Barackface: May 2025

Thursday, May 01, 2025

The Pakistani Army, ISI, The Pakistani Government And Terrorism

Pahalgam Attack Terrorists: Escape Route and Current Whereabouts
India's Options
What India Can Learn from Israel: Strategic Depth, Surgical Strikes, and the Pakistan Dilemma

Trump’s Trade War
Peace For Taiwan Is Possible
The Last Age of War, The First Age of Peace: Lord Kalki, Prophecies, and the Path to Global Redemption
AOC 2028: : The Future of American Progressivism

https://t.co/Iyop8Cx5wT
— Paramendra Kumar Bhagat (@paramendra) May 1, 2025

The question of the Pakistan Army, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), and the Pakistani elected government's role in fostering terrorism is complex and contentious, with allegations, evidence, and counter-narratives spanning decades. Below, I provide a concise and balanced analysis based on available information, acknowledging the geopolitical context, accusations, and Pakistan’s official stance, while critically examining the narrative.

Pakistan Army's Role

The Pakistan Army has been accused of supporting militant groups as a tool of state policy, particularly in the context of its rivalry with India and influence in Afghanistan. Key points include:

Support for Militants in Kashmir: The Army is alleged to have trained and armed groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) to conduct operations in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir. Former President Pervez Musharraf admitted in 2015 that the military trained militants to “force India to the negotiating table” over Kashmir.
- Example: LeT’s 2008 Mumbai attacks, where captured attacker Ajmal Kasab confirmed the group’s planning with ISI and military backing.
Afghan Taliban and Haqqani Network: The Army is accused of providing sanctuary, funding, and military hardware to the Afghan Taliban and Haqqani Network to counter Indian influence in Afghanistan and maintain “strategic depth.” U.S. Admiral Mike Mullen in 2011 called the Haqqani Network a “veritable arm of the ISI,” linked to attacks like the 2011 U.S. embassy assault in Kabul.
Selective Counterterrorism: While the Army has conducted operations like Zarb-e-Azb (2014) against the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), critics argue it spares groups like the Afghan Taliban and LeT, which align with its strategic goals.
Critical Perspective: The Army’s actions may stem from a perception of existential threats from India and an unstable Afghanistan. However, this strategy has backfired, with groups like the TTP turning against Pakistan, causing domestic instability. The Army’s dominance over civilian governance also limits accountability.

ISI's Role

The ISI, Pakistan’s premier intelligence agency, is often described as the operational arm of the military in fostering militancy, with allegations of direct and indirect support for terrorist groups:

Kashmir and India-Focused Groups: The ISI is accused of providing intelligence, training, and logistics to LeT, JeM, and Hizbul Mujahideen for attacks in India, including the 2001 Indian Parliament attack, 2006 Mumbai train bombings, and 2008 Mumbai attacks. Indian and Western officials, including U.S. intelligence, have linked the ISI to these groups.
Afghan Operations: The ISI allegedly supported the Taliban’s resurgence post-2001, providing safe havens and resources. The 2011 discovery of Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad, near a military academy, raised suspicions of ISI complicity, though Pakistan denied knowledge.
Double Game Allegations: The ISI is criticized for “playing both sides” in the War on Terror, aiding U.S. efforts against Al-Qaeda while covertly supporting the Afghan Taliban and Haqqani Network. A 2006 British Defense Ministry report accused the ISI of indirectly supporting terrorism in Afghanistan, Iraq, and London (7/7 bombings).
Critical Perspective: The ISI’s actions reflect Pakistan’s strategic calculus to counter India and ensure influence in Afghanistan. However, its alleged ties to militancy have strained relations with the U.S., led to Pakistan’s FATF gray-listing (until 2022), and fueled domestic terrorism, such as TTP attacks. The agency’s autonomy, often described as a “state within a state,” complicates oversight.

Pakistani Elected Government's Role

The elected government’s role in fostering terrorism is less direct, as civilian leaders have limited control over the military and ISI, but complicity or inaction is alleged:

Limited Authority: The military’s dominance in foreign and security policy often sidelines elected governments. For example, attempts by civilian leaders like Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif to curb ISI activities were thwarted. In 2008, the PPP government’s effort to place the ISI under the Interior Ministry was reversed within 24 hours due to military pushback.
Complicity or Inaction: Some governments are accused of turning a blind eye to militancy to appease the military or religious constituencies. For instance, the PML-N government (2013–2018) was criticized for not decisively prosecuting LeT leader Hafiz Saeed, despite his 2019 indictment.
Imran Khan’s Tenure (2018–2022): Khan’s government relied heavily on the military, and his rhetoric sometimes aligned with the Army’s narrative, such as downplaying action against Afghan Taliban factions. His administration’s reluctance to crack down on certain madrassas linked to militancy drew criticism.
Critical Perspective: Civilian governments face a delicate balance: challenging the military risks political instability or coups, while acquiescence enables the status quo. The FATF gray-listing pressured reforms, but structural military dominance limits civilian impact. Domestic terrorism, like the 2022 TTP resurgence, underscores the consequences of this dynamic.

Pakistan’s Official Stance

Pakistan consistently denies state sponsorship of terrorism, asserting:

It is a victim of terrorism, with over 80,000 casualties since 2001, including TTP attacks like the 2022 Peshawar mosque bombing.
Operations like Zarb-e-Azb and Radd-ul-Fasaad (2017) demonstrate commitment to counterterrorism.
Allegations of ISI or Army support are “negative propaganda” by India and Western powers to deflect from their own failures in Afghanistan.
The government emphasizes cooperation with the U.S., such as capturing Al-Qaeda operatives post-9/11, and its role in facilitating U.S.-Taliban talks (2019–2020).

Critical Analysis

The evidence suggests a pattern of selective support by the Pakistan Army and ISI for militant groups aligned with strategic goals, particularly against India and in Afghanistan. This stems from a security paradigm prioritizing India as an existential threat and Afghanistan as a buffer zone. However, the elected government’s role appears secondary, constrained by military dominance and political survival.

This strategy has significant blowback:

Domestic Instability: Groups like the TTP and ISIS-K, emboldened by Pakistan’s militant ecosystem, have attacked Pakistani civilians and security forces.
International Isolation: Pakistan’s FATF gray-listing and strained U.S. ties reflect global distrust.
Regional Tensions: Support for groups like LeT fuels India-Pakistan animosity, risking escalation.

Conversely, Pakistan’s narrative as a victim of terrorism holds some weight, given its high casualty toll and counterterrorism efforts. The U.S. and India’s focus on Pakistan may also deflect from their own policy failures, such as the chaotic Afghanistan withdrawal in 2021. Nonetheless, the Army and ISI’s reluctance to fully dismantle militant networks undermines Pakistan’s claims of innocence.

Conclusion

The Pakistan Army and ISI have been credibly linked to fostering terrorism through support for groups like LeT, JeM, the Afghan Taliban, and the Haqqani Network, driven by geopolitical aims in Kashmir and Afghanistan. The elected government’s role is limited, often complicit through inaction due to military dominance. While Pakistan denies these allegations and highlights its counterterrorism efforts, the evidence of selective militancy support is substantial, though contextualized by its security concerns. This duality—fighting some terrorists while allegedly abetting others—has fueled domestic and regional instability, complicating Pakistan’s global standing. For a deeper understanding, cross-referencing primary sources like FATF reports or declassified U.S. documents is recommended.

Pages

Thursday, May 01, 2025

The Pakistani Army, ISI, The Pakistani Government And Terrorism