Is Pakistan Losing Patience in the War on Terror?

On Saturday, in answer to a New York Times article, Pakistan's secretive spy agency denied that it had exposed the identity of a senior CIA official in Pakistan, causing him to abruptly leave Pakistan. In a briefing held on background, an official of the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) couldn't have made it more categorical: "We absolutely deny this accusation, which is totally unsubstantiated and based on conjecture."
Short of a smoking gun, we'll have to take the Pakistanis' word for it. CIA cover is never perfect, and this wouldn't be the first time that a CIA officer has been forced to leave his post in the middle of the night.
But what can't be dismissed is the suit filed by a Pakistani tribesman in which he accuses the CIA of murdering his brother and his son in a drone attack. According to press reports, none of which have been confirmed by the CIA, it was the appearance of the station chief's name in a filing in this suit, along with unspecified threats, that caused him to be pulled. Regardless, the suit itself could be an ominous sign that the Pakistanis may be coming to the end of their rope in the "war on terror."
Here's why: I have long known that the ISI oversees the judiciary, from the appointment of judges to interfering in cases that harm national security. There are no exceptions. If there were a Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks founder, he'd be behind bars - for life. In other words, it's all but certain that the ISI greenlit the case brought by the tribesman for the death of his brother and son.
The ISI's power in the judiciary hit home for me two years ago. My wife and I were winding our way through the Pakistani court system as part of an adoption. I wondered right from the beginning how often ex-CIA agents had appeared before Pakistan's notoriously conservative judiciary - and what the government would think about us, or if it might even block the adoption. Every lawyer I talked to assured me that the government - the ISI - wouldn't care about a civil case. When I asked whether the ISI intervened in cases touching national security, they only smiled.
In trying to figure out what's happening in Pakistan these days let's not fool ourselves. The ISI is not a rogue agency that does exactly what it wants. It falls squarely under Pakistan's military. The commander and chief controls the budget as well as personnel appointments. At any time, he can remove the ISI's director. And since Pakistan's military is the ultimate executive authority in the country, it would be safe to conclude Pakistan itself permitted the suit against the CIA.
Conceding that I've climbed out on a long speculative limb - but who doesn't when it comes to Pakistan? - we should be wondering just how much purchase we've lost in Pakistan. They want our money, but not our drones. They don't want the United States to fall into the arms of India, but they also do not intend to kowtow to us. They want to be a part of any settlement in Afghanistan, but they won't or can't bring the Taliban under control. But now, with leading elements of the country possibly going after the CIA, whether it's by leaking a name or by fighting it in the courts, we should start wondering whether Pakistan is done with the bargaining on the war on terror.

Related articles

• Is Pakistan Losing Patience in the War on Terror? (time.com)
• Is Pakistan Losing Patience in the War on Terror? (time.com)
• Pakistan Denies Exposing CIA Chief (time.com)
• Pakistan spy agency denies it helped unmask CIA station chief in Islamabad (dailymail.co.uk)
• Pakistani spy agency denies it unmasked CIA chief (foxnews.com)
• "Did ISI blow cover of CIA station chief in Pakistan?" and related posts (prairiepundit.blogspot.com)
• CIA top spy in Pakistan identified, flees country -- officials suspect Pakistan spy agency blew his cover (jihadwatch.org)
• CIA withdraws spy from Pakistan after threats:official (alternet.org)
• Pakistan Denies Revealing U.S. Spy's Identity (nytimes.com)
• CIA Station Chief Outed in Pakistan (abcnews.go.com)

Karzai seen as weak by U.S., own cabinet: WikiLeaks

KABUL/WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Afghan President Hamid Karzai's own inner circle considers him weak and sometimes unscrupulous, leaked U.S. diplomatic cables show, a domestic vote of no confidence that may be more damaging than foreign criticisms.
Karzai, known to be sensitive about his team's loyalty, is likely to be infuriated by the idea of his cabinet discussing his flaws, making deals behind his back and sharing concerns with a U.S. embassy considered highly critical of his rule.
Dispatches from U.S. ambassador Karl Eikenberry were even less flattering, but Karzai's rocky relationship with Washington is well known, and criticisms are often voiced face to face.
Finance Minister Omar Zakhilwal described Karzai as an "extremely weak man" who did not listen to facts, one cable dated February this year said, and former Interior Minister Hanif Atmar claimed Karzai did not understand U.S. policy in the region.
Zakhilwal said Karzai's inner circle had agreed to "collaborate to influence Karzai when they see him going astray," and support each other if they faced the president's anger for raising sensitive issues..
The cables contain allegations Karzai colluded in the intimidation of a senior official, and "ashamed" his Chief of Staff Umar Daudzai by pardoning narcotraffickers for political reasons, according to Britain's Guardian newspaper.
The New York Times and Britain's The Guardian newspaper have been given advanced access by WikiLeaks to over 250,000 cables.
And Education Minister Farooq Wardak said Karzai's electoral reform after a Presidential poll marred by widespread fraud "was comparable to the power-grabs of the mujahedin in 1991-1992.," referring to leaders in the country's vicious civil war.
"(The comments) will feed into Karzai's sense of isolation and his distrust of those officials that he fears are too close to the foreigners," said Martine van Bijlert, co-director of the Afghanistan Analysts Network.
"Those quoted will probably try to argue that they were talking to an American audience, giving them what they wanted to hear. But the personal attacks on Karzai, the ones saying he is weak and paranoid, will probably stick." she added.
The leak of cables comes at a time of rising violence and heightened mistrust between Karzai and his Western backers, more than nine years into an unpopular war critics say cannot be won.
Both governments played down the impact of previously released cables earlier this week, but Karzai is expected to reshuffle his cabinet soon so ministers could face punishment.
His office declined immediate comment, and the U.S. embassy in Kabul said they would not comment on leaked documents.
PARANOIA, CORRUPTION
Karzai's domestic critics did not themselves escape censure in cables that portray state corruption as the new norm.
A January cable detailing the likely line-up of Karzai's new cabinet described the agriculture minister as "the only minister that was confirmed about whom no allegations of bribery exist."
Another cable detailed how the transportation ministry collects $200 million a year in trucking fees but only $30 million is turned over to the government -- information sourced to Mines Minister Wahidullah Shahrani.
"Individuals pay up to $250,000 for the post heading the office in Herat, for example, and end up owning beautiful mansions as well as making lucrative political donations,"
The New York Times also quoted a former Afghan vice president denying accusations in one of the cables that he flew to the United Arab Emirates with $52 million in cash.
Questions about weak governance and corruption have long driven a wedge between Karzai and the Western leaders who have nearly 150,000 soldiers in Afghanistan, although many of the faults highlighted in the U.S. documents are well known.
But Washington has other problems with its Afghan partner.
Eikenberry detailed poor leadership and America-bashing from Karzai, said he was "paranoid and weak" and accused him of failing to grasp the "most rudimentary principles of state-building," which is key to the U.S. mission.
"His deep seated insecurity as a leader combine to make any admission of fault unlikely, in turn confounding our best efforts to find in Karzai a responsible partner," Eikenberry wrote in a July 2009 cable detailed by The New York Times.
Around 1,400 U.S. soldiers have died in the fighting since the war began in late 2001. The U.S. strategy rests on creating enough security for the Afghan state to win the loyalty of ordinary people, who otherwise may support the Taliban movement.
(Additional reporting by David Storey and Michelle Nichols)

Related articles

• Karzai seen as weak by U.S., own cabinet: WikiLeaks (reuters.com)
• Afghan ministers critical of Karzai in Wiki cables (reuters.com)
• U.S. frets over Afghan graft, Karzai: WikiLeaks (reuters.com)
• WikiLeaks: Afghan vice-president 'landed in Dubai with $52m in cash' (dailymail.co.uk)
• U.S. frets over Afghan graft, Karzai - WikiLeaks (reuters.com)
• US scrambles to restore Afghan relations (guardian.co.uk)
• WikiLeaks cables on Afghanistan show monumental corruption - CNN (news.google.com)
• WikiLeaks cables on Afghanistan show monumental corruption (cnn.com)
• US scrambles to restore Afghan relations - The Guardian (news.google.com)
• Harper backs ambassador on criticism of Karzai (theglobeandmail.com)