Från Pakistan till Georgien

Som Asia Times skriver nedan håller Washingtons främst allierade i Pakistan på att åtalas av den demokratiskt valda regering som USA med flera insisterade på att Pakistan skulle införa. Med resultatet att pakistan idag är ännu mer instabilt.

Vad har Pakistan med NATO, USA, Ryssland och Georgien att göra. Jo, Den enda transportvägen via land som trupperna kan försörjas med I Afghanistan och hamnar där. Därför träffade NATO ett avtal med Ryssland vid det möte i Bukarest som Georgien nekades NATO inträde att landvägen genom ryssland skulle öppnas för transporter till Afghanistan. Ryssland skulle också för första gången skicka folk till Afghanistan för att träna det Afghanska polisen. Med andra ord NATO och USA behöver ett samarbetsvilligt Ryssland i central-asien och inte minst mellanöstern.

En av många anledingar till varför USA och NATO inte kommer att göra något för att hjälpa Georgien annat än möjligen lite hårda ord. Realpolitik på storkmaktsnivå. Det finns heller ingen oberoende röst som kan agera. EU, NATO, och inte minst FN är alla bundna till Bush administrationen och resultatet av två beslut. Irak kriget och det s.k kriget mot terrorismens godkännande.

Och i bakgrunden finns förstås alltid olja och gas i det nya kalla kriget över energitillgångar. Kaukasus som rysk sfär mot mellanöstern som amerikansk kanske?

Asia Times Online :: South Asia news, business and economy from India and Pakistan
”The single strategy of severing NATO’s supply lines from Pakistan is the key to success. If the blockage is successfully implemented in 2008, the Western coalition will be forced to leave Afghanistan in 2009, and if implemented next year, the exit is certain by 2010.”

Several al-Qaeda cells have apparently been activated in Karachi to monitor the movement of NATO supply convoys.

This focus on Karachi coincides with two major events. First, the Pakistani armed forces are heavily engaged in fighting against militants in Bajaur Agency and in the Swat Valley in the tribal areas along the Afghan border.

At the same time, the coalition government in Islamabad is preparing to impeach Washington’s point man in the region, President Pervez Musharraf, mainly over his implementation of a state of emergency and dismissal of the judiciary last year when he headed a military administration.

The unpopular military operations and the political crisis, which could see Musharraf respond by using his constitutional powers to dissolve parliament, play into al-Qaeda’s hands as the government’s ability to counter new threats is considerably reduced.

NATO is understandably acutely concerned over protecting its supply lines into land-locked Afghanistan. When routes in Khyber Agency came under attack this year, NATO reached an agreement with Russia for some goods to transit through Russian territory. This alternative is costly, though, given the distances involved, and can only be used in emergencies.

Washington tried to get Iran to permit the passage of goods from its seaports into neighboring Afghanistan, but Tehran refused point-blank.

So NATO is stuck with Pakistan as a transshipment point, along with its political instability.

The latest crisis has it roots in elections in February, following Musharraf stepping down as chief of army staff. The national elections that followed resulted in a coalition civilian government headed by the pro-American liberal and secular Pakistan People’s Party and Nawaz Sharif’s conservative right-wing Pakistan Muslim League, whose political constituency is traditional and religious segments of society. The Pashtun sub-nationalist Awami National Party and the traditional religious Jamiat-i-Ulema-i-Islam are another mismatch in the coalition.

As a result, from the beginning the coalition was pulled in various directions, with little consensus on key matters such as the ”war on terror”. Only recently did the parties agree to move ahead on trying to impeach Musharraf.

Pakistan is the strategic backyard for NATO as well as for the Taliban and al-Qaeda. If Musharraf does go, it would be a huge victory for the militants to see off the US ally through whose office millions of dollars of aid are channeled in the ”war on terror”.

Om Claes

A blogger and general internet nerd from Sweden. I write about politics, internet, technology, the world around me and whatever else interest me. I write mostly in swedish but some english.
Det här inlägget postades i Internationellt och har märkts med etiketterna , , , , . Bokmärk permalänken.

Lämna ett svar

Din e-postadress kommer inte publiceras. Obligatoriska fält är märkta *