It is an amazingly stupid move on al Qaeda's and the Taliban's part. They've lost their sanctuary by forcing Pakistan to fight and risk losing nearly completely in this new front.
Still, increased attacks in Pakistan in the absence of any alternative front (remember that Somalia was lost as a potential Plan B) at least raise the remote hope of possibly seizing Pakistani nuclear weapons. So even as the jihadis lose overall, they might draw to an inside straight and emerge with a tremendous victory.
Yet despite the losses al Qaeda and the Taliban have experienced in Afghanistan, a number of observers insist we risk a defeat there. I don't see it, and neither does Secretary Gates:
There is no doubt, as we've talked -- for those of you were in Scotland, that there has been an increase in violence over the past year, but in part it has been due to much more aggressive actions on the part of the NATO alliance and the U.S. forces that are there. There was -- the spring offensive we expected from the Taliban became NATO's spring offensive. And here again, I think that the challenge for 2008 will be to sustain the successes we've had; to hang on to places that we have cleared, like Musa Qal'eh; and create the conditions in which further economic development can go forward.
Gates also comments on the increased priority of Pakistan for the jihadis:
There is no doubt, as we've talked -- for those of you were in Scotland, that there has been an increase in violence over the past year, but in part it has been due to much more aggressive actions on the part of the NATO alliance and the U.S. forces that are there. There was -- the spring offensive we expected from the Taliban became NATO's spring offensive. And here again, I think that the challenge for 2008 will be to sustain the successes we've had; to hang on to places that we have cleared, like Musa Qal'eh; and create the conditions in which further economic development can go forward.
General Cartwright noted that Pakistan has stepped up on their side of the border:
I'd -- just on the Pakistani side, we are impressed with this new chief and how he has set some goals and a vision for their military. And already his leadership is starting to affect them. So that -- having that capability and that added capacity in Pakistan has an effect in Afghanistan as far as al Qaeda's concerned. It keeps them on the run.
Strategypage writes about the overall defeat that al Qaeda is experiencing that is pushing them toward attacking in what had been their rear area:
It's not been a good year for Islamic terrorism. In Iraq, al Qaeda was crushed when the principal al Qaeda supporters, the Sunni Arab minority, turned on the terrorists. Same thing happened, to a lesser extent, in Afghanistan, where some of the pro-Taliban tribes turned anti-al Qaeda, and killed hundreds of al Qaeda fighters. ...
Al Qaeda is trying to shift resources to Pakistan, where it believes, in cooperation with some pro-Taliban Pushtun and Baluchi tribes, it can survive. Al Qaeda also believes that it has a shot at overthrowing the Pakistani government, and gaining control of nuclear weapons. This is a fantasy, as less than 20 percent of Pakistanis support Islamic radicalism, and there are many factions. But al Qaeda is running out of options. In the last seven hears it went from triumph (the September 11, 2001 attacks) to one disaster after another. Afghanistan was lost by the end of 2001, and operations in Iraq turned the entire Islamic world against al Qaeda. Pakistan has been a mixed success. Al Qaeda's usual suicide bomber tactics quickly turned most of the population against the terrorists, but some of the Pushtun and Baluchi tribes along the Afghan border kept the faith. This has changed in the past year, as some of those tribes have tired of the foreigners (al Qaeda) and gone to war with the terrorists. Despite all that, and major army offensives this year against Islamic radicals in the tribal areas, al Qaeda's position in Pakistan is precarious. Years of al Qaeda attacks on senior Pakistani officials, and suicide bombings that have killed hundreds of civilians, has turned the government and population against the terrorists. There are still terrorist supporters, but they are a minority, and have to be alert to getting turned in by a neighbor, or even family.
So, even though fighting in Pakistan seems scary because nuclear weapons are theoretically in play, this is a desperate move by the jihadis prompted by having no other real option to wage war. Defeated in Iraq and Afghanistan, smashed up in Somalia, failing to gain traction in Algeria or other places where local jihadis adopt the al Qaeda franchise, and under attack even in Saudi Arabia. Even in Lebanon the jihadis were smashed up and in Gaza, the Israelis are a powerful force that will not let jihadis operate at too high a level without acting decisively. And Gaza isn't exactly a mountain redoubt.
So now the jihadis have broken the truce that says Pakistan will tolerate jihadis on their frontier as long as they don't attack Pakistan. This was always a stupid deal with the devil, since the jihadis always break their promise.
So, with operations in Afghanistan knocking back the jihadis and Pakistan a more active front, I'd suspect that Pakistan will be more willing to tolerate--and possibly eager to have--American and coalition operations against the jihadis inside Pakistan. I'd expect special forces and air power to work in Pakistan with even battalion-sized infantry forays likely.
We may yet see bin Laden frog-marched out of the area or killed before the end of 2008. Al Qaeda and the Taliban are staking it all on a last jihad in Pakistan. Let's send the bastards to Paradise.
