In a good post at War on the Rocks on what appears to be President Trump’s new policy with respect to Pakistan Christopher Clary summarizes Pakistan’s influence on our efforts in Afghanistan:
That partnership likely includes considerable Pakistani cooperation with Western intelligence agencies examining threats from citizens or visitors of Pakistani origin, though the full extent is unclear in the open domain. The counter-terrorism partnership’s most publicized aspect is, ironically, the one that ought to be the most secret — the U.S. “covert†program to target terrorists in Pakistan using armed drones. Pakistan has publicly opposed the strikes as violations of Pakistani sovereignty that generate excessive civilian casualties, but it appears the vast majority of the drone campaign occurred with the explicit or tacit consent of the Pakistan military, including permitting U.S. operations from Shamsi air base near Quetta for a decade from 2001 to 2011.
Pakistan is also critical for the U.S. mission in land-locked Afghanistan, even as its behavior undermines U.S. objectives there. The troubled state of U.S.-Russia relations following the latter’s invasion of Ukraine resulted in Russia shutting down the so-called Northern Distribution Network that re-supplied Afghanistan through the Central Asian republics. U.S.-Iran relations have become only more troubled since the beginning of Trump’s presidency, and appear likely to worsen further still. The United States has begun using Turkmenistan for “humanitarian cargo,†a euphemism that in this case likely means “nonlethal†supplies to the U.S. mission in Afghanistan. Thus, the United States presence in Afghanistan depends — and will depend for the foreseeable future — on Pakistan, which permits U.S. ground and air lines of communication. Absent unexpected, major improvements in U.S.-Russia or U.S.-Iran relations, or a U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, this dependence on Pakistan cannot be alleviated. “No matter how great President Donald Trump makes America, he cannot win the war on geography,†observes Afghan expert and former U.S. official Barnett Rubin.
We need Pakistan’s cooperation to continue operations in Afghanistan and that cooperation will only be forthcoming as long as we aren’t too successful. For Pakistan a U. S. victory in Afghanistan would be worse than a U. S. defeat but best of all is a stalemate. They are not our friends.
I don’t get exactly what India is supposed to do to help us with Pakistan. Those two countries already hate each other and already do as much as possible to antagonize each other, stopping just short of war. What exactly is India supposed to do that would help us with events going on in Pakistan? Give up part/all of Kashmir if Pakistan agrees to shut down attacks coming out of Pakistan and stop providing safe havens? Not happening. I don’t see any carrots here and the stick has already been applied.
Do you think they didn’t tell Trump supplies come through Pakistan? He thinks Russia will give us free access?
Steve
At the time, I said that encouraging the ouster of Musharraf was a bad idea and would be regretted.
Yes, Musharraf most likely knew Bin Laden was in Pakistan, so what. Bin Laden was in a compound watching porn. Tracking the people leaving would have been more beneficial.
I do not know why India was included. I do remember the reaction when President Bush included N. Korea as part of the Axis of Evil, and I am still waiting for the apologies.
India has frequently had strong relations with elements in Afghanistan; that was some of the backstory to Pakistan intelligence support for the Taliban pre 9-11: the desire to reduce Indian influence and its exposure of Pakistan’s “lack of strategic depth.” India can probably do a lot to help Afghanistan in terms of infrastructure investment and trade; probably do it better than the U.S. and NATO, who are too remote.