Apr 17, 2011

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton accepted that despite resolution of the Raymond Davis Case where the alleged CIA agent was released by the Pakistani authorities after payment of, “blood money,” relations between the United States and Pakistan are ‘very challenging.’ Another blow came with the death of large number of civilians in drone strikes in Datta Khel. The attack was condemned by the Army Chief after the Divisional commander of 7 Division stated a few days back that only a small number of civilians were killed and the main targets were terrorist leadership in such drone attacks. What is of concern for the US is the low image in Pakistani public even in provinces as Punjab or Sindh where the people were largely neutral.

Meanwhile the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) challenged by the revelation of growing network of CIA spies in Pakistan is reportedly reviewing the parameters of coordination. American and Pakistani intelligence relations on the whole have been testy and intelligence agencies have been cooperating so far with occasional hiccups, but the Davis case has possibly highlighted the depth of penetration by the CIA in Pakistan. Therefore apart from the diplomatic and legal angle Pakistanis have been questioning sovereignty of the state with external intelligence agencies operating with impunity. This would also naturally imply reduction of CIA presence in Pakistan.

The possible decrease in cooperation between CIA and the ISI may have larger implications on the war in Afghanistan as well. The intelligence sharing mechanisms that were operative may become slow or even defunct, thus the fall out will not be restricted to the Davis affair. Given that intelligence agencies are suspicious of each other it remains to be seen how the current impasse between the CIA and ISI would be resolved.

Possibly against this backdrop the government granted one year extension to the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) chief Lt-Gen Ahmad Shuja Pasha.  This has to be seen in the light of the one to General Kiyani for three years up to 2013 and would no doubt ensure that there is continuity in ongoing counter militancy and terrorism operations in the country. However the argument goes against military logic as a varied perspective to conflict situations is a better option rather than carrying on with old war horses especially as terrorist attacks across Pakistan continue unabated. Given that General Kiyani is on a six year tenure already a new ISI chief would have provided continuity with change. Obviously this is not the option that has been exercised, so we may see, “more of the same thing,” as the phrase goes.

There are other concerns as well of concentration of power in individuals for too long a period thereby leading to abuse. The Pakistan Army’s record of extension of tenures to the Chiefs either by the political leadership or self awarded as by former General Pervez Musharraf as the President is notable. In the last decade plus there have been only two Army Chiefs in Pakistan, Musharraf and Kiyani. During the same period the Indian Army has seen six Army Chiefs when it has faced one limited war with Pakistan in 1999 in Kargil and an operational stand off in 2002, Operation Parakaram. Involved in militancy from Jammu and Kashmir to the North East the situation has been acknowledged to be ripe for political resolution be it in Srinagar or in Guwahati. Thus the benefits of an institutional turn over are evident. Hopefully the Pakistani establishment will follow a turnaround process in command in the years ahead.