Op-Ed: Pakistan - Failed state in the making, or the new war zone? By By Paul Wallis Feb 26, 2009 in World One thing’s for sure: If there’s been a real loser in the War On Terror, it’s Pakistan. The long suffering, faction-ridden country is in serious trouble. A hideous alignment of simultaneous problems is starting to break the structure of the country. Pakistan’s real problem is having far too many factions and opposing forces inside a country which can’t afford the constant polarizations and mutual obstruction. Some people may have forgotten that Pakistan was at one stage on its way to becoming a modern nation, with a miniature version of India’s middle class, and some prosperity. Currently, Pakistan is basket case territory, in terms of economic conditions. Since the original Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and the rise of the Taliban, the nation has been going straight backwards. It’s difficult and dangerous to do business in a war zone, and that, in effect, is the problem. The massive splits in the society have made a bad situation a lot worse. The insurgency in the north, which former President Musharraf attempted to suppress with military force, has exposed all the gaping wounds of a nation at war with itself. Pakistan’s military is simply not up to doing the military work required to win a war in the north. Its outdated Soviet era forces have tried hard. But against the terrain, the huge area, and veteran mujihadin and the local tribes, famous North West Frontier warriors themselves like the Pashtun, the shot’s not really on the board. The war in Afghanistan is spilling over into Pakistan, whether the Pakistanis like it or not, and they don’t. The CIA says that The problem with that idea is that these weapons come with a severe level of requirements for increased technical capacity and training, and that can’t be done overnight. Nor is the US noticeably enthused, although the new administration is taking on board the obvious fact that Pakistan’s capacity to fight terrorism does have to be drastically improved. Afghanistan and Pakistan are mutually suspicious of each other. Afghanistan doesn’t trust Pakistan because of Pakistan’s support of the Taliban. Pakistan believes Afghanistan to be too friendly with India, according to some sources, although there doesn’t seem to be a lot of evidence of any overt alliance. Which is the setting for the “failed state” scenario. Aid, however, isn’t likely to be the answer to the social dysfunction. You can’t glue a country back together with the equivalent of a Social Security check. Some sort of workable relationship among the factions, and de-polarization of the country, has to occur, before any normality can be achieved. Having done which, Pakistan can start trying to undo the damage done by the Taliban and Al Qaeda. The north is likely to become a desert, with these forces now at work enforcing their bogus Islam on the inhabitants, some of whom are already starving. The Taliban have already demolished many schools in the province of Swat, where “Sharia for peace” is the basis of the agreement. Have a look at the Australian documentary by The administration is talking about “limited” objectives in simply making sure Afghanistan isn’t used as a base for attacks on the US. I would suggest that only if you apply the standards of 2002 does that objective makes sense. If you apply the facts of 2009, it’s far more likely that a failed Pakistan would be a base for any future attacks. I doubt if it really matters where an attack comes from, if it hits. The Taliban are using the tried and trusted “Border War” scenario, which has protected criminals and terrorists for centuries. It’s a well known tactic, where guerrillas make raids and then scuttle back across a border, any border. The only cure for that is action on both sides of the border. Pakistan is theoretically protecting its own most likely destroyers. If Pakistan becomes a failed state, the Taliban and Al Qaeda have all the materials they need, including nukes. Which would mean total failure of the War on Terror, and perhaps a major war, in the event of an attack on the US or India. This is the scenario to avoid at all costs. Either that, or start working on the Happy World War Three commemorative mugs. The situation in Pakistan has been developing in ways even dedicated professional pessimists would have tried to avoid thinking about. The “Sharia for peace” initiative (see Subhabrata Das' previous DJ article ) has been variously described as a victory for the Taliban, and a defeat for Islamabad. In practice, it’s likely to be a defeat for Pakistan as a whole.Pakistan’s real problem is having far too many factions and opposing forces inside a country which can’t afford the constant polarizations and mutual obstruction. Some people may have forgotten that Pakistan was at one stage on its way to becoming a modern nation, with a miniature version of India’s middle class, and some prosperity.Currently, Pakistan is basket case territory, in terms of economic conditions. Since the original Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and the rise of the Taliban, the nation has been going straight backwards. It’s difficult and dangerous to do business in a war zone, and that, in effect, is the problem. The massive splits in the society have made a bad situation a lot worse.The insurgency in the north, which former President Musharraf attempted to suppress with military force, has exposed all the gaping wounds of a nation at war with itself. Pakistan’s military is simply not up to doing the military work required to win a war in the north. Its outdated Soviet era forces have tried hard. But against the terrain, the huge area, and veteran mujihadin and the local tribes, famous North West Frontier warriors themselves like the Pashtun, the shot’s not really on the board.The war in Afghanistan is spilling over into Pakistan, whether the Pakistanis like it or not, and they don’t. The CIA says that Predator drone attacks inside Pakistan will continue , because they’re achieving results against the Taliban and Al Qaeda. Pakistan has objected to the strikes, and wants to conduct these operations itself, using US missiles and equipment.The problem with that idea is that these weapons come with a severe level of requirements for increased technical capacity and training, and that can’t be done overnight. Nor is the US noticeably enthused, although the new administration is taking on board the obvious fact that Pakistan’s capacity to fight terrorism does have to be drastically improved.Afghanistan and Pakistan are mutually suspicious of each other. Afghanistan doesn’t trust Pakistan because of Pakistan’s support of the Taliban. Pakistan believes Afghanistan to be too friendly with India, according to some sources, although there doesn’t seem to be a lot of evidence of any overt alliance.Which is the setting for the “failed state” scenario. The Atlantic Council , which has been the voice for US international leadership, has stated that Pakistan will require at least twice the amount of aid currently being proposed.Aid, however, isn’t likely to be the answer to the social dysfunction. You can’t glue a country back together with the equivalent of a Social Security check. Some sort of workable relationship among the factions, and de-polarization of the country, has to occur, before any normality can be achieved.Having done which, Pakistan can start trying to undo the damage done by the Taliban and Al Qaeda. The north is likely to become a desert, with these forces now at work enforcing their bogus Islam on the inhabitants, some of whom are already starving. The Taliban have already demolished many schools in the province of Swat, where “Sharia for peace” is the basis of the agreement. Have a look at the Australian documentary by Four Corners , to see how well Swat is doing under its new owners.The administration is talking about “limited” objectives in simply making sure Afghanistan isn’t used as a base for attacks on the US.I would suggest that only if you apply the standards of 2002 does that objective makes sense. If you apply the facts of 2009, it’s far more likely that a failed Pakistan would be a base for any future attacks.I doubt if it really matters where an attack comes from, if it hits.The Taliban are using the tried and trusted “Border War” scenario, which has protected criminals and terrorists for centuries. It’s a well known tactic, where guerrillas make raids and then scuttle back across a border, any border. The only cure for that is action on both sides of the border. Pakistan is theoretically protecting its own most likely destroyers.If Pakistan becomes a failed state, the Taliban and Al Qaeda have all the materials they need, including nukes. Which would mean total failure of the War on Terror, and perhaps a major war, in the event of an attack on the US or India.This is the scenario to avoid at all costs.Either that, or start working on the Happy World War Three commemorative mugs. This opinion article was written by an independent writer. The opinions and views expressed herein are those of the author and are not necessarily intended to reflect those of DigitalJournal.com More about Pakistan, Failed State, Strikes More news from pakistan failed state strikes