Magnificent Delusions (52 page)

Although this could have been an opportunity to make a clean break with terrorist groups, Musharraf did not force the Jihadi groups out of business. Pakistan was “warehousing some extremists and leaving others untouched.” Some Pakistani officials, reported Paul Watson of the
Los Angeles Times
, argued that action against Pakistani Jihadis would alienate Pakistan's religious groups.
⁹⁸
Militant groups were banned amid fanfare, and sometimes their leaders were detained. But then the groups reemerged under new names, and courts freed the detained leaders, claiming lack of evidence.
⁹⁹

Over the next few years the United States and Pakistan lapsed into a now-familiar pattern. The United States provided large amounts of economic and military aid, including a fresh batch of F-16 aircraft, some frigates for the navy, and updated equipment for the army. Pakistan handed over several Al-Qaeda figures that the CIA and FBI had located in Pakistani cities, particularly in the first two years after 9/11. In a unique arrangement Pakistan also received reimbursement for what it spent to fight terrorism. Total aid and reimbursement between 2002 and 2012 amounted to $25 billion.

However, Pakistan made no fundamental shift in attitude toward Afghanistan or India. An attack by Kashmiri militants on the Indian Parliament soon after December 2001 resulted in the threat of another
India-Pakistan war. Although both sides mobilized along the border, US diplomacy was able to defuse the crisis. Musharraf also agreed to go through the motions of a peace process with India, which yielded no substantive result.

By 2005 the Taliban had resurfaced in Afghanistan. American intelligence discovered, once again, that the Taliban's activities were being directed from Pakistan while, as before, Pakistan denied its involvement. Further, terrorists involved in attacks on trains in Spain and on London's subway were found to have trained in Pakistan. Several countries' intelligence services stressed Pakistan's position as “a principal recruiting ground and logistical center for global terrorists.”
¹⁰⁰

What's more, Pakistan's halfhearted participation in the war against terrorism made it a major victim of terrorism. Some Jihadi groups determined that they would wage war on the Pakistan army and the ISI in addition to fighting the West and India. Junior military men from secret cells linked to Al-Qaeda twice targeted Musharraf for assassination. Thus, Pakistan's tolerance of extremism allowed new, more virulent offshoots of old groups. Terrorist attacks in Pakistani cities claimed thousands of lives. Instead of rallying the people against these extremists, however, Pakistan's establishment termed it the price Pakistan paid for supporting the United States. Officials demanded even greater monetary compensation from the United States for the losses Pakistan suffered on account of allying itself with the US-led war on terror. Clerics, politicians, and journalists blamed America rather than the Taliban for terrorist attacks in Pakistan. Once again, anti-Americanism had provided refuge against honestly facing Pakistan's own problems.

Bush acknowledged that Musharraf either “would not or could not” fulfill all his promises. According to Bush, “Part of the problem was Pakistan's obsession with India. In almost every conversation we had, Musharraf accused India of wrongdoing.” Four days after 9/11 the Pakistani ruler had told Bush that the Indians were “trying to equate us with terrorists and trying to influence your mind.”

Although Bush had invested heavily in securing Pakistani cooperation against Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, he found that “the Pakistani military spent most of its resources preparing for war with
India. Its troops were trained to wage a conventional battle with its neighbor, not counterterrorism operations in the tribal areas. The fight against the extremists came second.”
¹⁰¹

When Bush visited the subcontinent in 2006 he signed a civil nuclear deal with India, which was tantamount to accepting the legitimacy of India's status as a nuclear power. Pakistan, however, could not get such a deal because it was unwilling to submit to any international discipline. Pakistani nuclear scientist Dr. A. Q. Khan had been found running an illicit network that traded in designs and material for uranium enrichment to Libya, North Korea, and Iran. Instead of coming clean, Pakistani officials had fulminated against Indian and Zionist plots. This precluded any possibility of bringing Pakistan's nuclear program out of the shadows.

The highlight of Bush's trip to India included the civil nuclear deal and agreements on US investment. In Pakistan the US president arrived to the news that a US consular officer had been killed in a terrorist attack on the consulate in Karachi, but this did not prevent Bush from staying at the American ambassador's residence or continuing with his trip as planned.
¹⁰²
During his discussions he focused on the fight against extremists and the full civilianization of Musharraf's regime. Bush pushed Musharraf “to shed his military affiliation and govern as a civilian. He promised to do it. But he wasn't in much of a hurry”
¹⁰³

By 2007 the Bush administration's view of Musharraf and Pakistan had changed significantly. On February 26 Cheney and CIA Deputy Director Steve Kappes warned Musharraf during an unannounced visit to Islamabad that the tribal areas along the border with Afghanistan had become a safe haven for both the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. After realizing that Musharraf and the Pakistan army were unable or unwilling to deal with the problem, the United States ramped up the use of armed drones—unmanned aerial vehicles—in the region.
¹⁰⁴

The US tone was becoming tougher. Pakistan's media characterized the American message as “Do More.” But both officials and leaders of public opinion rejected the suggestion that Pakistan had become the epicenter of global terrorism. “Pakistan does not accept
dictation from any side or any source,” an indignant official said in response to reports of Cheney's demands. When members of Congress talked about cutting aid, Pakistani officials responded by condemning “discriminatory legislation.”
¹⁰⁵

During the summer of 2007 Musharraf faced his strongest domestic challenge. Opposition parties joined lawyers protesting the sacking of the Pakistan chief justice, who had until then been a Musharraf ally. Religious parties and retired servicemen supported the protests more out of their distaste for Musharraf than concern for full democracy. For the first time there was a chink in Musharraf's armor, and it seemed that he might not be able to retain complete authority. He had already ruled for eight years—no Pakistani dictator had lasted more than a decade in power.

The Bush administration recognized the need to look beyond Musharraf. US diplomats reached out to Bhutto and Sharif, both of whom were in exile. Sharif still had to overcome his agreement with Musharraf involving the Saudis. But Benazir Bhutto was ready to return to Pakistan. She and her husband had faced legal proceedings in corruption cases that had dragged on, all with no result; Zardari had spent more than eleven years of his life in prison without being convicted of a single crime. Bhutto asked the Americans to demand that Musharraf provide her party a level field by ending prosecution that amounted to persecution.

From exile Bhutto had spoken out against extremism. She had also castigated Pakistan's inadequate response to the terrorist challenge, promising a more robust policy if she came to power. Her argument that a democratic leader could fight terrorism more effectively appealed to Washington. The US ambassador, Anne Patterson, reported from Islamabad that “her party has more political legitimacy than any other party in Pakistan.”

On Bhutto's return to Pakistan on October 18, hundreds of thousands of supporters in Karachi received her. The US embassy estimated the crowd to be between five hundred thousand to two million. “She will have to fight for the right to again become Pakistan's Prime Minister,” observed Patterson. “But for today, she is
basking in the applause of hundreds of thousands of fans.”
¹⁰⁶
A suicide bomber attacked her rally, killing 136 people and injuring more than 450. Bhutto survived and continued her campaign.

Bhutto's return paved the way for Sharif to break his ten-year exile deal and come back to Pakistan. On November 28 Musharraf retired as chief of army staff and handed the baton to General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, who had previously served as the head of the ISI. Kayani was the first spy chief to lead the army. As a young officer he had studied at the US Army Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. Reflecting the American tradition of optimism about personnel changes, Pentagon officials now pinned their hopes on Kayani. In background briefings he was described as pro-American and anti-extremism.

Then, on December 27, 2007, in a second suicide attack, Bhutto was assassinated. In conversations with several people, including me, she had expressed concern over Musharraf's refusal to provide her adequate security. Nonetheless, she refused to stop campaigning in what she said was a final battle to save Pakistan from obscurantism. Her death was mourned across the board in Pakistan, even by erstwhile opponents; her followers saw her as a martyr. When elections were held in February 2008 Bhutto's PPP—now led by her widower, Zardari—won the most seats in Parliament.

Zardari named party loyalist Yusuf Raza Gilani as prime minister. I was named Pakistan's ambassador to Washington and presented my credentials to Bush in May 2008. Zardari replaced Musharraf as president of Pakistan in September 2008, after Musharraf resigned when faced with impeachment. The Americans now had a new set of interlocutors. We were eager to fight terrorism for Pakistan's sake and to redefine Pakistan's relationship with the United States.

Chapter Seven

Parallel Universes

O
n May 11, 2011, I sat down for what turned out to be a grim conversation with the US special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, Marc Grossman. The well-reputed diplomat had succeeded Richard Holbrooke as the Obama administration's point man for the two troubled countries. Ten days earlier US Special Forces had killed Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad, a Pakistani garrison town that was home to the Pakistan Military Academy. In response, a wave of anger directed at the Americans swept over Pakistan. The view in Islamabad was that the United States had violated Pakistani sovereignty. As an ally, Pakistanis thought, the United States should have conducted the Abbottabad raid jointly with Pakistani troops.

Grossman spoke softly, as he always did, but his message was unmistakably tough. He was in Islamabad soon after the bin Laden raid and found the atmosphere there “surrealistic.” He said that explaining to Americans how the world's most wanted terrorist could be hiding in as important a city as Abbottabad was difficult. According to Grossman, “Some forces in Pakistan” were still not willing to confront the fact that bin Laden was hiding in Pakistan.

He explained that if Secretary of State Hillary Clinton were to visit Pakistan later in the year, as planned, she would “raise some critical questions to the Pakistani leadership.” The two countries needed to discuss “the essence and direction” of future relations “if this relationship is to be salvaged.” The United States wanted access to the family
of bin Laden. It wanted an investigation into how he and his family were residing in Abbottabad. Above all, Pakistan needed to stop blaming the United States and start facing the fact that “somebody, somewhere” in Pakistan was responsible for protecting an international terrorist mastermind.

The next day I was asked to come to the White House for a meeting with Lieutenant General Douglas Lute, the National Security Council's coordinator for Afghanistan and Pakistan. Lute had dealt with issues relating to the war in Afghanistan as well as relations with Pakistan for several years. He had served under President Bush and had continued under Obama. As a soldier, he was always more frank than the diplomats. But this time he seemed to choose his words carefully.

Lute said that the United States and Pakistan had come to “forks in their relationship” in the past, where one path led to isolation and the other to continued partnership. In many of these cases the two countries had chosen the path of partnership. “This is one such moment,” he insisted. Lute objected to the tone in Pakistan over the bin Laden incident. He said the government of Pakistan took too long to educate its people about the event in Abbottabad. For Americans, Prime Minister Gilani's address to the nation was “disappointing,” as it did not address the key question regarding bin Laden's presence in Pakistan.

A CIA official present at the meeting said that Pakistan would gain nothing by stepping up anti-American rhetoric. “The poison thus spread will last longer and much beyond the time when the two militaries and intelligence agencies have made up,” he said. He was basing his statement on past experience. By now the Americans obviously understood that whipping up public sentiment was often the Pakistani military's modus operandi for seeking a new deal for aid and arms.

Then Lute made a veiled threat: “Countries have been designated state sponsors of terrorism on less evidence than that available on Pakistan,” he said. US Navy SEALS had found “a whole treasure trove of material” at the compound where bin Laden was killed. There were many unanswered questions. Instead of responding to these questions quietly, however, Pakistan was “raising the level of noise.” If the noise did not stop, Lute said, the United States could reveal its findings publicly.
Once the role of Pakistan was revealed, the US public and Congress would demand “measures that may go well beyond the past pattern of only cutting off aid.”