James’s Musings

thoughts, photography, and geeky stuff
from an unrelentingly curious Silicon Valley entrepreneur

Law of Unintended Consequences Strikes in Pakistan

by James G. Beldock on December 30, 2009

Sadly, today’s news that Karachi suf­fered a sui­cide bomb at­tack on­ly serves to add a new di­men­sion to con­cerns I orig­i­nal­ly raised in a post ear­lier this year (which I wrote from my Karachi hotel room on the evening of President Obama’s in­au­gu­ra­tion but, for se­cu­ri­ty rea­sons, was un­able to post un­til I left Pakistan). Now, in ad­di­tion to the dy­nam­ic I post­ed about (a state dri­ven to the brink of desta­bi­liza­tion by an ex­trem­ist mi­nor­i­ty), we must add the Law of Unintended Consequences: the pos­si­ble “col­lat­er­al desta­bi­liza­tion” re­sult­ing from in­creased US troop pres­ence in Afghanistan.

Asif Hassan/Agence France-Presse – Getty Images

Insidious forces of ex­trem­ism con­tin­ue to erode core Pakistani po­lit­i­cal and gov­ern­men­tal func­tions. Indeed, this par­tic­u­lar sui­cide at­tack fo­cused on Karachi, which lies at the south­west­ern-most end of Pakistan and, along with the rest of Sindh Province, has en­joyed rel­a­tive peace and tran­quil­i­ty since the high pro­file at­tacks again­st Western tar­gets it saw in 2002. These at­tacks thus por­tend a se­ri­ous es­ca­la­tion of the destabilization–and all of this de­spite (or per­haps be­cause of–keep read­ing!) a con­tin­ued US com­mit­ment to the re­gion in the form of a time-lim­it­ed com­mit­ment to Afghanistan. Indeed, today’s Associated Press notes the re­cent in­crease in Haqqani net­work at­tacks on Pakistani in­tel­li­gence and se­cu­ri­ty op­er­a­tives in North Waziristan is fur­ther strain­ing US-Pakistani re­la­tions. (The Haqqani net­work is an Al-Quaeda linked Afghani Taliban fac­tion op­er­at­ing on both sides of the Afghan/Pakistan bor­der. Its in­creased ac­tiv­i­ty may or may not be a re­sult of an in­creased US ac­tiv­i­ty in Afghanistan, but its re­cent im­pact on Pakistani ISI is nonethe­less se­ri­ous and po­ten­tial­ly the source of some Pakistani con­cern over US ac­tiv­i­ty.)

As well-known Washington Post cor­re­spon­dent David Ignatius point­ed dur­ing a fas­ci­nat­ing ses­sion at the re­cent Leading Thinkers Washington Forum on US-Pakistan re­la­tions, Pakistan both wel­comes in­creased US com­mit­ment to Afghan sta­bil­i­ty (and thus to avoid­ing Afghanistan’s re­turn to the sta­tus of a failed state), but al­so has cause for con­cern be­cause of the pos­si­bil­i­ty that more US troop pres­sure in south­east­ern Afghanistan will re­sult in more in­sur­gent ac­tiv­i­ty both in the Swat val­ley (to the north­east) and in Pakistan’s Waziri provinces (to the northwest)–via a kind of chaotic os­mo­sis des­tined to bring on­ly in­creased threats to Pakistani sta­bil­i­ty.

One way or an­oth­er, the con­clu­sion is clear and wor­ri­some: Pakistan is heat­ing up, and the US’s “Afghan Surge” has not quelled the hos­til­i­ty or the un­rest. If any­thing, the un­in­tend­ed short-term con­se­quence of the US ef­forts in Afghanistan may be in­creased in­ter­nal ten­sion and ter­ror­ist ac­tiv­i­ty in Pakistan. Let’s hope we can com­plete the task in Afghanistan suf­fi­cient­ly quick­ly to avoid per­ma­nent desta­bi­liza­tion of its neigh­bor to the south.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: