Brian M Downing
Last week President Trump outlined his Afghanistan policy. There was little new in it. More GIs, more money. That’s been going on since the Obama administration. What was new in the speech was the blunt criticism of Pakistan – a supposed ally but a duplicitous one that supports the Taliban and several Islamist militant groups. Further, Trump announced a tilt toward India.
Most Pakistanis will find the speech insulting. It will fuel conspiracy theories on the street and in the general staff as well. Why is the United States confronting Pakistan this late in the game, and how will the contest unfold? Where will China stand on the matter?
Pakistan’s duplicity
For several decades the Pakistani elite, mainly military, have encouraged a potent fusion of Islam and nationalism. It is exceptionally hostile toward outside forces, especially Hinduism and the Indian military, which bested Pakistani in three wars. The 1971 conflict ended with East Pakistan breaking away and forming Bangladesh.
The loss of so much territory was a shock and humiliation. It led to the orchestrated religious-nationalist ideology as a unifying force holding the impoverished, multi-ethnic country together. Conspiracy theories intermix with the ideology to offer dark and self-exculpatory explanations of the country’s military, political, and economic failures. Pakistani generals began to support Islamist militants which train anti-India guerrillas and terrorists. They later did the same for the Taliban which opposed Indian influence in Afghanistan.
When American special forces helped the Northern Alliance expel the Taliban, they came up against Pakistani Frontier Corps units fighting alongside the Taliban and al Qaeda. Support to the Taliban and a miscellany of Islamist groups continues to this day. It has contributed to the Taliban’s resurgence and the war’s persistence. Criticism has been strong from American troops along the Durand Line, but the generals and politicians have not protested forcefully. That’s changed, at last.
American pressure, Pakistani response
The recent accusations of duplicity were not done through back channels, nor were they delivered by an ambassador or cabinet secretary or general. They were made by the American president in a major policy statement watched around the world.
The Pakistani generals are livid. This must also be planning a strong response – and not simply a verbal one. The most obvious response is to shut down the supply routes running from Karachi, through Chaman and the Khyber Pass, then into Afghanistan. That’s their strongest move. Without those two routes, the American position would be dicey, relying wholly on the long northern route running from the Baltic through Russia and Uzbekistan, then into Afghanistan. The American effort would depend entirely and uneasily on the will of Vladimir Putin.
There are three reasons the Pakistani response might fall short of closing down the Chaman and Khyber routes, at least for an extended period of time.
First, Pakistan is facing an Islamist danger of its own. The Pakistani Taliban (TTP) and kindred groups are striking Pakistani cities with terrorist bombings. They do so because of their government’s assistance to the US, which though conditional, is a clear sign of apostasy and treachery. Duplicity has brought, paradoxically and appropriately, opposition from both the United States and Islamist terrorists.
Second, Pakistan’s growing partnership with China may not guarantee full support. Beijing announced support for Pakistan after Trump’s accusations, but it has broader economic and security concerns in the region and the Afghan war is a costly liability. China’s actions will be crucial.
Having made timely deals with Kabul officials, China controls most of Afghanistan’s vast mineral wealth. Iron, copper, rare earths, and oil are extracted and exported through Chinese-built infrastructure. Further, Uighurs from western China serve in Islamist groups, some of which enjoy Pakistan’s support. Better to choke them off soon than see them become more adept in terrorism and insurgency.
Third, Trump’s reference to closer ties with India is a threat – one that will be magnified in the conspiracy-laced minds of the general staff. India, in the estimation of Pakistani generals, is trying to break off the western province of Balochistan, which holds 41% of the country’s territory and a goodly portion of its mineral wealth. The Pashtun northwest, never truly under Islamabad’s control, could also slip free with foreign help.
An Indian-American partnership, with a mercurial and perhaps vengeful leader in the White House, could gravely threaten Pakistan’s security and territorial integrity. But of course its own corrupt and incompetent elites have brought the country to that point. The elites may feel the pressure to force the Taliban to negotiate a settlement and to break altogether with Islamist militancy.
Copyright 2017 Brian M Downing
Brian M Downing is a national security analyst who has written for outlets across the political spectrum. He studied at Georgetown University and the University of Chicago, and did post-graduate work at Harvard’s Center for International Affairs. Thanks to Susan Ganosellis.