Pakistan: The Iraqi cauldron

[Barrett808]

Ikram Sehgal
The Pentagon's senior civilian hierarchy and its armchair warriors who have never heard a bullet fired in anger, were right in speculating that the war would be over in a short time, but their assessment of "the war after the war" is proved wrong. As the senior US Army Chief Gen Shinseki, vindictively declared a "lame duck" by US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, insisted that the invasion (and occupation thereof) of Iraq needed "more boots on the ground". The senior military hierarchy united against Rumsfeld as their predecessors did against McNamara and his whiz-kids during Vietnam. Frustrated with the inherent caution and keen to put into practice the new high-tech concept of lightning IT warfare that could not be tried against the Taliban in Afghanistan. Rumsfeld found a kindred spirit in Gen Tommy Franks, the overall US Commander in the region. Rumsfeld and Franks had reason to feel confident about a quick victory in contrast to the informed military assessment that victory would take some time, even against a dilapidated and obsolete Iraqi military machine. However, they knew something which we didn't, even though it was a matter of speculation, critical decision-making personnel in Saddam's military hierarchy had been bought off even before the first shot was fired, many of them trusted the blood relatives of the dictator.

...

The US has repeatedly asked for two brigades of Pakistani troops for Iraq, while President Musharraf was initially amenable to the idea he had put a UN or OIC mandate (and participation by other Muslim countries) as a caveat. In the present political environment there will be a strong political reaction within the country against the sending of troops to Iraq. We must play a role in bringing peace to the people of Iraq but the political and human cost may be too high a price to pay. Any attack on Pakistani troops will invoke self-defence, the retaliation thereof could escalate and a blood-cycle will be in the offing, creating anti-Pakistani sentiments in the Middle East. This is more a probability than a possibility. Are we prepared to take the risk in the face of what we know is a moral duty to provide succour for the Iraqi people? In the circumstances the sending of Pakistani troops into the Iraqi cauldron is a major non-starter.

(more)

http://www.hipakistan.com/en/detail.php?newsId=en38528&F_catID=&f_type=source

[lindashaw]

1. I don't see how any country can send troops in there...

I read this morning that India will not send troops, even with a UN mandate. One by one, the countries around Iraq are making excuses why they can't. Bush asked for it. Now he's got it. Heaven help him, because the world won't.