The Mound of Sound

If you’re never heard of Takfiris you soon will for they’re the Muslim equivalent of ninjas and they’re about to really stir things up in Pakistan.

Like the legendary ninja, the Takfiri is an assassin, but one religiously motivated to slaughter fellow Muslims they judge apostate for failing to embrace Islam strictly as revealed by Muhammed and his companions. Anyone deviating from the path is considered no longer Muslim and, hence, an infidel deserving of assassination.

Asia Times Online warns that a Takfiri force is about to be unleashed in Pakistan:

On the one side are US-backed President Pervez Musharraf and political parties such as Bhutto’s Pakistan People’s Party (now headed by her 19-year-old son Bilawal) and Nawaz Sharif’s Pakistan Muslim League.

Against them are al-Qaeda ideologues such as Egyptian scholar Sheikh Essa, who are determined to stamp their vision on the country and its neighbor, Afghanistan.

Prior to 2003, the entire al-Qaeda camp in the North Waziristan and South Waziristan tribal areas of Pakistan was convinced that its battle should be fought in Afghanistan against the foreign troops there, and not in Pakistan against its Muslim army.

That stance was changed by Sheikh Essa, who had taken up residence in the town of Mir Ali in North Waziristan, where his sermons raised armies of takfiris (those who consider all non-practicing Muslims to be infidels). He was convinced that unless Pakistan became the Taliban’s (and al-Qaeda’s) strategic depth, the war in Afghanistan could not be won.

In a matter of a few years, his ideology has taken hold and all perceived American allies in Pakistan have become prime targets. Local adherents of the takfiri ideology, like Sadiq Noor and Abdul Khaliq, have grown strong and spread the word in North Waziristan. Former members of jihadi outfits such as Jaish-i-Mohammed, Laskhar-i-Toiba and Lashkar-i-Jhangvi have gathered in North Waziristan and declared Sheikh Essa their ideologue.

This is the beginning of the new world of takfiriat, reborn in North Waziristan many decades after having first emerged in Egypt in the late 1960s. On the advice of Sheikh Essa, militants have tried several times to assassinate Musharraf, launched attacks on the Pakistani military, and then declared Bhutto a target.

This nest of takfiris and their intrigues was on the radar of the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the day after Bhutto’s killing Sheikh Essa was targeted by CIA Predator drones in his home in North Waziristan. According to Asia Times Online contacts, he survived, but was seriously wounded. Sheikh Essa had only recently recovered from a stroke which had left him bedridden.

Someone has to smash this radical, fundamentalist threat. The West already has its hands full in Iraq and Afghanistan. Venturing into Pakistan could be a terrible debacle. Isn’t it time the very nations next in line to be targetted by these extremists – countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt – finally took some responsibility for defending Islam and moderate Muslim states from the ravages of these Islamist Jihadis? It’s not as though these countries don’t already feel threatened by the Wahabis, they do. The capricious Sauds have been playing both sides of this street for so long that they’re vulnerable to the very monster they themselves empowered. It’s not only Pakistan’s survival that’s at stake, it’s their own.

General Rick Hillier has let the cat out of the bag, the Taliban is getting outside help.

Hillier said the Afghan insurgents are getting help from other radical groups, including those fighting in Iraq. Roadside booby traps in Afghanistan, also known as improvised explosive devices or IEDs, are becoming more sophisticated and deadly, in part because of outside help.

“We do see some of the tactics, perhaps, that do come out of Iraq,” he said. “It’s hard to say exactly . . . but we are pretty confident that some of the tactics in use of IEDs . . . has come out of Iraq, without question.”

Support goes beyond expertise in explosives.

“Do we see foreign fighters in Afghanistan? We do.

“We see Chechens . . . and we see Arabs and Egyptians, Arabs from a variety of nations. We see Algerians and Moroccans, not in big numbers, but we do see those folks there.”

Hillier seems to have made no mention of the (rabidly radical Sunni) Taliban being fed improvised explosive devices by (fiercely fundamentalist Shiite) Iran. This allegation was made by Hillier’s boss, DefMin Pmackay, in Kandahar on Christmas day. Curious omission, that.

The general said that our glorious success in Afghanistan could have a stabilizing effect across the entire region – even in placid Pakistan next door. Yeah, right.

It’s not that I don’t expect Hillier to be top cheerleader for the Afghan mission. He hatched the idea and then sold it to the pols after all. What I find troubling is that he utterly shies away from discussing the metrics of just how well we’re doing.

How well are we doing in Afghanistan? Who knows? How does one tell? Just what does winning look like? What does losing look like? How many areas in Kandahar province are free from the prospect of Taliban infiltration or attack? Maybe that’s not a good measure. How many towns and villages can resist Taliban intimidation? That’s probably not a good one either. How much territory do we control this year compared to last year and the year before? Move along, nothing to see here.

I guess we could use body counts, or at least we could if we had any reliable means to differentiate the civilians we kill from the insurgents we kill. Then again, body counts aren’t much use if the enemy is able to readily replace his losses and keep recruiting and training new fighters as needed.

Hillier hasn’t just lowered the bar, he’s gotten rid of it entirely. The goal he initially set – way back when he talked our leaders into approving “the mission” – was to drive the Taliban out of Kandahar province. It was to kill a few dozen “scumbags.” So just how has the general met his own stated objectives? Well, he’s certainly killed a few dozen “scumbags” and a few dozen civilians to boot. But he’s not driven the Taliban out of Kandahar. To the contrary, a few dozen have grown into many hundreds at least, possibly more, and they’re not “out” of Kandahar but they are “throughout” Kandahar. The Taliban force has grown by leaps and bounds since we first arrived and yet we’re still fielding the same minuscule battle group to fight them.

We’ve got some very important decisions to make this year including whether to extend “the mission” past its scheduled end in 2009. It’s going to be a tough decision. Nobody in NATO wants in and yet no one wants to be the first to bail out either. The Dutch just extended their commitment to mid-2010 and I’m very suspicious that their incremental extension was taken in the hope that we would get out first so they didn’t look quite so bad.

We’ve got important decisions to take and not much time to mull them over. Now, more than ever, we need some plain talk and clear direction from Rick Hillier. He either has to show us how to make this thing work, with clear and precise objectives, or he has to admit he hasn’t got a clue about winning in Kandahar. I think he’ll do everything he can to duck the tough questions that only he can address in hope that the whole thing can be blamed on feckless politicians.

Here’s something to celebrate tonight – the end of the Bush regime. Seven long years and counting, seven more months to go. Why so soon? Because Congress will recess for the 4th of July celebrations and that’ll be it until the next president takes office. There’ll probably be a few appropriations bills passed but there won’t be any real legislative initiatives churned through Congress, the books will be closed on them if they aren’t already.

Bush is going to try to push some muddled, Middle East agenda, but those who matter in that region are already waiting to see who will be the next occupant of the Oval Office. That’s the person who matters to them now, not George w. Bush.

Then there are the wars. Afghanistan and Iraq remain in tatters and now Pakistan looms large as the next hot spot (and we thought it was going to be Iran – how silly). I expect Bush will opt for the security of military rule while making all the appropriate noises about democracy and civilian rule in Islamabad. When the going gets tough the Bushies look for tough guys, not democracy activists.

All things considered, I suspect the Frat Boy president will be glad to see the day where he can vacate the premises and leave his successor the job of cleaning up his neo-con, foreign policy incontinence.

If there’s one legislative battle of interest, it may be Bush’s initiative to make his tax cuts, scheduled to lapse in 2010, permanent.

So, raise a glass tonight to a better future – for Washington and the world – and don’t forget that this year we can also celebrate the 4th of July!

This time it’s El Rosarito’s police force that’s been disarmed after an attempt on the life of its police chief raised suspicions the force had been infiltrated by drug traffickers. From The Guardian:

The guns from the El Rosarito force will be tested to see if they were used in recent crimes, including an incident in which hooded gunmen walked through the local security chief’s offices shooting out computers and telephones, and leaving one person dead. The officers will also undergo “trust tests” expected to include lie-detector sessions and drug screening.

The security chief and local mayor have been assigned personal security entourages of dozens of soldiers, while the army has taken over everyday patrolling duties in the town of 160,000 next to Tijuana.

“We recognise that the enemy is inside our house and for this reason we are purging our ranks,” the head of the state police, Daniel de la Rosa, told reporters.

The newspaper El Universal has put the total of execution-style murders for 2007 at 2,673, 20% more than 2006.

Peter Galbraith, writing in The Guardian, doubts that Pakistani democracy will survive the assassination of Benazir Bhutto.

Galbraith who has vast experience of the region as a former Senate Foreign Relations committee staffer and US diplomat believes that the Pakistani military will prevail instead.

“For all its flaws, the PPP is Pakistan’s only true national institution. As well as overwhelming support in the Bhutto family’s home province of Sindh, it has substantial support in Punjab and North-West Frontier Province. Like many south Asian political parties, it is a family affair, but it has an enduring platform: opposition to military rule.

Pakistan’s army has long defined itself as the guardian of the nation, and successive generals have used this role as their excuse to seize and hold power. But the army is not a national institution. Historically, the Punjab has produced 90% of the officer corps while the Sindh, with 25% of Pakistan’s population, is essentially unrepresented. Sindhis tend to see army rule as equivalent to Punjabi rule. The Bhutto killing sparked widespread attacks on federal property in Sindh and could galvanise separatist sentiment in the province.

Benazir was an extraordinarily gifted politician. She was a brilliant strategist who focused not only on finding a way back to power for a third time but also on constructing a moderate coalition – including power-sharing with Pervez Musharraf – that could defeat extremism, make peace with India and thus create conditions that would get the army out of politics for good.

But the larger problem is the Pakistani military. Pakistan’s ruling generals have an almost unbroken record of sacrificing the national interest for their personal interest. Musharraf is not as bloodthirsty as his predecessor Zia ul-Haq but is no less keen on power.
Since Musharraf has certainly read the handwriting on the wall and yet still intends to stay in power, there is not much foreign leaders can do, in effect, to encourage his departure. Many Pakistanis – and most Sindhis – believe Musharraf and the army had a role in the Bhutto killing, which took place in a garrison city. Musharraf cannot be trusted to conduct an impartial investigation of the murder of his top rival. He has sacked Pakistan’s independent-minded judges and imprisoned its lawyers.”

Galbraith contends the US and Britain should press for an independent, United Nations investigation of the assassination.

“The Bhutto killing is tearing Pakistan apart. A UN investigation can help calm passions, but only the permanent departure of the army from power can provide a hope – and it is only a hope – of saving the country.”

Here’s another reason why Canada is a great place to live. According to a survey by Privacy International, Canada remains a leading nation in protecting the privacy of its citizens.

From CanWest News Service:

“The 2007 rankings indicate an overall worsening of privacy protection across the world,” says an overview of Privacy International’s findings on the group’s website.

The report describes “an increasing trend amongst governments to archive data on the geographic, communications and financial records of all their citizens and residents.

“This trend leads to the conclusion that all citizens, regardless of legal status, are under suspicion,” the report states.

The countries that received the highest marks for protecting individual privacy in 2007 were Greece, Romania and Canada.

However the news wasn’t all good for Canada.

Last year this country was described as having “significant protections and safeguards.” The new ranking says Canada has “some safeguards but weakened protections.”

The lowest ranking countries in the survey were Malaysia, Russia and China.

The United States, which has been criticized for its domestic surveillance as part of its war on terrorism, joined the United Kingdom on the list of nations described as “endemic surveillance societies” – the ranking’s worst category.

The assassination of Benazir Bhutto has plunged Pakistan into turmoil. Her Pakistan People’s Party was always a one-woman band so there is no natural successor to step into her shoes. That leaves Sharif and Musharraf. Of the two, Mushie is probably the strongest but is he strong enough?

What happens if Pakistan falls to a leader the nation cannot adequately support? It may fall back on the time-honoured alternative – military rule. That would mean that Musharraf’s own, freshly-minted army leader, Ashfaq Kiyani, could step into his boss’s old spot.

Kiyani is not only a career soldier from Punjab but he was also his nation’s spymaster as former head of the Interservice Intelligence Agency (ISI). It’s widely believed that Musharraf chose Kiyani to take over as head of the armed forces primarily because of his loyalty to Mushie but now that loyalty may be severely tested.

Musharraf’s power is waning and, in Pakistan, that’s not a good thing when political power is always shared with military power. As Mushie declines, Kiyani’s position is ascendant. Some analysts are now of the opinion that, if the unrest against Musharraf isn’t quieted soon, the army may “invite” him to step aside so that Kiyani can assume total control.

It’s also reported that Kiyani has strong links with Washington so he may been seen as the best option to put down unrest.

Penny wise, pound foolish. An old English truism about how a person can be utterly focused on saving a few pence but be wholly blind to wasting pound upon pound.

Squandered. That may be a fitting epitaph for the West’s hapless adventure in Afghanistan. Opportunities squandered, treasure squandered, lives squandered – all in the name of being penny wise.

We wandered into the very heartland of insurgencies whose backward people have driven out one powerful invader after another for centuries – a perfect record in fact – and we thought we could do it on the cheap with what amounts to barely more than a token force when measured against the enormity of the challenge.

Washington and its Foreign Legion sallied forth in the arrogant belief our inherent superiority would bend these peasants to our will. Six years later and our military leaders still boast that the insurgents cannot fight us “head to head.” That’s as irrelevant and foolish as saying the Taliban is doomed because it has no submarines.

Memo to Washington, Ottawa and Brussels – these guys didn’t fight “head to head” when they drove out Alexander or the British army (twice) or the Soviet army. They don’t fight to lose, they fight to win and they know what works where, judging by the idiotic statements that still issue from our side, we don’t.

Six lost years.

We got it wrong from the outset, confusing pushing on an open door with great military victory. The Taliban and the Northern Alliance had fought each other to utter exhaustion before 9/11. They were reduced to trench warfare that largely consisted of lobbing a few tank shells at each other every day. All our vaunted Western firepower really was little more than the straw that broke the camel’s back and sent the Taliban retreating to the hills. As military victories go, that’s about as meagre as they come and yet we were in the mood for celebrating great victory over the villains of 9/11 so that’s exactly what we did. And so it was entered into the history books.

And then we proceded to turn the country on its head and miraculously transform it into a wonderful, Western-style democracy. We held an election, ensuring that our guy won. Then we sent the Foreign Legion into the field in pitiful numbers to hold the fort.

Do you remember General Rick Hillier swaggering about and proclaiming how his 2,500 strong ground force was going to Kandahar province to “kill scumbags” whose numbers he assured us were a mere few dozen? It didn’t matter that he had a mere one rifle for every 30 sq. kms. of turf he’d undertaken to defend because there were only a few dozen bad guys and they were already all but whipped, right? As the words spilled out of his mouth they all sounded so confident, so convincing.

Six years later.

How things have changed. The vermin we thought exterminated have multiplied, sharpened their teeth and nails, and returned to plague us.

Our “just add water and stir” approach to building Afghan democracy has achieved every result predictable including insinuation into senior levels of the government of warlords, drug lords and even some known to collaborate with the insurgency. Is it any surprise that a horde like this would produce a national police service that is utterly corrupt and predatory to the civilian population?

That government is the foundation for everything we seek to accomplish in Afghanistan, whether civilian or military. And yet we simply look the other way lest we have to confront the reality that this foundation is rotten and crumbling. But, then again, this is Afghanistan and, even if you turn your back to one failure you then turn your face toward another – whether it is the fields of opium poppies, police banditry or a population utterly vulnerable and compromised by a resurgent guerrilla campaign.

Now we have the neighbouring state, Pakistan, thrown into even greater upheaval by the assassination of Bhutto. It is this state, where we’re also promoting an “add water and stir” democracy, that serves as a refuge, staging area and training ground for our own insurgency.

Six years on, we’ve squandered lives, we’ve squandered treasure but, most critically, we’ve squandered time we never could afford to waste. We have reached the bottom of our bag of tricks and have now produced what is gradually becoming a permanent culture shaped by medieval feudalism, crime, corruption and conflict. The longer it is allowed to persist the more entrenched it becomes and the fewer options remain to us to change it to our liking.

The northern warlords – once our supposed allies – see what’s coming and are re-arming, fully intending to call home their ethnic segments of the Afghan army when the time comes. They’ve lost faith in Kabul and Karzai, in the US and NATO, and they have a strong sense of what’s ahead. Washington and Brussels may tell us that the mission is a generational thing but find one group in Afghanistan willing to wait that long.

Is Pakistan in any condition to attempt the leap into the uncertain arms of democracy? Despite the assassination of the one person most capable of attempting to bring her volatile country in that direction, the Musharraf government continues to be pressured to hold national elections scheduled in less than two weeks.

Why?

Pakistan’s military will not tolerate weak and ineffective civilian rule which is about all that is possible in the country’s current state of disarray. What can be gained from putting Pakistan through a repeat of the Zia and Musharraf coups?

Even Bhutto’s own PPP party was so fragile that, without her, there is no obvious leader to take her place. It was a one-woman band. That leaves her former rival, Sharif, who has already declared his party will boycott the elections. That seems to leave the way clear for Musharraf’s bunch to win and what conceivable credibility will invest them in these circumstances?

Even without the existential challenges from al-Qaeda and the Taliban and other, homegrown Jihadist and Islamist groups, civilian rule for Pakistan is a dubious prospect. One major reason is the pervasive influence of the Pakistani military, not only in the nation’s politics but in its economy.

Not only does the military have huge sums invested in businesses and real estate, but less active military officers commonly work in the economic sector. Retired members of the military have many business advantages, especially when competing for government contracts.

The Pakistani military is also able to acquire private land and redistribute it for its own personnel, where military-owned construction and transportation companies monopolize service through preferential awarding of government grants.

In Pakistan there are over 90 military foundations providing a wide variety of goods and services. There are also undocumented ventures such as bakeries and gas stations, which are set up in communities where they are able to undercut local prices.

Additionally, the actual military possesses financial autonomy and capacity to redistribute resources. The Pakistani military possesses considerable financial autonomy and is able to use the principle of eminent domain-generally used in America during the creation of highways, or public buildings-to acquire public land and redistribute it to their personnel.

Currently, the Pakistani military receives 10 percent of newly available land. The military received three million acres in 11 provinces in the last few years – just over 3.5 billion American dollars worth of property. As a result, there is less land for peasants to farm.

Military officials in Pakistan will aggressively defend these types of actions, saying that their business ventures are more effective and successful than private ones, and that that they are trying to raise money to better care for their soldiers.

Establishing legitimate democracy in Pakistan will require wholesale reform of the country’s military, prying away its economic clout. Until then the most that can be achieved at the ballot box is the creation of a weaker and ultimately secondary, civilian administration. A civilian government that rules only at the sufferance of an autonomous military is pretty much doomed from the start.

The Israeli military has notified the Israeli military that it has completely exonerated the Israeli military in its use of cluster bombs in Lebanon during its failed skirmish with Hezbollah in 2006.

Israel’s military advocate-general, Brig-Gen Avihai Mendelblit found the, ” majority of the cluster munitions were fired at open and uninhabited areas”, but in some cases the military hit residential areas, responding to rocket attacks by Hezbollah. In Maroon a-Ras, the bombs were used to “allow the evacuation” of Israeli soldiers.

Amnon Vidan of Amnesty International in Israel said he was not surprised by the decision, noting that in such cases, rather than have the army investigate itself, it was better that an international investigation take place.

“The amount of cluster bombs used in civilian areas, as well as testimonies by soldiers about the use of the bombs, and Israel’s refusal to hand over to the UN maps of the locations where it fired the bombs to help demining efforts,” all point to different conclusions than those reached by the military, he said.