Faisal Shahzad�s Arrest and US Military Campaign in Pakistan

Pakistan’s diplomatic relations with the US has significantly improved over the last two years. The renewed US military aid to Pakistan is a reflection of growing ties between the two countries. However, the recent arrest of Faisal Shahzad on charges of engineering the Times Square bombing has cast a shadow on the ties. Nevertheless, as details continue to emerge, the Obama Administration appears to support the expansion of US military presence and action inside Pakistan. The intensity of US military campaign in Pakistan is slated to increase despite protests.

John Brennan, the Obama administration’s chief counter-terrorism advisor, stated that all of Shahzad’s connections are pointing towards the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). The US Attorney General, Eric Holder, in charge of the criminal investigation against Shahzad expressed a similar view. Both officials echoed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s warning of ‘severe consequences’ if Pakistan did not crack down more ruthlessly on terrorist networks within its territory. However, Defence Secretary Robert Gates has made a conciliatory statement aimed at Pakistan. Robert Gates, in an interview to the CNN on May 11, 2010 said that the Pakistanis “are very sensitive to the size of the American footprint, the number of Americans on the ground in a training capacity or whatever.” It appears that Defence Secretary Robert Gates is not in favour of a large US military presence in Pakistan. 

Analysts believe that Shahzad’s bombing attempt will possibly be a ‘game changer’ in the war against terror and might increase the possibility of an incursion of US forces into Pakistani territory. The Obama Administration has been considering escalating the military campaign in Pakistan. There are several factors that increase the possibility of intense US military campaign in Pakistan. First, conservative lawmakers on Capitol Hill have been asking for a wider military campaign in Pakistan to accomplish the goals of the war on terror. Recent hearings held on Capitol Hill focused on groups such as Jaish-i-Muhammad and Lashkar-i-Taiba.

Second, several Congress members in a hearing in March 2010 noted that the Lashkar intends to escalate violence. Some analysts have repeatedly pointed to the necessity of expanding drone strikes into Quetta to target the Quetta Shura which supposedly runs the Taliban operations. Shahzad’s connections have been traced to the Taliban. This bolsters the position of those who insist that a wider military campaign in Pakistan is crucial to eliminate a terror threat to the US.

Third, US/NATO campaigns in Marja and Kandahar in Afghanistan has improved the situation there. Reportedly, many of the gains made in the area by the US Marines’ offensive had largely been reversed and Taliban fighters had moved back into the area. The Kandahar offensive has also been the subject of low expectations. Experts believe that the easy assimilation of Taliban fighters into the local population and the lack of visible centres of Taliban control have complicated efforts and made it difficult to achieve a decisive victory.

Fourth, due to the announcement of the plan for troops withdrawal commencing in 2011, there is immense political pressure on the Obama Administration to achieve some semblance of victory. The expansion of the war in Afghanistan into Pakistani territory would not only ease pressure on the US forces in Afghanistan but it would also provide a visible endgame to the vexed problem.
 
Recent reports show an expansion of the use of aerial drone attack that include not just high-value Al Qaeda and Taliban targets as previously planned but also ‘general patterns of life’. The NATO forces attacked Mangotai, an area bordering Afghanistan in North Waziristan that killed 10 tribesmen on May 13, 2010. The US missile attacks in Khyber Agency on May 15, 2010 demonstrates that the US intends in widening the military campaign in Pakistan.

The US knows that expanding the military campaign in Pakistan would be met with vocal opposition but would more or less be tolerated by the current Pakistani establishment. The lack of protests by Pakistan’s military and civilian establishment suggests that a limited military campaign by US forces could be given tacit approval.

The developments after the aborted bombing in Times Square suggest that the event will be a ‘game changer’. Still. it is necessary to take into account some facts. First, even with the issue of a terse warning against Pakistan, Obama Administration officials have continued to point to the fact that Pakistani authorities are cooperating in every way possible. Second, the capacities of US ground troops are undoubtedly already stretched in Afghanistan. An expansion of the military presence, even if politically valuable to the Democrats facing elections in November, may not be militarily feasible. The US troops have been facing several obstacles in Afghanistan like failure to discern the enemy, the changing loyalties of the tribal leaders and difficult terrain. In such circumstances, the US troops may feel inclined to cross the border and target terror bases inside Pakistan.

Pakistan-US relations have been facing numerous challenges. Shahzad’s connection with the TTP has strengthened the case for an intense US military campaign in Pakistan to dismantle and eliminate networks of the TTP. Pakistan would have no option but to accept US military involvement inside Pakistan.

Dr. Shah Alam is Research Fellow, CLAWS

(Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not represent the views either of the Editorial Committee or the Centre for Land Warfare Studies).