![]() |
| The first multi-expert blog dedicated solely to counterterrorism issues, serving as a gateway to the community for policymakers and serious researchers. Designed to provide realtime information about terrorism cases and policy developments. |
Descent into AppeasementBy Daveed Gartenstein-Ross
Since Pakistan's new government came to power earlier this year, it has noticeably accelerated efforts to negotiate with and enter into accords with militant groups. While one can construct a case for negotiating with Pakistan's extremist groups, none of the talks in this new round address the problems of failed past agreements such as the September 2006 Waziristan accords. Rather, the current negotiations are likely to bolster the Taliban and al-Qaeda -- and create a more dangerous situation for Pakistan, for coalition forces in Afghanistan, and for U.S. citizens who will face an elevated risk of a catastrophic terrorist attack. My colleague Bill Roggio and I have an article in the new issue of The Weekly Standard examining the current negotiations, and the implications for American security. An excerpt: The Taliban violated each of the conditions of the now-infamous September 2006 Waziristan accords. It used the ceasefire as an opportunity to erect a parallel system of government complete with sharia courts, taxation, recruiting offices, and its own police force. Al Qaeda in turn benefited from the Taliban's expansion, building what U.S. intelligence estimates as 29 training camps in North and South Waziristan alone. And, while even the Waziristan accords paid lip service to stopping cross-border attacks against Coalition forces in Afghanistan, the new negotiations often leave this consideration aside. As North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) governor Owari Ghani recently told the New York Times, "Pakistan will take care of its own problems, you take care of Afghanistan on your side." You can read the entire article here. Other writings on Pakistan:
TrackBackTrackBack URL for this entry: |