PAKISTAN Special

BY: MICHEL CHOSSUDOVSKY 

The assassination of Benazir Bhutto has created conditions which contribute to the ongoing destabilization and fragmentation of Pakistan as a nation. The process of U.S.-sponsored "regime change,“ which normally consists in the re-formation of a fresh proxy government under new leaders has been broken. Discredited in the eyes of Pakistani public opinion, General Pervez Musharaf cannot remain in the seat of political power, but at the same time, the fake elections ported by the "international community" scheduled for January 2008, even if they were to be carried out, would not be accepted as legitimate, thereby creating a political impasse. There are indications that the assassination of Benazir Bhutto was anticipated by U.S. officials: "It has been known for months that the Bush-Cheney administration and its allies have been maneuvering to strengthen their political control of Pakistan, paving the way for the expansion and deepening of the ‘war on terrorism’ across the region. Various American destabilization plans, known for months by officials and analysts, proposed the toppling of Pakistan 's military... The assassination of Bhutto appears to have been anticipated. There were even reports of “chatter” among U.S. officials about the possible assassinations of either Pervez Musharraf or Benazir Bhutto, well before the actual attempts took place.

Political Impasse: "Regime change" with a view to ensuring continuity under military rule is no longer the main thrust of U.S. foreign policy. The regime of Pervez Musharraf cannot prevail. Washington's foreign policy course is to actively promote the political fragmentation and balkanization of Pakistan as a nation. A new political leadership is anticipated but in all likelihood it will take on a very different shape, in relation to previous U.S.-sponsored regimes. One can expect that Washington will push for a compliant political leadership, with no commitment to the national interest, a leadership which will serve U.S. imperial interests, while concurrently contributing under the disguise of "decentralization,” to the weakening of the central government and the fracture of Pakistan 's fragile federal structure. The political impasse is deliberate. It is part of an evolving U.S. foreign policy agenda, which favors disruption and disarray in the structures of the Pakistani State . Indirect rule by the Pakistani military and intelligence apparatus is to be replaced by more direct forms of U.S. interference, including an expanded U.S. military presence inside Pakistan … This expanded military presence is also dictated by the Middle East-Central Asia geopolitical situation and Washington's ongoing plans to extend the Middle East war to a much broader area. The U.S. has several military bases in Pakistan . It controls the country's air space. According to a recent report: "U.S. Special Forces are expected to vastly expand their presence in Pakistan as part of an effort to train and support indigenous counter-insurgency forces and clandestine counterterrorism units" (William Arkin, Washington Post, December 2007)… The official justification and pretext for an increased military presence in Pakistan is to extend the "war on terrorism.” Concurrently, to justify its counterterrorism program, Washington is also beefing up its covert support to the "terrorists." 

The Balkanization of Pakistan: Already in 2005, a report by the U.S. National Intelligence Council (NIC) and the CIA forecast a "Yugoslav-like fate" for Pakistan "in a decade with the country riven by civil war, bloodshed, and inter provincial rivalries, as seen recently in Balochistan." (Energy Compass, 2 March 2005). According to the NIC-CIA, Pakistan is slated to become a "failed state" by 2015, "as it would be affected by civil war, complete Talibanisation, and struggle for control of its nuclear weapons.” (Quoted by former Pakistan High Commissioner to UK , Wajid Shamsul Hasan, Times of India, 13 February 2005): "Nascent democratic reforms will produce little change in the face of opposition from an entrenched political elite and radical Islamic parties. In a climate of continuing domestic turmoil, the Central government's control probably will be reduced to the Punjabi heartland and the economic hub of Karachi ," the former diplomat quoted the NIC-CIA report as saying. Expressing apprehension, Hasan asked, "Are our military rulers working on a similar agenda or something that has been laid out for them in the various assessment reports over the years by the National Intelligence Council in joint collaboration with CIA?" (Ibid)  Continuity, characterized by the dominant role of the Pakistani military and intelligence has been scrapped in favor of political breakup and balkanization… According to the NIC-CIA scenario, which Washington intends to carry out: "Pakistan will not recover easily from decades of political and economic mismanagement, divisive policies, lawlessness, corruption, and ethnic friction." (Ibid). The U.S. course consists in fomenting social, ethnic, and factional divisions and political fragmentation, including the territorial breakup of Pakistan . This course of action is also dictated by U.S. war plans in relation to both Afghanistan and Iran … This U.S. agenda for Pakistan is similar to that applied throughout the broader Middle East Central Asian region. U.S. strategy, supported by covert intelligence operations, consists in triggering ethnic and religious strife, abetting and financing secessionist movements while also weakening the institutions of the central government…The broader objective is to fracture the Nation State and redraw the borders of Iraq, Iran, Syria, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.

Covert Support to Balochistan Separatists: Balochistan's strategic energy reserves have a bearing on the separatist agenda. Following a familiar pattern, there are indications that the Baloch insurgency is being supported and abetted by Britain and the U.S… The Balochi national resistance movement dates back to the late 1940s, when Balochistan was invaded by Pakistan . In the current geopolitical context, the separatist movement is in the process of being hijacked by foreign powers… British intelligence is allegedly providing covert support to Balochistan separatists (which from the outset have been repressed by Pakistan 's military). In June 2006, Pakistan's Senate Committee on Defence accused British intelligence of "abetting the insurgency in the province bordering Iran "  

Ten British MPs were involved in a closed door session of the Senate Committee on Defence regarding the alleged support of Britain 's Secret Service to Balcoh separatists (Ibid). Also of relevance are reports of CIA and Mossad support to Baloch rebels in Iran and Southern Afghanistan … It would appear that Britain and the U.S. are supporting both sides. The U.S. is providing American F-16 jets to the Pakistani military, which are being used to bomb Baloch villages in Balochistan. Meanwhile, British alleged covert support to the separatist movement (according to the Pakistani Senate Committee) contributes to weakening the central government. The stated purpose of U.S. counter-terrorism is to provide covert support as well as training to "Liberation Armies" ultimately with a view to destabilizing sovereign governments. In Kosovo, the training of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) in the 1990s had been entrusted to a private mercenary company, Military Professional Resources Inc (MPRI), on contract to the Pentagon… The BLA bears a canny resemblance to Kosovo's KLA, which was financed by the drug trade and supported by the CIA and Germany 's Bundes Nachrichten Dienst (BND)… The BLA emerged shortly after the 1999 military coup. It has no tangible links to the Baloch resistance movement, which developed since the late 1940s. An aura of mystery surrounds the leadership of the BLA. Washington favors the creation of a "Greater Balochistan" which would integrate the Baloch areas of Pakistan with those of Iran and possibly the Southern tip of Afghanistan, thereby leading to a process of political fracturing in both Iran and Pakistan … "The U.S. is using Balochi nationalism for staging an insurgency inside Iran 's Sistan-Balochistan province. The ‘war on terror’ in Afghanistan gives a useful political backdrop for the ascendancy of Balochi militancy". Military scholar Lieutenant Colonel Ralph Peters, writing in the June 2006 issue of The Armed Forces Journal suggests in no uncertain terms that Pakistan should be broken up, leading to the formation of a separate country: "Greater Balochistan" or "Free Balochistan .” The latter would incorporate the Pakistani and Iranian Baloch provinces into a single political entity… In turn, according to Peters, Pakistan's North West Frontier Province (NWFP) should be incorporated into Afghanistan "because of its linguistic and ethnic affinity.” This proposed fragmentation, which broadly reflects U.S. foreign policy, would reduce Pakistani territory to approximately 50 percent of its present land area. Pakistan would also lose a large part of its coastline on the Arabian Sea …                                                                                                  

Although the map does not officially reflect Pentagon doctrine, it has been used in a training program at NATO's Defense College for senior military officers… This map (as described), as well as other similar maps, has most probably been used at the National War Academy as well as in military planning circles…   "Lieutenant-Colonel Peters was last posted, before he retired to the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence, within the U.S. Defence Department, and has been one of the Pentagon’s foremost authors with numerous essays on strategy for military journals and U.S. foreign policy." (Ibid)               

"Strong Economic Medicine": Weakening Pakistan's Central Government: It is by no means accidental that the 2005 National Intelligence Council (NIC)-CIA report had predicted a "Yugoslav-like fate" for Pakistan pointing to the impacts of "economic mismanagement" as one of the causes of political breakup and balkanization… "Economic mismanagement" is a term used by the Washington-based international financial institutions to describe the chaos which results from not fully abiding by the IMF's Structural Adjustment Program. In actual fact, the "economic mismanagement" and chaos is the outcome of IMF-World Bank prescriptions, which invariably trigger hyperinflation and precipitate indebted countries into extreme poverty… Pakistan has been subjected to the same deadly IMF "economic medicine" as Yugoslavia: In 1999, in the immediate wake of the coup d'etat which brought General Pervez Musharaf to the helm of the military government, an IMF economic package, which included currency devaluation and drastic austerity measures, was imposed on Pakistan .

Pakistan 's external debt is of the order of US$40 billion. The IMF's "debt reduction" under the package was conditional upon the sell-off to foreign capital of the most profitable state owned enterprises (including the oil and gas facilities in Balochistan) at rock bottom prices . Musharaf's Finance Minister was chosen by Wall Street, which is not an unusual practice. The military rulers appointed at Wall Street's behest a vice-president of Citigroup, Shaukat Aziz, who at the time was head of Citi-Group's Global Private Banking. Citi-Group is among the largest commercial foreign banking institutions in Pakistan .  There are obvious similarities in the nature of U.S. covert intelligence operations applied in country after country in different parts of the so-called "developing World.” These covert operations, including the organization of military coups, are often synchronized with the imposition of IMF-World Bank macro-economic reforms. In this regard, Yugoslavia 's federal fiscal structure collapsed in 1990 leading to mass poverty and heightened ethnic and social divisions. The U.S. and NATO sponsored "civil war" launched in mid-1991 consisted in coveting Islamic groups as well as channeling covert support to separatist paramilitary armies in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Macedonia. A similar "civil war" scenario has been envisaged for Pakistan by the National Intelligence Council and the CIA: From the point of view of U.S. intelligence, which has a longstanding experience in abetting separatist "liberation armies,” "Greater Albania" is to Kosovo what "Greater Balochistan" is to Pakistan's Southeastern Balochistan province. Similarly, the KLA is Washington 's chosen model to be replicated in Balochistan province.

The Assassination of Benazir Bhutto: Benazir Bhutto was assassinated in Rawalpindi , no ordinary city. Rawalpindi is a military city host to the headquarters of the Pakistani Armed Forces and Military Intelligence (ISI). Ironically Bhutto was assassinated in an urban area tightly controlled and guarded by the military police and the country's elite forces. Rawalpindi is swarming with ISI intelligence officials, which invariably infiltrate political rallies. Her assassination was not a haphazard event. Without evidence, quoting Pakistan government sources, the Western media in chorus has highlighted the role of Al-Qaeda, while also focusing on the possible involvement of the ISI… What these interpretations do not mention is that the ISI continues to play a key role in overseeing Al Qaeda on behalf of U.S. intelligence. The press reports fail to mention two important and well-documented facts: 1) the ISI maintains close ties to the CIA. The ISI is virtually an appendage of the CIA. 2) Al Qaeda is a creation of the CIA. The ISI provides covert support to Al Qaeda, acting on behalf of U.S. intelligence. 

(This paper was originally published in Jan 2008.The contents of this article are entirely writer’s own views and PAKISTANSpecial Team may not agree with some or all for obvious reasons.) 

BY: SHIREEN MAZARI

What is with Pakistanis and the Americans? Despite over sixty-one years of independence; despite our successful struggle to acquire nuclear capability in the face of massive hurdles put in our way by these folk, despite the dismal record of our past military alliance with the US and its allies; despite the constant abuse being hurled at us Pakistanis in particular and Muslims in general, by them, post-9/11, we have continued to sustain the imperialists and neo imperialists in their misplaced assumption of the "White Man's Burden".

How else can we explain our continuing tolerance of the abuse — a form of psychological terrorisation — being meted out to us by the US? Their Administration continues with its mantra of "do more", and continues to scamper to build new political favourites as old ones lose domestic currency. Their politicians in and out of Congress hysterically threaten us with dire aid cut-offs if we do not deliver — although the only delivery they will ever be satisfied with is the handing over of our nuclear assets, Dr Khan and at least an Osama look-alike to appease their populace. As for the US media, we are definitely their bete noir, not least because our leadership is so readily accessible and prone to erring on the side of indiscretion — including our leadership-in-waiting. All and sundry make pronouncements on sensitive foreign policy issues with no thought to the implications and unintended consequences.

As for the US military, it is playing an interesting double game at the moment. The command in Washington critiques us, while at the operational level on the ground in the Trilateral Commission, they feign an atmosphere of camaraderie and goodwill which makes our local commanders adopt an unnecessarily accommodative approach towards them.

It is in this bizarre environment that our own security situation has been vitiated even as we have sought to please the US ad nauseum. Certainly, we have had a terrorist problem even before 9/11, but the US-led war on terror in Afghanistan has distorted our indigenous terrorist problem as well as aggravating it. To make matters worse, the US has adopted a duplicitous and treacherous strategy vis a vis the Pakistani state. On the one hand, it wants us to fight its designed war against terror, but it is itself supporting Baloch terrorist groups with the aim of destabilising both Iran's Sistan and Pakistan's Balochistan. The use of terror group Jundullah by the US against the Iranian state has been discussed in the US media. Additionally, the US has done nothing to push the Karzai government to close the offices of Pakistani terrorist groups like the BLA — now renamed the Baloch Republican Army, after the UK declared BLA a terrorist organisation.

This is just the tip of the iceberg. US citizens joined some Baloch expats in 2006 to launch the so-called "American friends of Balochistan" (AFB) in Washington DC with Robert Selle, apparently a journalist, as its chairman. The aim of the group is to separate Balochistan from Pakistan and its level of funding tends to show more than a passive acceptance by the US establishment. Interestingly, the group was formed a year after French diplomat Frederic Grare went to Washington and began claiming expertise on Balochistan.

Then there is the Baloch Society of North America, established in 2005, which is active against both the Pakistani and Iranian states and has access also in Canada and the UK, post the BLA ban. There is also a big question mark over the diversion of funds received from international donors by the World Sindhi Congress (WSC) and World Sindh Institute (WSI), to terrorists in Pakistan rather than for the philanthropic purposes for which the funding was given. Both these organisations have given financial support to the Sindh Liberation Army which has claimed responsibility for a number of bomb blasts in Sindh. To make matters worse, US officials even maintain contact with members of these groups in Pakistan.

The issue is why America has failed to monitor or curtail such activities emanating from its territory. After all, we all know that terrorist organisations have to have their political wings to raise funds and the US has attacked many religious groups on this count in Pakistan. We also know how Washington has emphasised the issue of terrorist financing and many Muslim charities have suffered on this count. Are we not interested in some level of reciprocity from the US?

With all these shenanigans which directly undermine our security, we have allowed US bases in the sensitive province of Balochistan, as well as in Sindh, and there is now evidence that they are also using a short refurbished runway near Tarbela for launching Predator flights. With all this logistical support offered by Pakistan, where is the US reciprocity on anti-terrorism? Of course, if we Pakistanis had even an iota of dignity, we would stop all logistical support and let Congress do its worst. What will that be? US marines coming into Pakistan? They can barely manage Iraq and Afghanistan at the moment.

Unfortunately, despite being abused all around, we continue to do US bidding — much against our own long term interests. Now we hear US military personnel are coming in to not only train our paramilitary forces but also to accompany them on missions within Pakistan. There has also been talk of the US "training" our military in counter-insurgency. What absurdities are we reducing ourselves to? Has no one studied the US's dismal record in this field — both in Vietnam and Iraq, not to mention in our own neighbourhood in Afghanistan? All that will happen with the additional influx of US military personnel in Pakistan is more acts of terror against our own security forces.

The only way to fight a successful war on terror against our own indigenous terrorist problem is to begin thinning out US personnel from Pakistan and adopting a holistic approach in dealing with the tribals. To make it a perceptually credible national effort we have to create space between ourselves and the Americans so that our security forces can become more effective with local support. Unless the locals flush out the terrorists, the state will see no success in this war. This is where the ANP victory can play a crucial role in a two-pronged strategy of dialogue, development and establishment of law and order. We have to overcome the psychological confidence deficit that prevents us from creating the necessary distance between ourselves and the US.

Is it not interesting that post the ANP victory in NWFP, when it was seen that the local people had rejected the extremists and elections had been conducted more or less peacefully in that province, and there was hope of the new political leadership using a policy of dialogue to isolate the militants and terrorists — something that went against the US policy — suddenly we have been hit with a spate of suicide attacks with even funerals being targeted — something that has not happened before.

Unfortunately, so far our ruling elite seem unable or unwilling to see the US design for what it is: a weakening of the Pakistani state and nation with perhaps a long term goal of balkanisation. After all, US scholars with close links to the establishment are referring increasingly to this end goal. Yet even here we seem to retain a strange subservience and continue to give academic space to perennial Pakistan-bashers, especially in terms of access to data and information. Such is our continuing hangover of kowtowing to old and new imperialist powers. No wonder we Pakistanis today face a double-headed terrorist threat: psychological terrorisation of the state by the US, and the physical home grown militant terrorism. One feeds on the other.