Tuesday, February 26, 2008
In Washington, much interest in Pakistan vote, but few policy options
Terrorist attacks, civil upheaval and a parliamentary election on February 18 that shaped the battle against radical extremism have moved Pakistan to the hottest of front burners within the Bush administration.
Nearly every week since November, the White House has received detailed intelligence briefings - known as "deep dives" - on everything from President Pervez Musharraf's struggle to retain power to the minutiae of the Pakistani army's search for al-Qaida members in the country's western mountains. President Bush has chaired numerous national security meetings and Vice Dick President Cheney sends a stream of queries to his underlings.
Top U.S. military, diplomatic and intelligence officials, including Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell, CIA Director Michael Hayden and the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman, Adm. Michael Mullen, have traveled to Islamabad in recent weeks, seeking to tighten the bilateral embrace.
"If you said there were A, B, C and D leagues of diplomatic and security engagement," one high-ranking official said, "this is A league."
Yet despite intense efforts to anticipate and direct events, the administration has no clear idea of what the immediate post election future will bring, few ways of influencing it and a policy that amounts over the short term to little more than crossing one's fingers and hoping for the best.
When Assistant Secretary of State Richard Boucher was pressed recently by lawmakers for a "Plan B," beyond advocating electoral fairness and transparency, he had little to offer. Various scenarios had been gamed out, Boucher told a House oversight hearing late last month, "Until you see the actual situation, it's very hard to decide precisely how to deal with it."
He continued, "Exactly what we would do, in the case of widespread violence after the election, would really depend on what it was and where it came from. If it were ignited by the militants, there's a chance that we could work and see the society band together. But if it were the result of electoral fraud, that, obviously, creates a much more complicated situation." It is "a real possibility," he said, but "I don't think I'm really able to give you a clear answer right now as to exactly what we would do."
U.S. inability to influence events has left policy in "suspended animation," said a counter terrorism official. Another official said, "I wouldn't want to call it a glide path, but there's some element of truth in that." They were among a half dozen senior officials interviewed for this article across the government's national security branches - none of whom was authorized to discuss the sensitive issue on the record.
Political upheaval has exacerbated long-standing anxiety
To read the full article, click here...
To read the ePaper, visit: http://www.newsindia-times.com
Nearly every week since November, the White House has received detailed intelligence briefings - known as "deep dives" - on everything from President Pervez Musharraf's struggle to retain power to the minutiae of the Pakistani army's search for al-Qaida members in the country's western mountains. President Bush has chaired numerous national security meetings and Vice Dick President Cheney sends a stream of queries to his underlings.
Top U.S. military, diplomatic and intelligence officials, including Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell, CIA Director Michael Hayden and the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman, Adm. Michael Mullen, have traveled to Islamabad in recent weeks, seeking to tighten the bilateral embrace.
"If you said there were A, B, C and D leagues of diplomatic and security engagement," one high-ranking official said, "this is A league."
Yet despite intense efforts to anticipate and direct events, the administration has no clear idea of what the immediate post election future will bring, few ways of influencing it and a policy that amounts over the short term to little more than crossing one's fingers and hoping for the best.
When Assistant Secretary of State Richard Boucher was pressed recently by lawmakers for a "Plan B," beyond advocating electoral fairness and transparency, he had little to offer. Various scenarios had been gamed out, Boucher told a House oversight hearing late last month, "Until you see the actual situation, it's very hard to decide precisely how to deal with it."
He continued, "Exactly what we would do, in the case of widespread violence after the election, would really depend on what it was and where it came from. If it were ignited by the militants, there's a chance that we could work and see the society band together. But if it were the result of electoral fraud, that, obviously, creates a much more complicated situation." It is "a real possibility," he said, but "I don't think I'm really able to give you a clear answer right now as to exactly what we would do."
U.S. inability to influence events has left policy in "suspended animation," said a counter terrorism official. Another official said, "I wouldn't want to call it a glide path, but there's some element of truth in that." They were among a half dozen senior officials interviewed for this article across the government's national security branches - none of whom was authorized to discuss the sensitive issue on the record.
Political upheaval has exacerbated long-standing anxiety
To read the full article, click here...
To read the ePaper, visit: http://www.newsindia-times.com
Labels: Pakistan vote, policy options, President Pervez Musharraf's
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
