In an important diary
Talibanistan: Much Worse than Reported tjfxh drew our attention to a report from Bill Roggio on the "truce" Pakistan has negotiated with the Taliban and Qaeda in Wazirastan. Basically, Musharaff with the okay from Bush, has created exactly the kind of terrorist home base
Bush claims to worry about in Iraq. This is both a frightening development with respect to America's legitimate objective of stopping al Qaeda and a testament to the scope of Bush's failure.
Roggio is no liberal by the way. He has written for the Weekly Standard and National Review Online.
Roggio continues his reporting today and after the fold I explain why events in Pakistan and Afghanistan deserve much more attention than we have been giving them.
We would do well to shift our attention towards developments in Pakistan and to follow the reporting of
Bill Roggio on the "truce" signed between the Pakistani government and the tribal area of Warzirastan. Roggio notes that this kind of "truce" has been an objective of bin Laden mentioned in his videotapes.
The Asia Times' Syed Saleem Shahzad states Osama bin Laden's most recent video tape "marks [al-Qaeda's] announcement that the new strategy it has been developing is now very much in place," which includes a reorganization of al-Qaeda's structure and "the acquisition of various bases in the shape of small pockets" in the tribal regions "along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border areas, including Khost-North Waziristan, South Waziristan, Kunar-Chitral and Kunar-Bajur."
Yesterday, the NY Times reported that Musharaff ruled out attacks by coalition forces in the tribal areas. So, not only are Pakistani forces leaving Waziristan but there is also a diminished threat from coalition forces. Roggio provides more information on these truces here too.
Roggio also notes that
Despite any "truce" signed in North Waziristan, the Taliban are quite active elsewhere in region. Within 24 hours after the agreement was signed, Taliban forces attacked a pro-government cleric in Bajaur. The cleric survived, but a 12 year old girl was killed in the incident. "Authorities believe militants may have wanted to attack Mabood because he supports government efforts to hunt down militants," reports the Times of India. "Authorities have said al-Qaida-linked foreign militants and local tribesmen sympathetic to them operate in Bajur."
Now, here is where it is important to put these developments in the broader context of Bush's "strategy" to fight terrorism. Reports out of Afghanistan state that commanders have "been taken aback by the level of violence" in the southern regions and are "urging allies to provide reinforcements." Why are there no American troops to serve as reinforcements there? Because American troops are bogged down in Iraq.
News reports say that Bush has warned that leaving Iraq will result in al Qaeda "setting up a violent, radical Islamic empire based in Iraq, which he said was Osama bin Laden's ultimate goal." We need to point out that Al Qaeda is setting that up in Pakistan just as bin Laden stated as his goal. Moreover, these truces seem to have been approved by the President.
Now the President and his supporters want to take on Iran. Why is Iran in the cross hairs? Because it allegedly harbors and supports terrorist groups. Because it has aspirations to be a nuclear power. Consider that Pakistan DOES harbor and has supported terrorist groups--the ones who attacked US. Consider that Pakistan IS a nuclear power and that IT is the chief source of nuclear know-how to the Iranians.
We need to do a better job of highlighting and reinforcing the comments of Richard Clarke who said that
a peace accord signed by Pakistan's government and pro-Taliban militants means the Taliban and al-Qaeda leadership have "effectively carved out a sanctuary inside Pakistan."
We need to link these developments to Bush's strategy in the war on terror explictily as
Wesley Clark has done. We need to do this not because it creates political advantages for Democrats but because Bush's approach to fighting terrorism including invading Iraq, threatening Iran, ceasing to serve as an honest broker of peace between Israel and the Palestinians, using torture etc has and is depriving us of the moral and military resources we need to engage those who really DO threaten us. That threat is principally where it has been since Reagan helped build bin Laden in Afghanistan in the 1980s--Afghanistan and Pakistan. Our message should be focus on real threats, remove groups like Hamas, Hezbollah and states like Syria and Iran from the cross hairs and engage them. Focus on eliminating al Qaeda and the Taliban as a secondary target. Combine carrots and sticks to clean out the tribal areas of Pakistan and let Musharaff know that, as Bush originally said, there can be know safe areas in any state for the terrorists who threaten us with mass murder.
