Homeland Security Watch

Comment by William R. Cumming

August 9, 2009 @ 9:26 am

Well I am in generally doubtful of the significance of body counts even of leaders. Your blog and your post and hoping you will articulate some more your reasons for significance of these guys. Even after the allies were winning in WWII, the Germans and Japanese killed a lot of the allies. The death of the then incapacitated FDR was significant only at the time and before people understoond Harry S.Truman. But hey mayber you are right and I am wrong. We are all individuals and all have talents and defects. So persuade me overtime that we should follow the political leadership of the Taliban whereever as being of significance.

Comment by Philip J. Palin

August 9, 2009 @ 3:38 pm

I perceive that Baitullah has been a game-changer. His charisma, skill at building alliances, and swift removal of adversaries has given him unprecedented power along the Afpak border. He has used this power in a strategically innovative manner.

Traditionally the tribes of the FATA have been satisfied to be left alone by Islamabad. The Pakistan constitution gives the Federally Administered Tribal Areas significant autonomy. Most of the tribes have had little sense of identity with Pakistan, and much more with their Pashtun cousins in Afghanistan.

Baitullah shifted significant attention from supporting the Taliban in Afghanistan to challenging the Pakistani state. Whether this was smart or not, effective or not, I am not arguing. But the strategic shift — largely orchestrated by Baitullah — has been significant. Moreover, I am not sure it is a shift that can (yet) be sustained without the potentially unique skills and personal relationships of Baitullah. Especially if the current level of pressure continues to be applied.

Further, Baitullah has become even more ambitious seeking to undertake terrorist operations in Barcelona (please see: http://www.ctc.usma.edu/sentinel/CTCSentinel-Vol2Iss1.pdf) and threatening Washington D.C. These could be examples of little more than egotistical over-reach. But Baitullah has shown sufficient capability that it would be unwise to dismiss him without second thoughts… and ongoing attention.

I could offer more evidence, but this is my “theory of the case” that Baitullah’s death could have strategic significance.

In the case of Noordin M. Top he is (was?) not much more than an especially murderous thug. I won’t try to argue otherwise. He has political ambitions and connections, but there is very little evidence for his ability to move from tactical mayhem to strategic impact. He presents much less of a threat to Indonesia than Baitullah has presented to Pakistan. So, Bill, I will spot you one.

Comment by Philip J. Palin

August 9, 2009 @ 5:03 pm

A bit more than hour after posting the prior comment my algorithms spawned a WSJ opinion piece that is organized around the following:

“The fashionable view in anti-antiterror precincts is that terror leaders are like daisies—mow one down and another will pop up to take his place. But not all leaders are easily replaced, and the charismatic and daring Mehsud is probably one of them.”

The WSJ piece was posted about the same time I was responding to William R. Cumming. I am not sure if I am thrilled or troubled to be involuntarily “channeling” the WSJ editorial page.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204908604574336002910350342.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Comment by Arnold Bogis

August 9, 2009 @ 8:49 pm

But as an aside, Baitullah (and the Pashtuns in general) have not been the only internal “threat” faced by the Pakistani government. There has been a long running hot and cold insurgency in the Baluchistan, for instance. So his death or a temporary dampening of that particular insurgency does not address the long term issue of ungoverned areas with unpredictable actors willing to host/protect international terrorists in a state with nuclear weapons and a nuclear weapons complex that is increasing in size.

With no real knowledge, I would bet that Zarqawi’s reach was greater in reality than Baitullah’s in aspiration. His brashness might have eventually led to his downfall at the hands of someone or something other than a drone at some point. Once the dust settles, there is still the risk that Pakistan will declare victory, turn again toward India, and allow Al Qaeda elements (that don’t plot openly against the government) to remain unmolested in the FATA. Al Qaeda with relatively secure lodging in a nuclear state. That prospect does not make me feel comfortable.

Comment by christopher tingus

August 10, 2009 @ 6:27 am

The emails sent Chris Uncle from very educated and astute friends throughout India say, “Do not underestimate the reality taking place within Pakistan despite any good news you may hear from the press in the west for we are very, very worried indeed.”

This from numerous dear friends throughout India, well educated and astute in global commerce and politics, all who consider the weapons of WMD in Pakistan in very loose hands and given the compexities of the rule in teritorries, many are doubtful that the region has any chance that any stability will truly remain intact.

This is a global problem and should be addressed by the good nations who realize the preciousness and goodness of Life and people seeking harmony and peaceful coexistence.

It is obvious that India should be very, very concerned I am told of what is taking place within Pakistan with its numerous differences within will evolve into a scenario which will affect many and have far reaching implications affecting everyone of us globally.

If this the case, if the relationship with government there is reliable and with good intent to the west, why will NATO not be asked for troop support only to reinforce WMD sites to assure that what appears the inevitable will not take place.

WMD in the hands of AQ especially as well as the same in the hands of the “Brutes of Tehran” as I refer to a blood thirst regime willing to spill the precious blood of a fellow Persian (NADA) murdered in cold blood on the streets of Tehran.

Dastardly evil with probable etrrorist strikes in Australia and in Europe will see heightened anxiety and we must decide who is on what team and continue proactive drone strategy and other tactics that portray to those seeking our demise that we have the inherent strength challenge those who are very willing to cut the head off even in the midst of the Lord’s eyes….

Our destiny is in great peril with the only hope that an evolving Germany will deal with swift hand and use its reemergence with sword in hand which in its harshness will strike decisively.

God Bless us!

Christopher Tingus
Harwich, MA 02645
chris.tingus@gmail.com

Comment by William R. Cumming

August 10, 2009 @ 6:34 am

Thanks Phil and Arnold. Pretty convincing discussion. What I find so very interesting is that huge number of Afghans fled into Pakistan in the 80′s. These huge camps of refugees/migrants were never fully taken into account by the Pakistan government I guess on the theory of return. The same theory of course has been utilized by the ARAB states to justify doing so little for the disapora caused by the 1948 triumph of the founders of Israel.

Well, now going to espouse a brand-new hot off the press Cumming theory. It is not failed states that are the source of terrorism. It is the large-scale refugee/migrant issue that is the problem even in Europe. It is interesting that there was a huge fight over terminology after Hurricane Katrina to keep the population largely minority that successfully evacuated and in many cases left the STATE of LOUISIANA forever from not being labeled refugees but to be labeled evacuees. By the way just for the record, in most cases except for Crisis Relocation Program during the height of the cold war under the federal civil defense program the theory for natural and even other man-made disasters was an early return of the evacuees to their homes or domiciles. We should now know that if the event is large enough domestically that is not going to happen and interesting the various UN conventions on refugees status use terminology remarkable applicable to the Katrina “Refugees.” Of course as Prof. then later Senator from CA always stated “Semantics is Everything.” Anyhow on with the story.

Deputy Secretary Jane Lute once held the UN Refugee portfolio. She might be an interesting interview on this topic. My point is that large scale semi-voluntary migrations are really refugee situations. I think this whole arena might be fertile grounds for study by the INTEL community (of course maybe already happening). It does seem that many of these terrorists have shown remarkable agility in moving around whether voluntarily or otherwise. I always found it interesting that the SUDAN bowed to US pressure and kicked out UBL.!
Well here goes to study as to whether its failed states or the refugees/migrants from those failed states that are the big problem. By the way a postscript. Bob Gallucci, former Clinton era Ambassador and Dean of School of FS at Georgetown now at the head of the McCarthur Foundation. They are one of the leaders in the study of migration issues. Might be an interesting and fruitful coincidence of timing if my paradigm proves correct.
To summarize, the Pakistan Government might have been barely able to handle its internal problems but now continues to misfire in the face of continued migration/refugee issues. Perhaps I am right the labels (semantics) are crucial in analysis of terroris and perhaps not.

Pingback by Mehsud said to be dead (again) | Homeland Security Watch

August 18, 2009 @ 4:04 pm

[...] reports are available from DAWN and prior coverage by HLSWatch is available here and here and here and here. Share This [...]