Bordering On The Extreme

The Age

Tuesday September 23, 2008

Daniel Flitton is Diplomatic Editor

The bombing of the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad is a harsh reminder of the disaffection and shambolic, dangerous reality outside Pakistan's capital. By Daniel Flitton.

THERE'S a well-worn line around diplomatic circles in Islamabad.

"Welcome to the capital," it begins."You're now only 15 minutes away from the real Pakistan." The capital of the world's second-most populous Muslim majority country is only a few decades old, another manicured bureaucratic village in the tradition of contrived federal cities, such as Canberra, Brasilia and early Washington DC.

Trek beyond Islamabad's limits, though, and you quickly find the real Pakistan, more shambolic, teeming with people, dirty - and often dangerous. Drive a couple of hours north to the border regions near Afghanistan and the rule of the gun is law.

The violence found in the real Pakistan came to the capital on the weekend, when at least 60 died in the bomb blast that destroyed the Marriott Hotel. The attack was yet another terrible reminder that Pakistan stands at the epicentre of the modern terrorist threat. Other strikes have rocked the capital during recent years, though none to match the scale of this attack.

The new democratic Government, having only just managed to finally push former general Pervez Musharraf from office, faces a daunting task: to reassure the local people of their security, and survive itself.

Pakistan's Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gillani claimed key figures in the Government, not the Marriott, were the intended target of the suicide bomber."

The purpose was to destabilise democracy," he said.

Gillani said the enormous 600- kilogram bomb, hidden aboard a construction truck, was actually aimed at nearby meeting of the country's top leadership, gathered late in the evening to break the Ramadan fast. A tight security cordon stopped the truck getting through, so the bomber switched targets and hit the hotel of choice for overseas visitors.

The bombing underlined the fragile position of the Government, according to Talat Masood, a retired Pakistan army general. "If they don't rise to this challenge, they are finished," he said. "I am not sure they have the capacity to take on such determined militants. To those who call this America's war, the Government must make absolutely clear that this is Pakistan's war and how it plans to meet the challenge."

Pakistan has been central to the so-called war on terror since Musharraf threw in his lot with the United States after the September 11, 2001 attacks. He lost favour in Washington as the war in Afghanistan soured, and it emerged that Pakistan's notorious intelligence agencies had kept up clandestine support for the Taliban. But terrorists put a stop to the Bush Administration's hopes to return former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto to power, killing her during a political rally late last year. Her widow, Asif Ali Zardari, is now President, and clearly in the extremists' sights.

A key suspect is Baitullah Mehsud, a mid-30s tribal commander regarded as a leader of the Pakistan Taliban based in South Waziristan, a province near the border with Afghanistan. Mehsud was also implicated in the Bhutto killing and has repeatedly vowed to attack the Government after a truce with his forces collapsed. His group, a few thousand strong and known as Tehrik-e-Taliban, reportedly turned back 40,000 Pakistani troops in fighting earlier this year, and on the same day as the Marriott bombing, five soldiers were killed in a roadside blast near a military base in South Waziristan.

Lydia Khalil, a close observer of the threat from Islamist violence after working in Iraq and later as an analyst with the New York Police Department, is now based at Macquarie University's Centre for Policing, Intelligence and Counterterrorism in Sydney. She cautions against the view that the Marriott bombing marks an escalation of Pakistan's problems."

What people do is they tend to pay attention to these spectacular attacks, which is only to be expected, but the reality is we have to take a look at what's leading to these attacks, what has led to the bombing and to the 50-plus deaths," Khalil says."

The escalation has already happened. It's in the underground, it's in the logistics, it's in the planning, it's in the sentiment of the population and the levels of radicalisation.

Those are extremely high in the population already, so these attacks are just a mere manifestation of that but the underlying causes have already escalated."

She sees the restive tribal areas as especially difficult. "There are swathes of the country that are just ungoverned. They have been taken over by either extremists groups with foreign elements, or the tribal politics are very complicated and haven't been (brought) under central authority. It's kind of the wild west, so to speak."

The unstable political climate in Pakistan is also to blame."

People are feeling very frustrated by the political process," she says."

Although Musharraf is out of power and people hail that as a success & they still have very long way in terms of getting an accountable government and leaders who are responsible to their needs."

All this compounds the difficulty for international engagement with Pakistan, especially as the conflict in Afghanistan flows freely across the border. The US has stepped up unilateral military strikes inside Pakistani territory in recent weeks and is apparently frustrated by a lack of co-operation from the Pakistan government to rein in the Taliban and foreign fighters.

Khalil admits these strikes can in turn foster more resentment, but does not believe they simply stir up a hornet's nest."

I think it's already buzzing. I don't think these attacks help in the sense of dampening down extremist sentiment. Of course people are going to feel very resentful. But at the same time, these strikes by US and NATO forces are very necessary because there are foreign fighters in there & and they need to be rooted out in some way."

We would be remiss to think this was the only way to do it - this is only part of the plan, this is only part of a comprehensive strategy that we need to put together, because obviously military strikes alone will not do it."

But identifying the aims and a strategy for winning them has become the most awkward part the conflict in Afghanistan, and increasingly in Pakistan."

That's kind of the million-dollar question," she says, noting the answers offered are at once obvious and complicated."

It's obvious in the sense that everyone says there needs to be more economic stimulation, more development aid, more educational work that needs to be done & and also holding Pakistani political leaders to account."

But that's easier said than done.

I don't think the US Government or other Western governments have the wherewithal to try to do that."

Speaking before a meeting with Pakistani counterparts later this week, Australian Foreign Minister Stephen Smith yesterday warned the instability posed serious risks to Australia's nearly 1100 troops in Afghanistan. "Pakistan really needs the help here of the international community to try and combat and counter extremism, whether it's on the border area near Afghanistan or whether it's in Islamabad itself."

But Khalil says he sees major limits on what Western countries can realistically achieve in region notoriously suspicious of outsiders.

"The rope is a little bit loose, but our hands are pretty much tied."

Additional reporting: Washington Post.

© 2008 The Age

Back to News Index | Back to Home