Why have the NATO/ US Forces Violated UN Mandate in Afghanistan? Probing Questions!
The NATO's/ US' strike on a Pakistani military post in Mohmand Agency on night 25-26 Nov 2011 is an extremely unfortunate incident. It should indeed be termed as a criminal act deserving condemnation in the harshest possible manner. While diplomatic overtures between Pakistan, NATO and the US to probe and resolve the issue continue, it is pertinent to reflect on a set of probing questions the answers to which might help in unraveling the truth behind this ill-fated US venture. The terms NATO and US have been used alternatively in the article to denote both the NATO and the US.
The NATO's helicopters reportedly penetrated 1-2 kilometers deep into Pakistan before bombarding the Pakistani post. One basic question should emerge in every Pakistani's mind,
"Was this NATO's intentional or an unintentional act?"
If this was an unintentional act then consequences may not be very serious as far as NATO's engagement in Afghanistan goes. On the other hand, if it was an intentional venture, the consequences could be extremely disastrous for the future of Afghanistan. But here too, another fundamental question arises,
"If it was a deliberate action, did the US factor-in possible Pakistani response in its calculation matrix?"
If the answer is yes then from the US perspective,
"What could be the likely contours of the envisaged Pakistani response?"
Logically, the next question should be,
"Should the US then have ensured safeguards against such a Pakistani response?"
Most probably, "Yes!" Whether the US calculation was right or wrong, the future will surely bear testimony to that fact.
Taking the lead further again from the US view point,
"What was the need of undertaking such an adventurous action against Pakistan?"
"Was it a way to vent out its (the US) frustration in Afghanistan?"
or
"Was it positively directed at domestic public opinion in the US and the West?"
or
"Was it targeted at exerting further pressure on Pakistan to do more with respect to US' 'North Waziristan Obsession'?"
or
"Was it in line with changing contours of the US' 'Af-Pak Strategy', following its withdrawal from Afghanistan, which leans and is heavily tilted towards India as opposed to Pakistan?"
In pursuance of the above assertion,
"Is the US trying to create conditions to intentionally distance itself from Pakistan?"
"Would it be in the US interest particularly at a time when Pakistan is considered central to the resolution of the Afghan quagmire worldwide?"
Again from the US perspective,
"What could be the possible reasons for distancing from Pakistan?"
"Has Pakistan outlive its utility?"
The NATO relies heavily both operationally as well as administratively on Pakistan's support. "What alternatives do the NATO/ US have to solicit same support from Pakistan despite giving it a cold diplomatic shoulder?"
"Does and can the US knock at the UN door to bow Pakistan into submission and solicit similar support that it enjoys now?"
These and other similar-like questions need to be continually asked as the events unfold to get to know what lies deep beneath!
The NATO's helicopters reportedly penetrated 1-2 kilometers deep into Pakistan before bombarding the Pakistani post. One basic question should emerge in every Pakistani's mind,
"Was this NATO's intentional or an unintentional act?"
If this was an unintentional act then consequences may not be very serious as far as NATO's engagement in Afghanistan goes. On the other hand, if it was an intentional venture, the consequences could be extremely disastrous for the future of Afghanistan. But here too, another fundamental question arises,
"If it was a deliberate action, did the US factor-in possible Pakistani response in its calculation matrix?"
If the answer is yes then from the US perspective,
"What could be the likely contours of the envisaged Pakistani response?"
Logically, the next question should be,
"Should the US then have ensured safeguards against such a Pakistani response?"
Most probably, "Yes!" Whether the US calculation was right or wrong, the future will surely bear testimony to that fact.
Taking the lead further again from the US view point,
"What was the need of undertaking such an adventurous action against Pakistan?"
"Was it a way to vent out its (the US) frustration in Afghanistan?"
or
"Was it positively directed at domestic public opinion in the US and the West?"
or
"Was it targeted at exerting further pressure on Pakistan to do more with respect to US' 'North Waziristan Obsession'?"
or
"Was it in line with changing contours of the US' 'Af-Pak Strategy', following its withdrawal from Afghanistan, which leans and is heavily tilted towards India as opposed to Pakistan?"
In pursuance of the above assertion,
"Is the US trying to create conditions to intentionally distance itself from Pakistan?"
"Would it be in the US interest particularly at a time when Pakistan is considered central to the resolution of the Afghan quagmire worldwide?"
Again from the US perspective,
"What could be the possible reasons for distancing from Pakistan?"
"Has Pakistan outlive its utility?"
The NATO relies heavily both operationally as well as administratively on Pakistan's support. "What alternatives do the NATO/ US have to solicit same support from Pakistan despite giving it a cold diplomatic shoulder?"
"Does and can the US knock at the UN door to bow Pakistan into submission and solicit similar support that it enjoys now?"
These and other similar-like questions need to be continually asked as the events unfold to get to know what lies deep beneath!
Comments
Post a Comment