6/01/09

Over a month has passed since Pakistani insurgents moved within 70 miles of Islamabad, posing what Richard Holbrooke described as an “extreme test,” not just for Pakistan’s government, but for the U.S. as well.  Since then Pakistan’s government has mounted a serious response aimed at quelling the insurgency, moving military forces to drive out opposition forces from the Northwest frontier, including the extremist den in South Waziristan.  The overall results of the offensive are not yet clear, and for gains to be solidified, steps must be taken to alleviate emerging displacement crisis that has already impacted roughly 2.4 million people.  Still, the government’s action should be seen as a step forward in the struggle against extremists operating in the region.  This breakthrough follows months of sustained pressure from the Obama administration on the Pakistani government to take action – coupled with new economic and political support for Pakistan’s civilian government and the rule of law.  In stark contrast to the Bush administration’s lax and inattentive approach, President Obama and his national security team have made Pakistan a top priority and begun to work toward a comprehensive strategy.  

However, long term challenges remain, as military action will only accomplish so much. It is essential that the Obama administration continue to pursue a comprehensive strategy – including protecting and helping the populations in affected areas and strengthening the capacity of Pakistan’s civilian state -- in order to permanently root out the militants.

Progress appears to be made against Pakistan’s insurgency.  “For the past month, the [Pakistani] military has been pressing an offensive against Taliban militants who had taken over the Swat Valley, north of Islamabad, the capital. On Sunday, a day after the military reported that it had taken the valley’s biggest city, Mingora, from the Taliban, Pakistani officials said the campaign could be over in a matter of days,” writes the New York Times.  The Pakistani military has also expanded its battle to a second front in Waziristan, which has long been a hotbed for Taliban activity directed both at Pakistan and U.S. forces in Afghanistan.  The Times reports today that “The latest fighting followed exchanges of fire starting late Saturday between militants and the Pakistani military in South Waziristan, which the government has said will be the next front in its offensive. Twenty-five militants were killed in those clashes, the Pakistan military said.” According to Karen DeYoung, the offensive in Swat offered “potential new opportunities to ferret out and target the extremists,” sparking “a new sense of possibility amid a generally pessimistic outlook for the conflict in Afghanistan and Pakistan.”  In addition, DeYoung reports that the Swat offensive “also poses a dilemma for al-Qaeda, a senior military official said. "They're asking themselves, 'Are we going to contest' " Taliban losses, he said, predicting that al-Qaeda will "have to make a move" and undertake more open communication on cellphones and computers, even if only to gather information on the situation in the region. "Then they become more visible," he said.” [NY Times, 5/31/09. NY Times, 6/1/09. Washington Post, 6/1/09]

While the military offensive appears to have had initial success, it has displaced millions  and the final outlook is still uncertain.  As the New York Times writes, “The campaign has displaced about three million people, and refugees coming out of Swat during the lifting of a curfew on Sunday said that many people remained stuck in the valley without food, water and electricity.” Additionally, “International Red Cross officials are ‘gravely concerned’ about the stark situation in Pakistan's Swat Valley, where a month long offensive against the Taliban has displaced more than 2 million civilians.”  The New York Times writes, “The mass migration of residents out of Swat is Pakistan’s largest since the country was partitioned from India more than 60 years ago, and it has added to concerns over security and the government’s capacity to provide immediate relief to the displaced.” According to the Washington Post, the Obama administration “has contributed $110 million to assist Pakistanis displaced by the Swat fighting, and President Obama is dispatching special envoy Richard C. Holbrooke there this week to assess the situation.”Excessive optimism is likely premature. Despite assertions from Pakistani military officials that “‘only 5 to 10 percent of the job is remaining’ and that the pockets of resistance would be cleared in two to three days,” the New York Times notes that “the areas have been largely off limits to reporters, and it has been impossible to corroborate assertions by the military, which have been overly optimistic in the past.” Additionally, General Petraeus explained that more than just military action is needed. “It was very clear in discussions with everyone, from President Zardari through the other members of the delegation that there’s an understanding that this does have to be a whole-of- government approach — in other words, not just the military but all the rest of the elements of government supporting the military — so that they can reestablish basic services, repair the damage that is inevitably done by the bombardment of these areas in which the Taliban are located, and to take care of the internally displaced persons. And there’s an enormous effort ongoing in that regard, our State Department, other countries, all trying to help the U.N., which is the agency on the front lines there, trying to take care of these refugees that are streaming out of the Swat Valley.” [NY Times, 5/31/09. CNN, 5/31/09 NY Times, 6/1/09. Washington Post, 6/1/09. NY Times, 6/1/09. General David Petraeus, 5/10/09]

Pakistan’s action against the insurgency followed weeks of deliberate, firm pressure by the Obama administration.  Despite Pakistan’s geopolitical and security importance, the Bush administration never developed a comprehensive policy towards the region. This neglect failed to spur Pakistan to address an intensifying threat from terrorists and insurgents, dramatically illustrated in April, when “Pakistan's Taliban seized control of another district in the country's northwest just 70 miles from the capital after consolidating their hold on the Swat Valley.” Since that time, the Obama administration has heightened the focus on Pakistan, working toward an overall strategy that uses a combination of pressure and incentives to induce a response from Pakistan’s government. In April, before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testified to the stakes in Pakistan: "I think that the Pakistani government is basically abdicating to the Taliban and to the extremists." CENTCOM commander General David Petraeus echoed Clinton’s remarks, prodding Pakistan’s leaders to “focus on the looming threat posed by extremists within their borders, instead of their rivalry with India,” reported the Associated Press. On the security side, the Wall Street Journal reports that the U.S. will send “Special Forces teams into one of Pakistan's most violent regions as part of a push to accelerate the training of the Pakistani military and make it a more effective ally in the fight against insurgents there.”  The Administration also offered new support to Pakistan’s civilian leaders, beginning with Secretary Clinton’s intervention to end a standoff and restore Pakistan’s chief justice – a key demand of the political opposition – and  Special Representative Richard Holbrooke stressing that the President “unambiguously supports” Pakistan’s elected government.  The Administration made a new commitment to civilian aid at the Tokyo donor’s conference last April, where the U.S. pledged $1 billion to “strengthen economic growth and stability through agriculture, education, health, poverty alleviation, and energy,” according to CNN.  [GAO, 4/17/08. WSJ, 4/23/09. Secretary of State Clinton, 4/22/09. AP, 4/27/09. Special Representative Richard Holbrooke, 5/06/09. CNN, 4/17/09. WSJ, 5/16/09]

What We’re Reading

North Korea put a long-range missile on its launch pad.  South Korean sources speculate that the launch could come when South Korea’s president meets with President Obama on June 16.  South Korea shifts from its previous conciliatory stance on North Korea.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected U.S. calls for a West Bank settlement freeze.  The U.S. weighs its response.

Six people were killed in fighting between the Palestinian Authority and Hamas in the West Bank.

Cuba agreed to resume immigration talks with the U.S.

Pakistani forces cleared the Taliban from the main city of Mingora in Swat Valley.  Today they fight Taliban forces on two fronts.

The Jalrez Valley in Afghanistan, where U.S. efforts have reduced violence while improving services and creating jobs, is an important test case for President Obama’s Afghanistan policy.

The proposed future U.S. commander in Afghanistan, Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, will face his confirmation hearing tomorrow.  The New York Times editorial board has some questions for him.

South Ossetia elected its own parliament, another step away from Georgian rule.

Commentary of the Day

Bill Powell profiles Kim Jong Un, poised to be Kim Jong-il’s successor.

Clive Crook discusses the problems of international aid bureaucracy in Afghanistan.  

Tim McGirk looks at the problems that Prime Minister Netanyahu’s rejection of the settlement freezes causes for President Obama.

George McGovern argues for cutting the defense budget and investing in U.S. infrastructure.