Center for a New American Security

US Special Forces have conducted multiple raids into Pakistani territory, local daily The Nation reported today in a front-page article that was basically just quoting an earlier Guardian story. 

One previous US raid that occurred in 2008 was already known about. And when it happened, there was serious concern as to whether such actions by the Americans might lead to the breakdown of the Pakistani army. One respected London-based Pakistan academic said if American troops kept crossing into Pakistani territory he could envisage a situation where Pakistani commanders would lose control over soldiers who would want to fight the incursions.

That might explain this comment:

"The Pakistanis were kept entirely in the dark about it. It was one of those things we wouldn't confirm officially with them," said the source, who had detailed knowledge of the operations."

Read the original Guardian story here.

Newspapers reported today that the F8 incident reported with much ensuing panic yesterday was a hoax. However, it wasn't long before the small sense of relief was overshadowed by new episodes of death and destruction.

A mine exploded under a bus in Mohmand killing 15, mainly women and children, various news outlets reported. It seems this time the civilians might not actually have been the target since the road where the blast happened is used frequently by the miiitary. Although of course, you have to wonder if the people who put the mine there decided a few dead civilians was a risk worth taking.

A suspected car bomb in Peshawar wounded 13, nine of whom are in critical condition. While a suicide bomber attacked a military aircraft servicing facility 75 km from Islamabad killing seven.

The capital itself got a respite, but the streets were pretty quiet. Londonstani toured the various markets on his daily chores and found most of the shops to himself. The downside was that there were no cabs.

While the blow back is clear for everyone to see, no one really knows what is happening in the tribal areas themselves. Reporter friends have been up to Dera Ismail Khan and Peshawar to talk to those fleeing the conflict zones but their stories of having to flee after government forces suggested (in no uncertain terms) that it's time to leave did little to shed light on how the fighting is actually unfolding. Of course, the government and the militants claim to be heaping humiliation on each other in buckets, but its anyone's guess what's actually happening. 

The latest government numbers put Taliban deaths at 142 and their own losses at 20. The latest figures from aid agencies suggest 120,000 have been made homeless.

But while the military operation and the attacks away from the frontline are getting the headlines, it seems to Londonstani that the predictable see-saw of Pakistani politics is thinking of double backing on itself once more. There are whisperings amongst the English speaking super elite, the taxi drivers and the very low level government clerks that maybe it's time the army took over once more.

From Londonstani's point of view this is just wierd. It wasn't that long ago that everyone seemed to be on the streets shouting death to Musharraf. Now, I've heard a possible Pakistani future leader say, "You know if Musharraf hadn't made a couple of small mistakes towards the end, he would have been remembered as the man who saved the nation."

At the time of the most stringent anti Musharraf hysteria, Londonstani remembers sitting in a newsroom asking a visiting Pakistani analyst, "But who's gonna replace Musharraf? You think the same people who ran the country into the ground before him are suddenly going to start amending their ways?"

The analyst said he thought they had learnt their lesson. But it seemed much like bringing Afghan warlords back to Kabul. And, the fear is that the results could actually be much the same.

The complaints of the upper sections of society is that this present government is completely venal, corrupt and incompetent. "'What's new?" Someone with a sense of history might ask, but it seems that this government is setting new records at such a pace that the whole "only the army can run Pakistan" has come back into popular usage a year and a bit after they were last in power (it normally takes a few years). But of course, there is a conspiracy that this is actually what they have been planning all along anyway.

It would be pretty depressing if it wasn't for the fact that there does seem to be a growing sense among young upper and middle class Pakistanis that its time to step the plate. That the old paradigm is very, very broken and their only other option - going abroad - is not really all that appealing. After all, how many financial professionals with qualifications from their country's best institutes actually want to drive cabs?

Londonstani is going to be off on a world wind tour of Pakistan over the next few days.. so hopefully more on what people are thinking behind the scenes.

So, everyone know's who.. sorry what.. Kerry Lugar is, right?

There have been some references in the comments section about the Pakistani military's public relations efforts. Londonstani can only assume the following article by Kamran Khan of The News is the kind of thing we are talking about here:

KARACHI: When the top military commanders declared their serious concern regarding clauses of the Kerry-Lugar Bill impacting on the national security, the top brass had knowledge and evidence that a few elements within the government deployed resources to lobby several key United States congressmen for inclusion of anti-military and anti-nuclear programme segments in the controversial US aid bill, informed officials said.

“This is actually an attempt to cripple the Pakistan Army and the ISI and it is not the first or last attempt. There are some elements with clandestine job in all this,” said an informed official, who disclosed that Pakistani security officials were constantly getting information from their sources in Washington that illustrated vast difference between the public and private positions adopted by individuals and organizations representing Pakistan’s national interest in Washington.

There you have it people, you just can't trust the politicians to protect the country, apparently.

The real subject of this post is communication, and when it all goes wrong.

Londonstani has spent most of the day confused by an interview in the Independent with Lieutenant-General Sir Graeme Lamb. The British soldier tasked with finding ways to make Afghan insurgents into ex-insurgents without resorting to the traditional military method of just killing them.

Was the general saying something radically new to warrant a headline that practically screamed "Army chief; "We must tackle Taliban grievences"? (note: shouldn't that be grievances?)

The first paragraph read: "The British commander tasked with helping to bring to an end eight years of war in Afghanistan by persuading the Taliban to lay down their arms believes many in the enemy ranks have "done nothing wrong".

Was he saying the Taliban weren't really all that bad. Was this some sort of pimped-up repeat of the embarrassing 2006 Musa Qila deal, where an agreement between locals and the British military resulted in the town falling to the Taliban?

Well, actually, Lamb was only repeating an idea that has become an accepted part of the tool box that will be employed in Afghanistan; most Taliban fighters aren't hardened terror-loving ideologues and are so open to being persuaded to lay down their weapons. The problem here is the reporting.

The way the first paragraph uses the phrase "done nothing wrong" and in the second paragraph, "Lieutenant-General Sir Graeme Lamb told The Independent that many in the Taliban's rank and file carry a sense of "anger and grievances which have not been addressed", makes it sound like the writer's trying to be ironic in that "how-could-they say-such-a-thing" sort of way.

The fuller quote which is lower down makes a bit more sense: "We need to take a good look at the people we consider to be our enemies. A lot of young men fighting us have not done anything wrong. They have anger and grievances which have not been addressed. The better life they expected has not materialised; these are the people we must talk to, but we must make sure we have something to offer them."

You mean, we need to understand the people we are fighting and figure out why they are doing it?.. okaay, that doesn't sound too stupid

The article is alarmist, inaccurate and destined to provoke knee-jerk reactions. And the reason for that is pretty mundane. The Independent doesn't get many exclusives. Lamb gave them his first interview since he was appointed to the post by Gen. McChrystal so they had to make a big deal out of it but were stuck because he didn't really offer anything news worthy (ie anything new), so they made hammed up the comments they had.

To get an idea of what sort of context his comments should have been seen in, have a look at the Reuters pick up of similar comments he gave to the BBC.

LONDON (Reuters) - A retired British general sent to Afghanistan to explore ways of negotiating with members of the Taliban said on Thursday money might convince young fighters to give up their arms.

While this is the AFP pick up of the comments from the Independent article itself (but without the hysteria and spin):

LONDON (AFP) – The British commander overseeing a programme of reconciliation with "moderate" Taliban fighters on Friday said talking with the rank-and-file was essential to ending the conflict.

Ahaa.. so it all sounds a whole lot less sexy now.

Part of the reason this has gotten way up Londonstani's nose, is that he was at a discussion in London attended by media types covering foreign affairs and a senior editor from the Independent spoke about the innate superiority of newspapers over blogs. Her point was that newspapers are staffed by trained professionals who are able to put comments in their proper context and provide the public with the information it needs to take positions on policies carried out in its name. Londonstani can only conclude that possibly the Independent's staff of trained professionals had the day off.

Afghanistan needs proper reporting, but this isn't it.

Londonstani used to love this newspaper as a kid.. please someone shut it and put it out of its misery