posted September 06, 2006 06:33 PM              

By Barbara Plett
BBC News, Islamabad

The visit to Afghanistan by Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf comes on the heels of a deal that could have ramifications for Afghan complaints about cross-border militancy.

On Tuesday the Pakistani government signed a peace agreement with pro-Taleban militants in North Waziristan, a semi-autonomous tribal area next to the Afghan border.

Over the past year the army has been targeting Taleban and al-Qaeda fugitives who use the lawless region as a base to launch attacks in Afghanistan.

But their supporters among the local tribes were drawn into the fight, leading to fierce battles that killed hundreds.

The accord is meant to end the violence, and it is viewed here as an implicit admission that the government's military strategy has failed.

Deal brokered

According to the terms of the deal, the tribesmen promised to stop attacking the army and to stop crossing the border to fight in Afghanistan.

The government agreed to halt major ground and air operations, free prisoners, retreat to barracks, compensate for losses and allow tribesmen to carry small arms.

The thorny issue of foreign fighters was left ambiguous. The militants promised that all non-Pakistanis would leave North Waziristan, or stay and respect the deal. But the government did not insist that they be registered, as it has done in the past.

A 10-member committee is charged with implementing and monitoring the agreement.

A driving force behind the negotiations was the governor of North West Frontier Province, which borders North Waziristan, Lt Gen Ali Mohammed Aurakzai. He welcomed the accord as "unprecedented in tribal history", and said the inter-tribal council that brokered it had resolved a complicated issue within a few weeks.

Some commentators, however, declared it a victory for the militants.

Possible outcomes

"The government policy has swung from one extreme to another, from the use of brute military force to what appears to be total capitulation to militants," wrote Ismail Khan of the Dawn newspaper.

"The government was desperate [for a solution]. It has bought temporary peace," said Rahimullah Yusufzai, a close follower of Taleban affairs. "I think this accord will give legitimacy to the militants. They will behave as people who fought the army to a standstill."

But will it work?

Similar deals in neighbouring South Waziristan did stop attacks on Pakistani soldiers, although it strengthened the hand of locals who shared the ideology and views of the Taleban.

The accord may ease domestic pressure on President Musharraf, especially from religious parties, which have accused him of waging war on his own people.

Whether it stops cross-border movement remains to be seen.

Implied message

There could be initial success as the various stakeholders seek to show the deal is working. But regional observers are sceptical. And the government will face US, Nato and Afghan demands to resume operations at any sign of violation.

The accord highlights what many analysts here see as the contradiction at the heart of Gen Musharraf's leadership.

As a key US ally in the "war on terror", he is under pressure to crack down on Islamic extremism. But politically that is difficult in a country where sympathy with the Taleban and opposition to American policy run deep, including within his own armed forces.

He will no doubt be explaining details of the peace deal in Kabul. But it is unlikely either the Afghans or the Americans want to hear the message it seems to imply - that the solution is to accommodate and work with the Taleban, rather than confront and try to defeat them militarily.

posted September 06, 2006 06:39 PM              

Critics say treaty, which calls for end to terrorist actions, seems 'a total capitulation' by Islamabad.
By Arthur Bright | csmonitor.com

In a move that some say appears 'a total capitulation' to pro-Taliban forces, Pakistan signed a peace deal with tribal leaders in the North Waziristan region of Pakistan Tuesday, and is withdrawing military forces in exchange for promises that militant tribal groups there will not engage in terrorist activities.

The Associated Press reports that the agreement is meant to end five years of fighting in the province, located along the border with Afghanistan, that has claimed the lives of over 350 Pakistani troops and hundreds of militants and civilians.

quote:

---

Under the pact – signed by a militant leader, Azad Khan, and a government representative, Fakhr-e-Alam – no militant in North Waziristan will shelter foreign militants.

Militants also will not target Pakistani government and security officials or pro-government tribal elders or journalists, North Waziristan lawmaker Maulana Nek Zaman said.

For almost five years, Pakistani soldiers and paramilitary forces have battled local tribesmen, many believed to be allied with the Taliban and Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda network, in the fiercely independent mountain region where central government powers do not reach. Bin Laden is also believed to be hiding along the porous Pakistani-Afghan frontier.

---

The New York Times reports that the deal "is widely viewed as a face-saving retreat for the Pakistani Army, which has taken a heavy battering at the hands of the mountain tribesmen and militants, who are allied with the Taliban and Al Qaeda." But while the militants have promised to cease attacks across the border into Afghanistan and to expel foreign fighters, the treaty has given them a significant loophole.

quote:

---

In one of the most obvious capitulations since it began its campaign to rout foreign fighters from the area, the government said foreigners would be allowed to stay if they respected the law and the peace agreement. Osama bin Laden and other leaders of Al Qaeda are believed to be among the foreigners who have taken refuge in the area. ...

A spokesman for the militants, Abdullah Farhad, denied in a telephone call from an undisclosed location that there were any foreign militants in North Waziristan, and said the government should provide evidence of their presence.

"Why should we bother if they are not here," he said, speaking of foreign fighters.

---

Although Mr. bin Laden is thought to be in the area, Pakistani officials have given mixed signals as to whether he would still be considered a target by government forces. In his blog for ABC News, Brian Ross reports that Pakistani Major General Shaukat Sultan said in an interview that bin Laden "would not be taken into custody, as long as [he] is being like a peaceful citizen." http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/09/pakistan_gives_.html

Soon after in a statement, however, the Pakistani ambassador to the US said, "If [bin Laden] is in Pakistan, today or any time later, he will be taken into custody and brought to justice." The ambassador also said that Gen. Sultan's comments were taken out of context, though Mr. Ross presents the transcript of the interview in his blog. http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/09/pakistan_denies.html

Though the treaty was met with hugs and the exchange of greetings between Pakistani soldiers and Talibani forces upon its signing, Ismail Khan of the Pakistan newspaper Dawn said the deal sent the government "back to square one." http://www.dawn.com/2006/09/06/top2.htm http://www.dawn.com/2006/09/06/top15.htm

quote:

---

Like a pendulum, the government policy has swung from one extreme to another, from the use of brute military force to what appears to be total capitulation to militants. Never did the government try to intelligently combine the use of force with pursuit of dialogue. ...

For now the government has been able to achieve peace but whether it will be durable and not relapse into more chaos and lawlessness, remains to be seen. It will indeed be a daunting task for the government to ensure that there is no cross-border movement by local and foreign militants and they do not indulge in activities detrimental to peace and security.

Unless that happens, the government would continue to be under pressure from Afghanistan and the US-led coalition partners to rein in militants, prompting it to launch another operation and that may result in the unravelling of the agreement.

---

The Washington Post notes that the peace deal may bode ill for Afghan and US forces across the border in Afghanistan, as it could embolden militants "to operate more freely in Pakistan and to infiltrate more aggressively into Afghanistan to fight US and allied forces there."

quote:

---

"This could be a very dangerous development," said one official at an international agency, speaking anonymously because the issue is sensitive in both countries. "Until recently there has been relative stability in eastern Afghanistan, but now that could start to deteriorate."

The agreement could add a new element of tension to [Pakistan's president, Gen. Pervez]Musharraf's visit [to Afghanistan on Wednesday], aimed at smoothing over his relations with Afghan President Hamid Karzai. The two Muslim leaders, both allies in the U.S.-led war against Islamic extremists, have clashed heatedly over allegations that Taliban forces in Afghanistan are receiving support and shelter from inside Pakistan.

Pakistan's move also appeared to complicate the U.S. role in the region. U.S. officials have praised Musharraf for his help in capturing al-Qaeda members and refrained from pressing him hard on cross-border violence. A withdrawal of Pakistani forces could reduce pressure on al-Qaeda figures believed to be hiding in the region, including Osama bin Laden, allowing them more freedom of action.

---

The Indo-Asian News Service reports that the US would prefer Pakistan retain control of its tribal areas like North Waziristan, in the interests of deterring terrorist groups.

quote:

---

"It is in the interest of Pakistan and the Pakistani people that the government be able to exercise its sovereignty throughout all of Pakistan," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack told reporters in response to a question about a reported peace agreement with pro-Taliban militants in the North Waziristan region. ...

"Certainly everybody understands the importance of not having safe havens where you can have these ungoverned areas where Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, other terrorist groups can plan and launch terrorist attacks not only against Afghans and international forces in Afghanistan but against Pakistanis and Pakistan."

---

However, Mr. McCormack said that he was unaware of the Pakistani peace deal in North Waziristan, and noted, "This is an area that traditionally has not been under the control of the central government, so this is a historical problem, I think, in Pakistan." http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/7598_1787619,000500020000.htm

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0906/dailyUpdate.html