling as a blueprint for my children to make it through school. And so Clarke's made-up intelligence of "reports that al-Qaeda has created joint fighting units with the Taliban, which are attacking U.S. bases in Afghanistan from their sanctuary inside Pakistan" --- and the judgement of the editorial staff of The Washington Post --- should be shelved under Fantasy.

Why? Because such imaginary wanderings disregard the complexities of the local and regional situation. One could make the argument that Al Qa'eda --- as strategist, as planner, and even as ideological leader --- is now peripheral. Other groups, drawing their inspiration from conflicts closer to home --- the de facto civil wars in Afghanistan and possibly in Pakistan, the unresolved and still destabilising "grey areas" such as Kashmir --- are waging their battles.

Why? Because Clarke's response to those battles is the snap recommendation that drops a bomb on any consideration of those issues:

We must now eliminate the new terrorist safe haven in Pakistan. But that will require effective action from a weak and riven Pakistani government.

Since unilateral US actions against the "safe haven" are likely to weaken and possibly fragment the "weak and riven" Pakistani government, it's a self-fulfilling fantasy. No one will be safer, but Mr Clarke can return with a sequel to his fantastic tale next year, offering us more "terrorists" in lieu of any thought of how to deal with the causes behind that terrorism.

Fact x Importance = News (Dec 1)

Mumbai has dominated the news, but what other stories have we been reading?:

• 'Al-Qaeda' has switched its focus from Iraq to Pakistan.


• Some al-Qaeda supporters are unhappy with the international media's pro-Obama bias.


• Vladimir Putin may be considering a return to the presidency.


• Meanwhile Russian warships have been deployed to the Caribbean for the first time since the end of the Cold War, as guests of Venezuela.


• And a Russian investigator claims that Georgia employed foreign female mercenary snipers during last summer's conflict.


• Fewer than 1% of airline passengers singled out by TSA screeners for suspicious behaviour are arrested.