SPONSORED BY:

No Man's Land

 

Email To A Friend

Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.

Separate multiple addresses with commas

SPONSORED BY
 

Before 9/11, especially during the Soviet presence in Afghanistan, Pakistan and U.S. policies in the border region converged; a friendly government in Afghanistan gave Islamabad strategic depth against India as well as a land bridge across Central Asia, and an open border ensured easy access to Kabul. This fit well into Washington's strategic objective, which looked to Pakistan as a vantage ground to prevent Soviet hegemony in the region. But post-9/11, the United States wants greater controls on the border. Pakistan's national interest now conflicts with its foreign policy and the most powerful state institution, the Pakistani military, is caught in the middle. Experts say that while the Pakistani army would like to continue its support of some of these militant groups to counter what it perceives as the security threat from India and its continued claim to Kashmir, it now has to appease the United States for strategic, military, and foreign aid. Hassan Abbas, a research fellow at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government writes that extremism has been rising in Pakistan's border areas and they continue to provide sanctuary to militants who spread insurgency in Afghanistan.

The Pakistani army has shown it is not sufficiently equipped to fight insurgency in these areas. Former CFR Adjunct Senior Fellow Mahnaz Ispahani says there is some validity to the argument that the Pakistani army cannot entirely control or close the border with Afghanistan. Islamabad and the FATA regions have long followed a policy of "live and let live," with minimal interference in one another's affairs, but Ispahani says the United States would like to see this changed.

Looking Ahead
A classified U.S. military proposal disclosed by the New York Times outlines an intensified effort to enlist tribal leaders in the border areas of Pakistan in the fight against al-Qaeda and the Taliban. If adopted, the proposal would "directly finance a separate tribal paramilitary force," the newspaper says. The United States has also started a five-year $750 million assistance program in the FATA. The State Department's Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs assists the Frontier Corps, a Pakistani federal paramilitary force stationed in the NWFP and Balochistan,with financing for counternarcotics work.

To restructure the relationship between Pakistan and Afghanistan, a Council Special Report, authored by Rubin, recommends recognition of an international border by the two countries and cooperative development of the tribal areas on either side. It also suggests transforming the status of the tribal areas in Pakistan and empowering the people by allowing them to participate in elections.

Ispahani says besides security and military cooperation, the two countries must focus more on economic issues. Being a landlocked country and sharing one of its longest borders with Pakistan, Afghanistan's economy is "incredibly dependent on Pakistan" and this has moderated Afghan's policy with its neighbor, she says. Marvin G. Weinbaum, a former Pakistan and Afghanistan analyst at the U.S. State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research, writes that Pakistan's wide-ranging exports to Afghanistan amounts to roughly $1.2 billion per year and it imports more than $ 700 million worth of goods.

Experts say tensions might ease with the new Pakistani army chief solely focused on military matters and securing the border. From 1999 to 2007, Pervez Musharraf was busy running the country in his dual role as president and leader of the military. A change in army leadership, however, by no means solves the bigger problems of limitations or the will of the army itself. Ispahani suggests in both countries, especially in Pakistan, there needs to be a greater recognition that the war against militancy is in the country's own interests.

© 2007

Label

Newsweek Top Stories
Visions of a Decade
Visions of a Decade

From 2000-2009, one photo per month.

The Failure of Copenhagen
The Failure of Copenhagen

Why there could be a silver lining in a failed climate treaty.

Sex Scandals of the 2000s
Sex Scandals of the 2000s

From John Edwards to Mark Sanford, the decade's memorable affairs.

118 Days in Hell
118 Days in Hell

A NEWSWEEK journalist recounts his captivity in Iran.

Discuss

Sponsored by

Member Comments

  • Posted By: noreengul @ 10/28/2008 4:38:58 AM

    I agree and support mehmood shah, we were once united under afghan rule but after british division the are-a culturally also divided,over years we puktoons living in pakistan have evolved different va-lues and culture,sorry to disappoint you but I wu-d not like to be called afghan or identified with them (although I am a proud pukhtoon of tribal areas in pakistan. I have my own identity and love to call myself cultured progressive puktoon victim of international politics and living in terror due to afghans talibans.

  • Posted By: Ali khan @ 01/29/2008 7:19:24 AM

    Mr mahmoodshah don't try to twist the facts. Be a man and call a spade a spade. Durand line is an imaginary line and was never and will never be accepted by pakhtoons on either side of Durand line.
    British divided us and we have suffered for a long time but now inshallah very soon we will be united again and will get rid of Pakistani army who are killing our men and women, elderly and children in the name of war against terrorism. They can fool the world and take west for a ride in the name of terror but not us and the truth is that Pakistan itself is a terrorist state. We pakhtoons will struggle for our freedom from Pakistani occupation and inshahllah we will get it.

  • Posted By: mahmoodshah @ 12/07/2007 3:03:58 AM

    I think the article in your esteemed paper certian basic in accuracies: the first being the impression that the International Border between Pakistan and Afghanistan is a disputed border.This is grossly incorrect because Afghanistan has never raised this issue at any International Forum and can not do so under International Law.The second inaccuracy pertains to the Pukhtun population in Afghanistan.Although there never have been any accurate cencus in Afghanistan but it is well known that the Pukhtun population is wellover 64%.And by the way may I add that the Pukhtuns living in Pakistan including the Tribal Area would like to called Pukhtuns than Afghans because Afghan is a geographical term used for all those who live in Afghanistan including Persian/Dari speaking people.Regards mahmoodshah Peshawar Pakistan.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse

My Take

Customize the NEWSWEEK homepage
to feature your favorite columnists.

Customize Now