washington switches to new policies,war stretches to pakistan

Decision by Iraqi cabinet that has set date for departure of America with Washington consent signals tectonic shift in USA policies and its approach on "war against terrorism".
though it has not been unexpected one .long before election obama criticized war in iraq as diversion from Afghanistan and said that war in iraq was war of choice not of necessity.this transition of policy being adopted in Washington power corridors simply means that sphere of war is now closing in to Afghanistan and tribal areas of Pakistan.
USA is actively on the chessboard of Afghanistan again but its key player pakistan's fragile political infrastructure,tanking economy,crumbling security situation and spiking insurgency along its western borders and frontier province has raised doubts of its sincerity in the minds of its establishment and thinktanks.
would Pakistan be able to accommodate this thrust of policy?could it offer blind assistance to USA. According to me ,if Pakistan administration fails to response as anticipated then the option has always been present for USA in the form of India,possible cooperation that musharraf had advocated as the reason for joing the hands of west in the war against terrorism in the past is shaping again.
Indian influence,though remained obscure but acted behind the scene.during last seven years Indian companies have established their strong footings,helped to build ring road as an alternate route to gwadar,built infrastructure,enhanced its work force and diplomatic troops and even forged ties with few factions of Taliban.If USA goes this way then the guns are likely to be turned against Pakistan sooner than later.
This way of pressing Pakistan would not yield anything or help counterinsurgency measure rather aggravate the crisis in Afghanistan and its effects now are likely to be felt in whole region.
There are palpable flaws in America strategic approach and counterinsurgency measures.
Sir frank kitson is renowned military author and no living soldier in west had more counterinsurgency experience than him.Mr kitson observes in one of his account that "defeating terrorist or insurgent consist largely in founding them ,garnering accurate and timely information that can only be achieved through winning trust of local population who support the insurgent tacitly or actively"
USA approach has entirely been anti-thesis of this,its aerial raids in afghanistan or incursion in Pakistan resulting in killing of civilian particularly children and women has further alienated the general population.

American establishment has completely overlooked the fact that geography and tribal loyalities has shaped the history of this region than any foreign force.administration in Washington expects from Pakistan to convince or force tribal elders where necessarily to cooperate with USA and NATO to quell insurgency but these moves are to be based on sound heart and mind winning strategies not with the use of force and fail in longterm as people see USA,Taliban and alqaeda through the same prism,as all of them have disrupted the serenity and peace of their area.
This will be rhetoric to neglect the clout of print and electronic media as it was substaintiated by recent presidential polls where people of USA swept the way where media wanted them too.western media highly biased attitude bringing pakistan nearly equal to countries like somalia is harbinger of nothing something positive.

There seems complete ignorance of USA media and excitable politician when Pakistan is animated as country whose nuclear arsenals could be seized anytime by radicalist.these rumormongers completely overlook the fact that though Pakistan ruling may be divided in its ambition but are against these extremist and resurgent who could destroy their wealth and monopoly over the country.west must understand that Pakistani nation is against these orthodox ideas of extremist not based on their cliché of modernity but their adherence to social values and local traditions

Pakistan is viewed as country whose military and intelligence are creating trouble by both Mr.Karzai and USA.pakistani security establishment was vilified for having relationship with Taliban and Afghan president blamed Pakistan for colluding with Taliban to create instability in his country.In fact this was an attempt to distract world community from the real challenges like growing opium-trade,rising influence of drug and warlord and weakning of central government that Karzai had been failed to address.Unexpected statement came, when this week karazai went far end by saying that he will not contest presidential election if USA did not provide amnesty to molvi umer if he did agree to talk with current regime.

If this is the credibility and dual standard of Mr.Karazai then how one can expect from us that we would slain our strategic goal and will sit silently when our energy needs are not met while USA make deal with India,how Pakistan can digest the "strategic and economic base"which India has established,though there has been rapprocation in few last year but we have fought three full scale wars with it. Pakistan military and civil establishment has deep reservation against prejudice being directed at us and surely these are justified one's.USA will leave Afghanistan sooner or later as we learn from history, it went to such adventures in korea,Vietnam and iraq, that were all carried away from its own shores. It doesnot mean pakistan wants any confronation with india but leaving behind a country virtually with Indian hegemony will be nightmare for us.

these rampant incursions in Pakistan territory resulting in killing of civilian,whatever sort of quiet deal has been struck but they must realize they it doesnot not enjoy support and consent of parliament and military inner circle.threat of disintegeration of Pakistan does not come from these radicalist, but real threat comes from economic crisis and USA military intervention.Ahmad rashid and B.R. Rubin proposes USA in their recent work published in "foreign affairs" to compensate Pakistan if it really want to win war in afghanistan and that could be initiated by the formation of contact group that address the legitimate grievenance of Pakistan and set an outline for providing Pakistan nuclear civilian plant like India after assurance by Pakistani government about the stability and strong command and control system.they also state that USA should ask India to seize the activities of its research intelligence wing that Pakistan claims is trying to destabilize P akistan internally.

But it would surely be miscalculation by America to go after alqaeda and henchman without satisfying Pakistani reservation.every single attack on Pakistan territory,every single casualties in tribal belt will turn tide against USA and its interest,these tactics will certainly wear out the motivational and combative capability of Pakistan military personnel and worst nightmare can come into, resulting disintegeration of Pakistani military along ethnic lines .this will stymie every hope and possibility of durable peace and prosperity of afghanistan. Rashid and Rubin suggest America to go for great bargain but to me such bargain at the cost of Pakistan interest and sovereignity will be foolish bargain.
Finally, time will be better litmus test of Pakistani relations with USA but to me growing influence of Clinton machinery and likely appointment of hillary as secratery of state would erode obama mantra of change,the way things are turning out forecast the relation to be more at daggers drawn