In Pakistan, Is All Hell Breaking Loose? Or Has a Corner Been Turned by President Zardari?

A BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS
by Christine Bowman

When Pakistan's and Afghanistan's Presidents Asif Ali Zardari and Hamid Karzai were in Washington meeting with President Obama on May 6, the U.S. president declared, "I'm pleased that these two men, elected leaders of Afghanistan and Pakistan, fully appreciate the seriousness of the threat that we face and have reaffirmed their commitment to confronting it."

A week later in Pakistan, we find abundant evidence that Zardari got Obama's message. The Pakistan government and army are in all-out attack mode against Taliban forces in the Swat valley, previously having tried a mode of appeasement and cooperation with those same forces. Hundreds of thousands of civilians have taken flight.

At the same time that Zardari is facing off against the Taliban, he also appears to be addressing the international community's concerns about the safety of Pakistan's nuclear weapons. At least according to his domestic critics, Zardari has quietly stopped Pakistan's nuclear arms build up by cutting the nation's nuclear budget dramatically, and turning down a "rare opportunity to buy uranium from the international market."

The Daily Times in Pakistan reports its view that American diplomats are satisfied that Zardari is both trustworthy and in control:

The new spokesman of the State Department, Ian Kelly, echoed the Obama administration’s trust in Pakistan’s ability to safeguard its nuclear assets in the face of the Taliban turmoil.

“We were assured by President Zardari that they have complete command and control of the nuclear weapons in Pakistan,” he said.

“We have full faith and confidence in President Zardari.” he said when questioned if Washington could verify that.

The State Department also vowed to help Islamabad address the humanitarian situation in the wake of the Taliban insurgency and the Pakistani government’s actions to clear Swat of the Taliban. “I think that the meetings last week were very productive and we look forward to continuing to help the government of Pakistan in their battle against the extremists and their attempt to establish democratic institutions,” Kelly added.

If, indeed, Pakistan's president has thrown his lot in with the U.S., can he prevail?

Experts who are closely watching the situation include Robert Windrem, a research fellow at the NYU Center for law and Security, and Robert Blackwill, former U.S. Ambassador to India and a senior fellow at the RAND Corporation.

Windrem's report today at MSNBC.com details recent work on new nuclear reactors that he deems "ominous." Windrem also cites concerns about who exactly the personnel on the ground are, who may have direct access to Pakistan's nuclear arms.

“At the higher level and the planning level, things are probably fine,” said [Shuja] Nawaz [director of the South Asia Center at the Atlantic Council, a leading Washington-based foreign policy and international security institute], speaking of the national command authorities, “but when you get down into the weeds, then you have problems.” ...

“In the Pakistani Army itself, they were trying to filter out people with Islamist tendencies, and they have failed,” he says. “Even corps commanders are closet Islamists.” He adds that senior officers in Pakistan’s intelligence service, the ISI, belong to the Tablighi Jamaat. The fundamentalist Muslim organization operates worldwide and has been accused of recruiting for radical organizations in Afghanistan as well as Pakistan.

Also writing today at YaleGlobal, Robert Blackwill seems to give the Pakistan/U.S. initiatives an "A" for effort, but then expresses grave reservations:

For every good reason, the Obama Administration is devoting enormous thought to Pakistan. In my judgment, the evolving situation in Pakistan is potentially the most dangerous international situation since the 1962 Cuban missile crisis. ...

Blackwill goes on:

In my view, the United States has four vital national interests concerning what the Obama Administration calls AfPak: first, to prevent Pakistan’s nuclear weapons and materials from coming into the possession of Islamic extremists; second, to ensure that Afghanistan does not again become a sanctuary for terrorists to launch attacks against the United States and its allies and friends; third, to avoid war between India and Pakistan; and fourth, to prevent the Taliban and its radical collaborators from gaining control of Pakistan. Although under the dynamic leadership of Ambassador Richard Holbrooke policymakers are attempting to positively influence Pakistan, every single important trend that I can identify is negative and getting worse. ...

But none of this gets in the next year or two at the fundamental problem. Islamic extremism is systemically on the rise in Pakistan, and elites there – both civilian and military – do not appear to have the will or the means to resist. It is also important to understand that U.S. policy instruments are too weak to affect significantly these evolving and disturbing societal trends in Pakistan. That is a preeminent task for Pakistanis. But maladroit U.S. actions can make the situation in Pakistan worse.

Zardari has taken dramatic steps to assert his leadership. His nation, clearly, is at a flashpoint, but perhaps also a pivot point. Just elected last Fall like his American counterpart, Zardari may be the one guy on the planet with even more on his plate than Obama. Check out the BBC's profile for clues to Zardari's character and abilities. Follow all the links above for more in-depth analysis of developments in the world's most explosive hotspot.

A BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS