[Update] Taliban Encroachment in Pakistan Grows at Terrifying Pace: What Does the U.S. Do?
By SusanUnPC on April 23, 2009 at 5:01 PM in Afghanistan, Current Affairs, Pakistan, Richard Holbrooke, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Taliban, Terrorism
See larger map below the fold.
Update: Read “Taliban Advance: Is Pakistan Nearing Collapse? at Time magazine. Hot Air’s Ed Morrissey notes, “this Daily Mail piece has had me on edge since morning. The Kardari government gave the Taliban an inch by signing away Swat so now they’ve decided to take a mile in Buner. The wages of appeasement. … [Time's dispatch is] about the rapid shari’a-ization of Buner and spreading panic in Islamabad. How bad is it? Roggio ups the freak-out ante:
The Taliban takeover of Haripur would put the Taliban on the doorstep of Islamabad and would also put two major nuclear facilities at risk. Morrissey recalls reading that the U.S. has “emergency contingency plans to seize Pakistan’s nukes if things go haywire, but I’m naively hoping against hope that Zardari and the military leadership will voluntarily surrender them to keep them out of jihadi hands if they think they’re about to be overrun. …” (Read more reactions at Memeorandum.com.)
The Taliban take-over of Pakistan, city by city, region by region, is flat-out terrifying. And CNN’s Fareed Zakaria — who devoted his Sunday show to Pakistan — wants you to e-mail him at GPS@cnn.com, to answer this question: “Should the United States take dramatic action and interfere in the inner workings of Pakistan to keep it from falling apart?” What in the hell should we do?
Today, we learn that the crisis is growing exponentially as the Taliban is encroaching in the country, through Punjab and Peshawar, the capital of the restive North-West Frontier Province [map below], and now is only 60 miles from Islamabad, the nation’s capital. The Taliban has declared its goal of taking over all of Pakistan, which means those extremists would also be in control of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons.
Check out the New York Times’s “Pakistan Sends Special Police to Taliban-Held Area.” Also read MSNBC’s “Pakistan troops rush to Taliban-infiltrated area – NATO truck base also attacked; Clinton urges Islamabad to focus on threat“:
“Gunmen attacked a Pakistani paramilitary force sent to a Taliban-infiltrated district just 60 miles from the capital Thursday, killing a police officer and feeding growing doubts about the government’s peace deal with extremists in the area.”
Each move and violent act, notes the NYT, provide “another indication of the gathering strength of the insurgency, and it raised new alarm about the ability of the government to fend off an unrelenting Taliban advance toward the heart of Pakistan.”
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
From the MSNBC article:
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told American lawmakers in an unusually blunt statement Wednesday that Pakistan’s leaders were “basically abdicating to the Taliban.” On Thursday, however, she said the Pakistani government appeared increasingly aware of the threat. [Hillary has clearly seen new classified information telling her that the threat level is substantially higher than earlier thought.]
U.S. special envoy Richard Holbrooke talked to Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari by telephone Thursday, but the president’s office would not say if Swat or Buner were discussed. The chairman of the U.S. military’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen, was visiting Pakistan.
As reports filtered out about Taliban fighters moving into Buner — that they were patrolling roads, broadcasting radio sermons and ordering barbers to stop shaving beards — the government sent six platoons from the paramilitary Frontier Constabulary to the district this week.
Here’s a full map of Pakistan. Look closely, and you’ll see Islamabad and Punjab, the areas that the Taliban are now targeting:
On Sunday, in a very frank interview, Richard Holbrooke, our envoy to Afghanistan/Pakistan, laid it out in no uncertain terms, beginning with a description of the people who are living in Pakistan:
You have people who committed 9/11, who attacked Mumbai, who attacked Islamabad, who killed Benazir Bhutto, and without any doubt at all are planning attacks on the United States and our allies, as well as the government of Pakistan, as we speak.
It is very difficult. I can think of no other place in the world where history hangs more heavily over the situation, and current economic conditions makes it more difficult in Pakistan.
… Pakistan really matters to the national security of the United States. [...]
Below, Richard Holbrooke points out that the Taliban are now within 100 miles [now it's 60 miles] of Islamabad and creeping closer and closer to Punjab. We also hear from a preeminent Pakistani journalist on Punjab:
Holbrooke told Zakaria:
I would draw your attention to the fact that the day before yesterday the chief spokesman of the Taliban in the Swat area publicly renounced the part of the deal in which they’re supposed to lay down their arms.
And it seems to me that that ought to be a wakeup call to everybody in Pakistan that you can’t deal with these people by giving away territory as they creep closer and closer to the populated centers of the Punjab and Islamabad. They’re less than 100 miles from Islamabad after this deal.
And I am concerned at the growing risk that you’ll have more terrorist attacks in Lahore and Islamabad, perhaps in Karachi. So we are very concerned about this.
Here is the full interview of Richard Holbrooke:
Now hear from “leading Pakistani journalist Ahmed Rashid”:
::::::::::::::::::::::
In December 2007, CBS News’s Katie Couric asked each presidential candidate which country posed the greatest threat. Hillary Clinton answered, “Pakistan.” Barack Obama replied, “Iran.” Hillary had it right, of course.
If only she were president. However, it’s assuring that she is our Secretary of State. Doubtless, she is concentrating with all of her energy on how to cope with this crisis. I just pray she finds some way to slow, and hopefully halt, the progression of the extremist Taliban in Pakistan.
The alternative is too frightening to contemplate.
(Release: November 13)
on sale for only $16.95.
has a spatula.)
8% Off at $11.95, with a rare five-star ranking by 294 customers: 
And check out these: 
("This crazy redhead is on to something. Her pink Rambler story alone is worth the price of the book," writes 
- “Richard Sale’s reportage on Washington, the CIA, the American armed forces, and foreign intrigue has created a perfect background for this account of the steady growth of President Clinton as a master of the game of nations.”--W. Patrick Lang, former head of Middle East Operations, DIA
"Anne C. Heller's stunning biography of Ayn Rand" uses a "plethora of newly unearthed research and fresh insight."
Let’s see Iraq has a population of generously rounded up about 30 million. We went in there with about 140,000 troops and some wise generals suggested we needed three times as a many or say being a bit conservative about 400,000. Now Pakistan has 172 million or about 5.5 times more suggesting we need a mere 7-800,000 troops to stabilize the place. I’m sure we can count on our friends in China and Russia to help us out but if they can’t maybe Togo will help!
Sorry, my math is a bit fuzzy, not 7-800,000 troops but 2,000,000 troops need. That should be easy to come by!
maybe 0bama should go to pockistan (his pronounciation) and give them one of his kumbaya speeches at the same time dissing america. the taliban would surely love him and lay down their weapons and sing along.
no shit….
one of his kumbaya speeches, LOL!! I’m sure that would solve everything.
REally, the more you read the news, the more it looks like vicious gangs are taking over the world.
So this is the way Obama gets tested. He gets the nukes and moves toward 2012. Or, Obama sits on his hands and either the Taliban gets the nukes… else India destroys the nukes before that can happen… else Israel destroys the nukes before that can happen. The option to be quietly “present” is not available… sorry. Would be nice right now to see what Obama’s thesis on Soviet nuclear disarmament was all about… Too bad he lost it.
Uhhh…can we see a show of hands from those of you who feel comfortable with the Stoner in Chief handling this situation?
Thought so.
Paksitan. That is the country visited by Obama in 1981 while on spring break with one of his college friends who was from Pakistan, after Abdulah Azzam founded the refugee camp at Peshwar. The Palestinian, Abdullah Azzam had sent out a call for JIHAD to all young muslims worldwide to combat the USSR invasion of Pakistan. These volunteers came to be called “Freedom Fighters” or better known as “Mujahideen”. The young muslims were to be water boys, ammunition carriers, not fighters. So why did Obama visit Afghanistan in 1981? Why were people so interested in his passport in that period of time? Obama went from Indonesia to Pakistan at a time when all forieng travel was prohibited, but citizens of INDONESIA were welcome.
Excuse me. The Call for Jihad was to combat the invasion of Afghanistan. The Mujahideen later came to be called “Al Qeada”.
Hg, your excused. The Soviet invasion or the US one?
The Lion was killed by UBL. How does that make Mujahideen Al Qeada?
Mujahideen is Al Qaeda
Besides that is why God made whisky, So the Irish could not rule the world.HAHAHAHAHAHA. I suppose maybe I will have another pint now. Goodbye.
Saw a 3 hours program in late 2001 (in the EU) on Afghanistan and the leader of the Mujahideens of the Northern Alliance, Ahmed Massoud. He had written to the US Congress pleading for help before it would be too late. He had visited the EU also pleading his case against the Taliban…the US did not take his plead with enough urgency, and, as usual, the EU talked a lot about the urgency but did little.
There was a statement made that had he known English instead of French things would have been different, because he would not have made his trip west to the EU but to the US. 9/11 and other attacks might not be part of history today. His death 2 days before 9/11 speaks volumes of the strategy, planning, execution done by Al- Qaeda.
RW, MY point to Hg, exactly.
the way i see it, the difference in reproduction/militancy rates spells long term trouble for just about every civilized group of people on the planet. it would be one thing if the Taliban type groups were some sort of static entity, but they are multiplying much faster than we are and are willing to be much more ruthless in enforcing their ideology. i don’t know what the solution is.
China.
The invasion of Iraq was nothing but a distraction from our real business with al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan. Both could have been extinguished, if we had only kept our focus. Now the problem has metastisized to Pakistan, and it’s probably too damn late to put the fire out.
The Bush invasion of Iraq is probably going to go down in the books as the single biggest foreign policy blunder in the history of the United States of America.
Truly well-said.
But now we’re stuck with this mess, and I just pray that Holbrooke and Clinton and Gen. Jones can come up with something.
Someone above suggested that Israel or India might seize the nuclear weapons. Even though we’re not very well-loved there, it strikes me as much, much better if the U.S. does the deed, if it must be done. If India did it, all hell would break loose. Ditto Israel. All hell may well break loose too if the U.S. goes on.
I have no doubts that our contingency plans are very well-planned — our military is SO good at that. But the blowback is utterly unpredictable and extremely dangerous.
What a mess.
Right now, it would be nice to have some of that “moral authority” back. I think we can get the nukes, or Pakistan may even willingly hand them over. But that makes us the arbiter in any ensuing disputes between Pakistan and India. It is almost like adopting them. What a mess.
Of all conceivable scenarios, this seems to me the least likely.
US adopted Pakistan from the cold war times. Every dollar in its billions of aid went to strengthen Pakistan’s army against India and not its people which is why they are in such dire economic straits now. They exaggerate the threat India poses so they can play victim and get the aid. If they stop exporting terrorism and stop spewing hate toward India, India could be their finest ally (after all, they were all once the same people).
From: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=4782&page=0
[Interesting thing is Indians don't feel this kind of animosity toward Pakistanis.]
{Thanks for this post, Susan. I had been sitting on a bunch of sources waiting to write but never got the time.}
I HOPE you will post.
Btw, Holbrooke’s interview is truly fascinating to listen to — he realizes just how heavy his burden is. It’s quite something when even such a, well, people say he’s vain and testy — but he’s willing to admit that this is extraordinarily difficult. I rather liked his style with Zakaria — abrupt, challenging.
The Pakistani journalist is interesting to listen to as well.
Sometimes Zakaria has great shows. Will never forget the Spitzer interview, for example. God how we could use Spitzer about now in the White House, as an adviser or — oh hell — why not as another czar.
I was totally impressed with that Pakistani journalist’s intellectual honesty. If you remember, I had ended one of my posts where I said only Pakistan could save itself from Taliban and he said the same thing — I think the only viable solution is for Pak army to go after these militants and it will be a blood bath. Have you seen what is going on in Sri Lanka? I think the Sri Lanka govt is doing the right thing. These militants don’t understand the word diplomacy.
you may be right.
From a novice tactical point of view, the fact that the Taliban have migrated out of the NW province closer to population centers makes hellfire missle strikes more difficult.
BO standing on the stage during the primaries, talking about firing off missles, if there was a “high value target”, gets messy when they are landing in downtown Quetta.
It would be easier if the Pakistani government would ask for help securing the nukes, but even that would probably mean more resistance from the Taliban and create a situation where the tribal leaders would be easier to enlist in their cause. Why not call on NATO or the UN to participate so we aren’t alone in the fight. Every country in the area and in Europe have a stake in this because it is truly dangerous. Teak is right about China I think. Their help is so important. And Hillary was right and Obama was wrong. His lack of understanding makes me more grateful she is SoS. This is really scary situation. I’ve always wondered why the US gave tacit permission to India and their nuclear program? If I remember, last year, Bush agreed to sell fighter planes to Saudi Arabia which could conceivably be used against US bases in the area. It’s Russian Roulette.
Sorry rw and teak. It was rw who suggested China as part of the solution.
IMO, no invasion in Iraq would not have made much of a difference. Islamic fundamentalism had been growing since early 1900’s, first as a religious revival, then becoming politicized and spreading nationally, then regionally, and, in a globalized world, globally.
It is a movement that is in many places and 9/11 was TOO much of a success for the fundamentalists to simple have been eradicated by concentrating on Afghanistan and Pakistan. Maybe they would have been better contained in that region of the world.
I disagree rw. Actions have consequences and Arab countries don’t trust our intentions in the ME. When we invaded Iraq based on trumped up intelligence and given the military power of the US, the concern and anger increased. In the process, Bush squandered a lot of good will which existed post 9/11. It’s also stretched the military and has hurt our economy. But, as Susan said, we are there and someone has to have some common sense about where to go from here and it’s clear it won’t be Obama. Our fight isn’t about Islam and the radical elements, but more about our ME policy IMO.
You make a number of different valid points. But I was only addressing the point of the Iraq war on the Afghan/Pakistan issue.
My point was that Islamic fundamentalism (NOT ISLAM) would still be a major issue there whether there had been an invasion of Iraq or not. Islamic fundamentalism has a long history and it basically 1. rejects the western value sys. and capitalism 2. many Islamic org. provide for their people what the state does not: education, health, food (much like the communist org.in Europe prior to the rise in fascism) 3. Islamic fundamentalists were fighting the USSR in Afgh. before the US came in to train, arm and “Arabicize” them – they get energize to fight whomever threatens their way of thinking. It’s like Hillary Clinton said, you can’t go in and pull out, go in and pull out…go in and put the entire UN contingency nations to work on nation building and stay until it is done.
For courses read many books on the issue and the conclusion I came to is that there are many opinions as to why Islamic fundamentalism rises and ebbs but doesn’t disappear and there are equally as many opinions on what to do about it. And all this is just my opinion.
Very good post SusanUnpc.
All I can think of right now is…is this what Biden was talking about?
There is a camel looking for a straw here. The US military is not capable of any sustained commitment in Pakaistan. The Pak military is weaken by elements with in the ISI. None of this has any easy answers. Yet this a field that CAN NOT be abandoned. At what point do we alienate the Pakistani people? When we do or don’t show up?
Will the IMF and others loan money to the Pakistan in light of these developments?
I am sure India is none to thrilled with these developments either.
A broken arrow is a bad thing to have to look for sitting in UBL’s cave.
these must be those moderate ones.he should just go talk to them.he can say just cut it out now and we can have a pizza party..
These are the ones about which all of the most extreme negative stereotypes are true.
There are no moderate Taliban, cynic. They are by definition extremists. A couple of years before 9/11, they destroyed a two thousand year Buddha. They had public executions of women and men in soccer stadiums and refused to allow little girls an education. There has to be an answer short of force because that won’t work either, but making nice with them isn’t going to work. Our allies and even those who aren’t our friends, but realize how desperate this situation is, have to isolate them, cut off their income from poppy, block the flow of arms. They have to know there is no help anywhere.
America used to have presidents who stood up against dictators and extremist. Now, I don’t know what the Obama administrations stands for?
Vietnamese and Vietcong troops were hiding in Cambodia and Nixon bombed the hell out of Cambodia. So if the Al Qeada and/or Taliban is hiding in Pakistan why not bomb the hell out of Pakistan? Do unto others before they do unto you. The Pakistan nukes are probabely a lot worse than the Irannian nukes.
You read my mind.
Hg, I respectfully ask, what is the deal?
The Pakistan nukes are probabely a lot worse than the Irannian nukes. One nuke can ruin your day and it makes no difference
Bomb who exactly? Think you will make the non Taliban Pakistani society come over to join you?
We are talking about what has decades in the making.
You think AQ Kahn’s network will go away?
The Pakistan nukes are more advanced than any Irannian nuke, The Pakistanis have more advanced systems. Will Taliban come over to us–NO. They are a militant religious MOB. Will Iran ever be subjected to Taliban rule –NO. Both oppose each other and both are a danger in their own right. You are talking about TRIBAL CONTROL. Just like the Sioux Indians of North America might wish to control the Indian Nation Of North America. It Can’t be done.
Will Taliban come over to us–NO.
I said non Taliban. In that as PM317 said up thread, Pakistan has to solve this not us. And not to say we can’t “assist”.
With elements of the ISI aligned with the Taliban, the Pak Military has to cover its flanks.
Again what difference does where a nuke comes from? or if one is more advanced than another?
As for tribal control, it is a religious strata. Either way, nukes can screw with your day.
The taliban maybe like an ebola virus, the last thing anyone needs are broken arrows.
Well, Mr. Odramarama doesn’t like war. It is not very hopey-changey. He would much rather hug our enemies and bow to others. Remember, Obama likes to talk. He always made that clear, talk, talk, talk, speechify, speechify, speechify, hope, change, hope…action? Not so much. Barry’s tired and just wants his waffles!
That worked out well, didn’t it, Hg? It gave Pol Pot all the opportunity he needed to begin a reign of terror and there is no South Vietnam now.
The communists eventually won because they knew they could depend on their stateside allies like Jane Fonda, and people like YOU Elise, to undermine our efforts. You should be proud of the killing fields, you helped to create them.
This is just another example that appeasement never works. The Pakistani government has been carrying out a conciliatory program with the Taliban and this is what you get–a train wreck.
I found a quote that seems to fit:
“Appeasers believe that if you keep on throwing steaks to a tiger, the tiger will become a vegetarian.” [Heywood Broun]
Not likely.
Of course the ante is upped in this case because there’s the possibility of nukes in the hands of rogues and criminals.
And we haven’t even hit Day 100. Whew! Chilling.
I’m sorry, I thought we were migrating the entire Taliban to the US, feeding, clothing and lodging them, all on the taxpayers. Did I miss something?
From Holbrooke’s comments above: And it seems to me that that ought to be a wakeup call to everybody in Pakistan that you can’t deal with these people by giving away territory
Why should land for peace with the islamists sworn to the destruction of the pakistani government ever be considered a workable policy when this same policy has failed Israel time after time in its concessions made to the islamists sworn to its destruction?
The Taliban–”religious students”–are not going to compromise with anybody. As far as they are concerned, their beliefs are non-negotiable. Peaceful coexistence is not an option. Upthread, cynic uses this phrase: “Now the problem has metastasized to Pakistan.” So how do we get red of a cancer that has metastasized without killing the patient? Pretty soon, surgical removal will no longer be possible. The closer the cancer spreads to vital organs (i.e., population centers), the more difficult it will be to remove it.
I’m just “playing” with the metaphor. I know this isn’t going to be easy.
So we pat the Pakistanis on the heads… give them moral and military support if “they” take on the Taliban on their own soil and do it swiftly. They now have the moral authority they need to take care of business with the Taliban. We have another front against the Taliban… win-win?
It’s easier to think about it when it’s in the form of a hypothetical metaphor, isn’t it? Once the metaphor is translated into reality, the options don’t seem so clear-cut anymore . . .
But yes, it seems that if the Pakistanis do not take on the Taliban “on their own soil and do it swiftly,” they will soon be faced with a civil war, with the Taliban taking the initiative. And the nukes are the big wild-card in this that nobody can ignore . . . I too will repeat the prevalent mantra of this thread: “what a mess . . . “
If it were a board game it could be fun. Seeing it’s reality, you just hope that the people in charge will do the right things at the right time and for the right reasons. Otherwise, it is not likely to go well at all. Yes, what a mess.
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. When Adolph Hitler was rattling his sabres in the early 1930’s and Neville Chamberlain announced “Peace in Our Time”, it should have taught us a lesson that we would never forget. But each dictator, tyrant or group of renegades that strives for power, whether it be for ideological or religious reasons, or just that a meglomaniac is hungry for power, there is always a timid, cowardly or foolish head of state that will give in to evil that promises peace if only ……………..
So they give in and give in and give in until there is nothing left to give and they are swallowed up.
Whether Pakistan is what Joe Biden was talking about several months ago, (the six months surprise) I have always felt that there is a reason from Obama’s past that he is so obsessed with Pakistan.
This is a very troublesome problem and I pray that our Secretary of State is allowed to use her head in this matter. I was not in favor of her accepting this position because I thought she deserves better, but I thank God that she is there at this point in time.
May God keep her safe guide her in this endeavor.
And may God Bless America.
Here comes Barack Obama’s first genuine 3:00 AM phone call. God help us!
[...] of history and current issues at her fingertips. This is a follow-up to my earlier story, “[Update] Taliban Encroachment in Pakistan Grows at Terrifying Pace: What Does the U.S. Do?.” (Stay tuned for another story by John [...]
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
In the early 1930’s when Adolph Hitler was rattling his sabres and Neville Chamberlain came back from a meeting with him and announced “Peace in Our Time” he had just delivered Europe to the Nazis.
Appeasement never works. Whether it is to a crazed dictator or a group of religious fanatical thugs all it does is give them license to continue to grab more territory.
This is a very troubling situation, and I hope that our Secretary of State is allowed her head in this matter. She and Richard Holbrooke between them have enough experience to handle this and it won’t be easy.
Whether Pakistan is what Joe Biden was referring to when he said “six months down the road” I don’t know, but it has always been suspect that Obama is so obsessed with Pakistan, and has been since his school days.
Whether Pakistan is a problem on its own, or just another step in a nefarious plan to promote Sharia Law around the world, we’d better all pray that God gives Clinton and Holbrooke the strength and ability to handle this matter. Please let’s hope Obama is not involved because he will just louse it up.
This could end up as Armageddon for sure.
Pakistan supported the Taliban in Afghanistan for years and have mostly ignored them along the Afghanistan and Pakistani boarder. So this was something that they created in one way or an other. However, this will be a problem for China and India to resolve. We could provide them with some logistical support. I am bit tiered of the world blaming US for everything so have them try to get along with out us for a change and lets see how that will work out.
This is scary stuff!
Sometimes I get a crazy thought that Obama really is the Manchurian Candidate, weakening us and leaving us vulnerable from the inside.
He “vacationed” for a summer in Pakistan while he was in college. I’d really like to know what he was doing there, especially since the only reason why college age males go to Pakistan is to become radicalized, murderous Muslims.
We got in this mess with Pakistan because of the self righteous left who wanted the strong man Musharref replaced. Now you have a limp wrist reformer that’s capitualting state power to the Taliban and soon they will control the nukes
Alqueda and nukes controlling Pakistan all because of a false morality that right makes good.
How we miss Mushareff now!