The capture of Mullah Baradar, the Afghan Taliban's second-ranking official and operational chief, has
been hailed as a major victory for the U.S. (though attended by
notes of caution).
Baradar's absence could cripple the Taliban and move it closer to
peaceful reconciliation. But many South Asia watchers think that
Pakistan's role in the capture could be even bigger news. Pakistan's
Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency, the CIA-like branch of the
Pakistani military, led the joint U.S.-Pakistani operation to capture
Baradar in Pakistan.
The ISI has long history of sheltering
and even funding the Taliban's most extreme elements. In October,
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
accused
them of tolerating al-Qaeda. Since the U.S. invaded Afghanistan in
2001, the ISI's refusal to fully cooperate has been one of the greatest
hurdles for bringing stability to the region, and America's diplomatic
standoff with Pakistan over the ISI has threatened to undo the
U.S.-Pakistani alliance. Does their role in capturing Baradar finally
signal ISI coming around to the U.S. side, or are they merely hedging their
bets?
- ISI Finally Seeking Peace? The Daily Telegraph's Ben Farmer writes,
"If the arrest of Mullah Baradar heralds a change in the ISI position
towards its former protégés rather than being a one off, it will be a
landmark event in the counter insurgency. It follows the ISI's
declaration earlier this month that it wished to play a significant
role in Hamid Karzai’s attempts to reconcile with senior insurgent
leaders."
- 'Temporary Confluence of Interests' Gregg Carlstrom isn't holding his breath
for more cooperation. "The ISI has a history of playing all sides,
though; it's quite possible Pakistan's security apparatus saw a
strategic benefit in capturing Baradar (fears about a mounting Taliban
presence in Karachi, perhaps, or maybe the ISI is getting something in
return) but doesn't plan to make a habit of these arrests."
- Loss of Taliban Safe-Haven National security think-tanker Michael Cohen says
an ISI crack-down would devastate the Taliban. "One can only imagine
the impact on Taliban feelings of security and reliance on Pakistani
support: that safe haven ain't feeling so safe anymore. One has to
think this will affect the drive toward political reconciliation in a
dramatic way - because if you're the Taliban this news suggests that
time is no longer necessarily on your side."
- Pakistan Yields to U.S. Pressure The Economist evaluates
the move as "perhaps reflecting a change in policy by the government in
Islamabad. [...] Pakistan had previously bought off Washington by
co-operating on the capture of al-Qaeda figures, while keeping the
Afghan Taliban leadership safe. But, with the Afghan insurgency
spiralling and now arguably a bigger problem than al-Qaeda, it seems
that the Americans had run out of patience."
With
its contacts, geographic location, and new-found “responsible”
approach, it’s Pakistan — not Iran, India, or Russia — that is
positioned to play the role of stability guarantor in a post-American
Afghanistan, especially as it pertains to U.S. interests. Pakistan has
an opportunity to come in from the cold and project its regional
influence through more conventional and “legitimate” means. In doing
so, it can secure its interests and the respect and trust of others,
while also containing the Taliban contagion infesting its border areas
with Afghanistan.
Want to add to this story? Let us know in comments
or send an email to the author at
mfisher at theatlantic dot com.
You can share ideas for stories on the Open Wire.
User Comments
Please type your comment and click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be prompted to log in or register