WHY NATO / USA ATTACKED? by Shahid Ali
http://observe-pakistan.blogspot.com/2011/11/why-nato-usa-attacked-by-shahid-ali.html
WHY NATO / USA ATTACKED? by Shahid Ali
The blogger is
Shahid Ali who actively participates in political and social discussion on Twitter.He lives in Karachi and attended Karachi University and National Defence University Islamabad.
A lot has been said and written after NATO air strike at Pakistani posts on Pak Afghan border. Many thinkers and analysts suggested about how Pakistani government should respond to these attacks. To make up a plan, first we should comprehend that WHY NATO attacked Pakistan? I tried but failed to search some expert opinions / articles over this WHY. It is necessary to evaluate what targets NATO and US wanted to achieve from this attack?
First let us clear some points.
1. NATO and US are definitely not that nave to provoke and annoy their partner in War on Terror without any reason. They are well aware that in PRESENT SITUATION, without Pakistan the end game or wrap up of Afghan war is not possible.
2. The excuse of friendly fire or mistake is also not weighty because Pakistani posts are well marked on maps that both sides possess.
3. Initially it was claimed by ISAF/NATO forces that first they received fire from Pakistani side and they asked for air support to retaliate. Even this argument has no substance.
a) If fire was coming from Pakistani side, there must have been some casualties, injuries or material losses on other side. More than an hour assault could not be called for a few undamaging bullets coming from other side (as claimed).
b) If air support was requested, ground forces must have informed the exact location from where they were receiving fire. Before sending air support, Pakistani authorities were not contacted (through border co-ordination system that is already in place) by NATO about any offensive fire from Salala outpost (that is already marked / mapped).
So all above clearly directs that attack was intentional and deliberate.
Now let us eliminate the wrong answers to the question - Why NATO/US attacked?
1. They dont want supply line from Pakistan False.
2. They want open war with Pakistan False.
3. They are very comfortable in Afghanistan and dont need help from Pakistan False.
4. They dont want settlement of Afghanistan problem False.
After all above wrong answers, let me present another reason that might have been the real target of US and might be the right answer to this WHY.
Bear in mind, this was neither first attack on Pakistani forces by NATO/US/Afghan-insurgents nor the first violation of our territorial sovereignty. This was the continuation of serial attacks particularly in past seven months since OBL episode.
By these attacks US achieved:
1. Hardline/Anti-US/Pro-Taliban forces in Pakistan demanded government to quit War-On-Terror and go for head-on collision with US.
US believes that Pakistan cannot quit WOT or fight with US. Yes, there are many variables, but the final conclusion they draw is correct. In short, Pakistan wont fight US.
2. US brought Pakistan Government and Army under immense public pressure. They are asked monitor western borders just like they do it on eastern side with India. Whoever crosses the border either US drone or NATO helicopter should be hit and treated as invasion.
For this, 24 hours surveillance of Afghan border is required. So interestingly the US demand of surveillance, monitoring and guarding of Afghan border is now the demand of Pakistani public. The cause of FATA tribes annoyance (presence of armed forces) has been suddenly transformed into a DEMAND by the same people. Instead of leaving FATA, armed forces are now asked by Pakistani public to make their presence feel at Pak-Afghan border. We are witnessing 180 degree turn in Pakistani public demand.
To meet these public demands and achieve the required results, full scale forces deployment and western command has to be setup. Permanent upfront posts, army brigades, radars installation, backup cantonments, air forces bases etc, in short a replica setup (with some technical changes) of Pak-India border would be needed.
Once Pakistan forces setup all their facilities on western side, then it would become an active and operational border for the forces. If Pak forces successfully take control over the western side, withdrawal and leaving it unguarded on later stage for tribal Pushtuns would certainly not be the choice of forces. This would make the bordering Pushtun tribes irrelevant and Pakistan forces would be free from what US call exploitation.
This border control by regular forces will change the dynamics and environment so drastically that Pakistani policy of Must-be-a-friendly-government-in-Afghanistan could be softened or amended and Pak support to Pushtun fighters could be withdrawn to install a stable Afghan government resulting withdrawal of NATO forces.
Even after that, Pakistan would interfere in Afghan politics but not to the extent of no-solution-without-Pakistan. Changing regimes in Afghanistan just like eastern neighbor India wont be that serious matter for Pakistan than it is now because of an open and unguarded long border.
Above is my answer to WHY NATO ATTACKED.
It is for Pakistan government and armed forces to decide if they want to go to the extent of setting up a whole new western command of armed forces with the funding of Anti-US friends or keep continue the pardon & move on policy and linger on till the US unilaterally announce withdrawal from Afghanistan as did in Vietnam.
