By William Tucker
Chief Correspondent for In Homeland Security
The death of a notorious militant is hardly a rare occasion, but there are times when the timing and methodology employed to kill the militant is exceptional. Two recent cases put a spotlight on this phenomenon. Hakimullah Mehsud, the leader of the Pakistani Taliban, was recently killed in an alleged U.S. UAV strike in North Waziristan. By itself, the method employed to kill Mehsud has become routine. In fact, Hakimullah’s predecessor, Baitullah Mehsud was likewise killed by an unmanned aircraft, but the timing of Hakimullah’s death was notable. Pakistan claims that peace talks between the state and the Pakistani Taliban were making progress until Mehsud was killed. Though the progress of these peace talks would certainly have been debatable, Pakistan’s reaction was swift. For years the TTP has claimed that Pakistan was helping the U.S. identify the movements of its leaders for targeting by armed UAV’s, so it is conceivable that the Pakistani denunciation was related to the peace talks. Truth be told, Pakistan has been pushing Washington quite fervently to end the UAV strikes. Pakistan has played a double game in the past of publically admonishing the U.S. for launching the strikes, while privately urging the continuance of the program. Political changes in Islamabad may have shifted this calculus especially now that the U.S. is nearing a withdrawal date from Afghanistan. Nonetheless, the TTP blamed both the Pakistani ISI and the U.S. for Hakimullah’s death.
This past Sunday another assassination took place. Nasiruddin Haqqani, son of Jalaluddin Haqqani, the founder and leader of the Haqqani network, was killed when he stopped at a market in Islamabad. This assassination was professionally accomplished when two gunmen on a motorcycle stopped and opened fire just as Nasiruddin left his vehicle. The methodology employed is something rarely seen when a militant is targeted because it is difficult to pinpoint the location of a target that typically moves covertly. The fact that Nasiruddin was so easily followed, and quite possibly spotted visiting the same market regularly, spoke to his comfort of moving around in Pakistan. Pakistan views the Haqqani network favorably as it has worked with the family for decades and are seen as vital to Pakistan’s interests in Afghanistan. The Haqqani network is perhaps the most capable group in conventional and guerilla warfare affiliated with the Afghan Taliban and taking out Nasiruddin would complicate matters for Sirajuddin Haqqani, Nasiruddin’s older brother who has taken over much of his father’s responsibilities. Nasiruddin was viewed as Sirajuddin’s right hand man, and with Jalaluddin at an advanced age the timing of this assassination will have a measurable impact on the network.
That these two deaths occurred so close together in the midst of Pakistani attempts to shape a post-U.S. Afghanistan is difficult to ignore. Though the U.S. and Afghanistan have profound differences, both are wary of Islamabad’s dealing with the Taliban and how it will impact the post-U.S. environment. Neither party wants Pakistan to reprise the role it played when the Taliban ruled Afghanistan pre-9/11, and they are concerned about another bloody civil war similar to that which ensued following the Soviet withdrawal. For Pakistan , Afghanistan is vital for strategic depth, but also for containing the influence of major powers in Central Asia. This means that Pakistan has a vital interest in Afghanistan, while the U.S. just wants to prevent a militant safe haven. The Afghan government has a vested interest in remaining in power and weakening the Taliban. All told, each player has a interest that opposes the other in some fashion. This means that this struggle and clandestine intrigue will continue to accompany any diplomacy that takes place.
Comments are closed.