PAKISTAN's major assault on the Taleban has won national and international praise, but a record of policy flip-flops means its resolve to finish the job remains in doubt. Armed forces backed by air power are attacking militants in the Swat valley 130 km north of the capital to halt a growing Taleban insurgency that has alarmed the United States. On Thursday, Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani ordered the army to strike at “militants and terrorists” he said were trying to hold the country hostage at gunpoint. For now, some Pakistanis are cheering on the government, prompted by mounting alarm at the spread of Taleban influence across the northwest and militant bombings in Punjab. Washington, too, has applauded: Attacks on militants near the border with Afghanistan are seen as vital to US efforts to hit Al-Qaeda and end the insurgency in that country. But skeptics question whether the army has the stomach for a sustained effort that could cause heavy civilian casualties, increase a refugee burden and alienate public opinion. “In the past a lot of these offensives have been for show: One day it starts, and three days later, after it wins applause in Washington, it stops,” said Gareth Price, head of the Asia Program at Britain's Chatham House think tank. “In this case we'll just have to give it more time to see if it evolves into something sustained.” A further brake on the offensive could come from a powerful military spy agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), reluctant to harm links with some militant groups it sees as tools in Pakistan's confrontation with India, analysts say. A threat to the State “As long as India remains the arch enemy of Pakistan and its key security challenge I see very little chance of these jihadi groups being put out of business by the Pakistani state,” said Syed Rifaat Hussain, of Qaid-e-Azam University. The United States and its Western allies have trusted the ISI to help combat Al-Qaeda, but there have long been suspicions that it takes a permissive line over the Taleban, allowing the militants freedom to attack Afghanistan over the border. Timothy Hoyt, Professor of Strategy and Policy at the US Naval War College, said organizations once supported by the ISI were evolving into a threat to the Pakistani state. “This creates a unique complication, because it is not entirely clear that the intelligence and military - or elements within them – do not still view these groups as an asset, either for geopolitical or ideological reasons,” he said. Analysts say these links explain why Pakistan's policy on its armed groups flip-flops between inconclusive offensives and peace deals that critics say embolden the militants. Authorities agreed in February to a Taleban demand for Shariah law in the Swat valley but the militants refused to disarm, and pushed out of Swat closer to the capital. Alarmed, the United States pressured Islamabad for action. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton accused Islamabad of abdicating to the Taleban, while US President Barack Obama expressed grave concern about the “very fragile” government. Army “could mean business” On Wednesday, President Asif Ali Zardari, in Washington for talks, assured US President Barack Obama of Islamabad's commitment to defeating Al-Qaeda and its allies. Some former skeptics are keeping an open mind. A former foreign secretary, Humayun Khan, told Reuters in April the government lacked singleness of purpose. But on Friday he saw grounds for hope following Gilani's statement. “The army is doing this under considerable pressure, of course. And it may not be a swift affair. But my own feeling is that this time they could mean business,” he said. Political scientist Moeed Yusuf said he had never seen the civilian and military authorities acting more closely in unison because both realised matters were “as serious as it gets”. But he said he expected the operation would be limited to the settled areas of North West Frontier Province where the Taleban had recently consolidated their grip. It would not be extended into the nearby Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) that are home to Al-Qaeda and other militant groups for fear of civilian casualties. “The public mood is for them at the moment. But the army has a very low threshold when it comes to political backlash and civilian damage,” he said.
