Soon after
the US invaded Afghanistan and overthrew the Taliban government
in 2001, I predicted that Taliban resistance would resume in
four years.
My fellow
pundits, who were cock-a-hoop over the US military victory over
a bunch of lightly-armed medieval tribesmen, became drunk on
old-fashioned imperial triumphalism, and denounced me as "crazy,"
or worse. But most of them had never been to Afghanistan and
knew nothing about the Pashtun tribal people. I had covered
the struggle against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan during
the 1980’s and was well aware of the leisurely pace of warfare
favored by Pashtun warriors.
"Do
not stay in Afghanistan," I warned in a 2001 article in
the Los Angeles Times. The longer foreign forces remained
in Afghanistan, the more the tribes would fight against their
continued presence. Taliban resumed fighting in 2005.
Now, as
resistance to the US-led occupation of Afghanistan intensifies,
the increasingly frustrated Bush administration is venting its
anger against Pakistan and its military intelligence agency,
Inter-Service Intelligence, better known as ISI.
The White
House just leaked claims ISI is in cahoots with pro-Taliban
groups in Pakistan’s tribal agency along the Afghan border and
warns them of impending US attacks. The New York Times,
which allowed the Bush administration to use it as a mouthpiece
for Iraq War propaganda, dutifully featured the leaks about
ISI on front page. Other administration officials have been
claiming that ISI may even be hiding Osama bin Laden and other
senior al-Qaida leaders.
The Bush
administration claims that CIA had electronic intercepts proving
ISI was behind the recent bombing of India’s embassy in Kabul.
India and Afghanistan echo this charge. No hard evidence has
yet been produced, but the US media has been lustily condemning
Pakistan for pretending to be an ally of the US while acting
like an enemy.
President
George Bush angrily asked Pakistan’s visiting prime minister,
Yousuf Gilani, "who’s in charge of ISI?" An interesting
question, since all recent ISI director generals have been vetted
and pre-approved by Washington.
I was one
of the first western journalists invited into ISI HQ in 1986.
ISI’s then director, the fierce Lt. General Akhtar Rahman, personally
briefed me on Pakistan’s secret role in fighting Soviet occupation
of Afghanistan. ISI’s "boys" provided communications,
logistics, training, heavy weapons, and direction in the Afghan
War. I kept ISI’s role in Afghanistan a secret until the war
ended in 1989.
ISI was
primarily responsible for the victory over the Soviets, which
hastened the collapse of the USSR. At war’s end, Gen. Akhtar
and Pakistan’s leader, Zia ul Haq, both died in a sabotaged
C-130 transport aircraft. Unfortunately, most Pakistanis blame
the United States for this assassination, though the real malefactors
have never been identified and the investigation long ago shelved.
On my subsequent
trips to Pakistan I was routinely briefed by succeeding ISI
chiefs, and joined ISI officers in the field, sometimes under
fire.
ISI, which
reports to Pakistan’s military and the prime minister, is accused
of meddling in Pakistani politics. The late Benazir Bhutto,
who often was thwarted and vexed by Pakistan’s spooks, always
playfully scolded me, "you and your beloved generals at
ISI."
But before
Gen. Pervez Musharraf took over as military dictator, ISI was
the third world’s most efficient, professional intelligence
agency. It still defends Pakistan against internal and external
subversion by India’s powerful spy agency, RAW, and by Iran.
ISI works closely with CIA and the Pentagon and was primarily
responsible for the rapid ouster of Taliban from power in 2001.
But ISI also must serve Pakistan’s interests which are often
not identical to Washington’s, and sometimes in conflict.
ISI was
long and deeply involved in supporting the uprising by Kashmiri
Muslims against Indian rule, and has been accused by India of
abetting groups that have committed bombings and aircraft hijackings
inside India, including a wave of terrorist bombings against
civilians in Bangalore and Gujarat over recently weeks. For
its part, India’s powerful intelligence service, RAW, has mounted
bombing and shooting attacks inside Pakistan.
The reason
it is often difficult to tell whether Pakistan is friend or
foe is because Washington has been forcing Pakistan’s government,
military and intelligence services into supporting the US-led
war in Afghanistan and rounding up and torturing opponents of
Pakistan’s military dictatorship. Pakistan was forced to bend
to Washington’s will through a combination of over $11 billion
in payments and threats of war if Pakistan did not comply. The
ongoing prosecution of the US-led war in Afghanistan depends
entirely on Pakistan’s provision of bases and troops.
While Pakistan’s
government, military and intelligence services were forced to
follow Washington’s strategic plans, 90% of Pakistan’s people
bitterly opposed these policies. President-dictator Musharraf
was caught between the anger of Washington and his own angry
people who branded him an American stooge.
Small wonder
Pakistan’s leadership is so often accused of playing a double
game.
The last
ISI Director General I knew was the tough, highly capable Lt.
Gen. Mahmood Ahmad. He was purged by Musharraf because Washington
felt Mahmood was insufficiently responsive to US interests.
Ever since 2001, ensuing ISI directors were all pre-approved
by Washington. All senior ISI veterans deemed "Islamist"
or too nationalistic by Washington were purged at Washington’s
demand, leaving ISI’s upper ranks top-heavy with too many yes-men
and paper-passers.
Even so,
there is strong opposition inside ISI and the military to Washington’s
bribing and arm-twisting the subservient Musharraf dictatorship
into waging war against fellow Pakistanis and gravely damaging
Pakistan’s national interests.
ISI’s primary
duty is defending Pakistan, not promote US interests. Pashtun
tribesmen on the border sympathizing with their fellow Taliban
Pashtun in Afghanistan are Pakistanis. Many, like the legendary
Jalaluddin Haqqani, are old US allies and "freedom fighters"
from the 1980’s. When the US and its western allies finally
abandon Afghanistan, as they will inevitably do one day, Pakistan
must go on living with its rambunctious tribals.
Violence
and uprisings in these tribal areas are not caused by "terrorism,"
as Washington and Musharraf falsely claimed. They directly result
from the US-led occupation of Afghanistan and Washington’s forcing
the hated Musharraf regime to attack its own people.
ISI
is trying to restrain pro-Taliban Pashtun tribesmen while dealing
with growing US attacks into Pakistan that threaten a wider
war. India, Pakistan’s bitter foe, has an army of agents in
Afghanistan and is arming, backing and financing the Karzai
puppet regime in Kabul in hopes of turning Afghanistan into
a protectorate. Pakistan’s historic strategic interests in Afghanistan
have been undermined by the US occupation. Now, the US and India
are trying to eliminate Pakistani influence in Afghanistan.
ISI,
many of whose officers are Pashtun, has every right to warn
Pakistani citizens of impending US air attacks that kill large
numbers of civilians. But ISI also has another vital mission.
Preventing Pakistan’s Pashtun, 15–20% of the population of 165
million, from rekindling the old "Greater Pashtunistan"
movement calling for union of the Pashtun tribes of Pakistan
and Afghanistan into a new Pashtun nation. The Pashtun have
never recognized the Durand Line (today’s Pakistan-Afghan border)
drawn by British imperialists to sunder the world’s largest
tribal people. Greater Pashtunistan would tear apart Pakistan
and invite Indian military intervention.
Washington’s
bull-in-a-china shop behavior pays no heeds to these realities.
Instead, Washington demonizes faithful old allies ISI and Pakistan
while supporting Afghanistan’s Communists and drug dealers,
and allowing India to stir the Afghan pot – all for the sake
of new energy pipelines.
As Henry
Kissinger cynically noted, being America’s ally is more dangerous
than being its enemy.