Violence Spirals as Pakistan Awaits New Government

On Monday, Reuters cited analysts who said, "A spate of suicide attacks by Islamist militants could spark a war of revenge among ethnic Pashtun tribesmen in Pakistan's northwest just as moderate, secular political parties appear poised for power." On Sunday, a suicide bomber blew himself up among thousands of tribal members discussing resistance to the Pakistani Taliban [the meeting was referenced by Pakistani media outlets as a jirga, a tribal assembly of elders which makes decisions by consensus]. According to news sources, 40 people were killed in the third suicide attack in three days. The Washington Post cited Javed Iqbal Cheema, the Interior Ministry spokesman, who said the blast occurred while "five tribes were finalizing a resolution that would punish anyone who shelters or helps Al Qaeda, Taliban and other fighters..." The bombing occurred in the semi-tribal region of Darra Adam Khel, a town about 25 miles south of Peshawar, when most of the people had dispersed and "noted elders of the five tribes - Tor Chappar, Sherakai, Busti Khel, Zarghon Khel and Akhorwal - were discussing forming committees to implement the jirga’s decisions," reported Pakistan's Daily Times. A senior local official told the AFP, "The suicide bomber was an 18-year-old boy. His face is recognizable and initial investigations indicate he was a resident of Darra Adam Khel."

The recent spate of violence is both significant and worrying. The Pakistani security forces have been fighting Islamist militants in the northern areas since November, and although the military claims it has cleaned out most of Swat, attacks still persist in the area. According to Reuters, analysts have noted a "dangerous trend" towards attacks that strike at the heart of Pashtun society. A former security chief for the tribal areas told the news agency, "These are direct attacks on Pashtun society...All institutions, which represent Pashtun society, the mosque, a wedding, a funeral or a jirga, they have all been targeted. They want to bomb the entire Pashtun society into submission." Due to the strict code of honor these tribes live by, known as Pashtunwali, the recent attacks on a funeral [see Feb. 29 post] and on the jirga could trigger inter-tribal feuds, which could create a more explosive situation for the government. In my opinion, the recent string of attacks could further isolate support for the Pakistan Taliban, if the government responds accordingly - that means issuing statements condemning the attacks (already done), as well as seeing this as an opportunity to rally support from the tribal community by further vilifying the actions of the Pakistani Taliban. Ultimately, the tribal identity and code of honor should be emphasized in order to overshadow support for these militants.

Frontline Documentary- Who is the Radio Mullah?

PBS Frontline presented an insightful program entitled, "Pakistan: State of Emergency," a look into the NWFP/FATA region which has largely become a battleground between Pakistani security forces and Pakistani Taliban militants. Frontline/World reporter David Montero visited Swat Valley, "once the crown jewel of Pakistan's tourism trade," but now a haven for these extremists. In the Frontline documentary, Montero had to wear local clothes and brown contact lenses to blend in with the mostly Pashtun (Pathan) population. In the past, he noted, "the people of Swat have resisted extremism and violence." Despite this, he reported, "the Taliban were entrenching themselves, building a $2.5 million madrassa, or religious school, on the outskirts of town. It became the base for their leader, a mysterious cleric known as the 'radio mullah' for his sermons and tirades broadcast by his pirate radio station. His name is Maulana Fazlullah." The 33 year old militant leads the Swat-based extremist group, the Tehreek-e-Nafaz-e-Shariat-e-Mohammadi (TNSM).

Fazlullah was dubbed the 'radio mullah' because he operates a pirate radio station in Swat, which he uses to praise the Taliban and broadcast his overarching message, which Frontline noted includes a ban on music and dancing, the absolute concealment of the female body, and the discouragement of education for girls. According to the program, he also tried to stop a polio vaccination campaign in Swat, "claiming it was a Western ploy to make Muslims infertile." In September 2007, Fazlullah launched a violent campaign in the city, capturing towns throughout the valley and killing security and police personnel. The documentary includes some disturbing footage of those killed, including the bodies of policemen who were beheaded by the Taliban. Montero interviewed Ahmed Rashid, author of Taliban, in the program, who said, "We should remember the Taliban were never defeated by the Americans. They were routed, and they fled Afghanistan and came to Pakistan. The Afghan Taliban and Al Qaeda, who are living in Pakistan, have nurtured a whole new generation of Pakistani extremists. So, this is a very, very dangerous phenomenon."

When Fazlullah's campaign began in Swat, the populace began pleading with Musharraf's government to take action. Islamabad instead reacted slowly and "half-heartedly," initially only sending in a poorly trained paramilitary force. Many subsequently turned to Swat's prince Asfandiar Amir Zeb, a moderate and a leading voice against the Taliban. He explained to Montero that Fazlullah was able to attract a following in Swat because of popular discontent with the Pakistani government, which, he said, had grown corrupt and neglected to develop the region. However, once Fazlullah's violent agenda became apparent, people turned against him. Nevertheless, the Musharraf government continued to react slowly, until, two months into the campaign, ordering 20,000 soldiers into Swat. Although most of Fazlullah's men were killed and the army regained control of most of the area, the mullah and his top commanders escaped into the mountains. Rashid commented on the military campaign in the program, emphasizing, "I think the operation has been a total disaster. The military moved in, as usual, far too late….This could have been nipped in the bud two years ago by a small police operation."

Rashid ultimately blamed Musharraf for having an inconsistent policy toward extremists in Swat and in the tribal areas along the Afghan border – sometimes he appeases militants by offering truces and payoffs, sometimes he cracks down on them. The PBS Frontline episode was significant because it emphasized that these extremists don't have the support of the people in the area - in fact, their campaign of violence and terror has largely caused the population to turn against these groups. However, the government's inconsistencies and inefficiency only succeeded in demoralizing the populace. A newly elected coalition government, in my opinion, must regain the trust of the people, especially in the northern areas. Although there have been indications that the government might sit down and negotiate with the Pakistani Taliban, the new regime must remember to practice consistency - not just with its own policies but with the actions of the military, who needs the support of the country to succeed in its campaign in the north.

You can watch the PBS/Frontline documentary online [see previous link]. The website also has an interview with Montero, as well as an interactive map on tribal Pakistan. [Image from PBS]

Car Bomb Kills 27 Ahead of Pakistan Vote

A car bomb killed 27 people and wounded 93 on Saturday when it exploded in front of a (Pakistan People's Party) PPP election office in Parachinar, in northern Pakistan. The blast, reported the AFP, increased security fears on the last day of campaigning, just two days before the elections. According to CNN, "The office was used by PPP parliamentary candidate Riaz Hussein, according to party spokesman Nazir Dhoki. The explosion occurred late in the afternoon." Some of the dead were workers for the political party, and the Associated Press cited Interior Minister Hamid Nawaz who said "the suicide bomber drove into a crowd as they were preparing to eat." Although he did not speculate on who might have perpetrated the attack, the AP noted, "Monday's elections are taking place against a backdrop of rising Islamic militancy throughout Pakistan, and many candidates have been discouraged from holding large rallies. Security fears are highest in lawless tribal areas along the Afghan border."

An article in today's Dawn reported that the federal government has warned the provincial police chiefs to "step up security" following intelligence reports that suicide bombers may strike "in the next 72 hours" to sabotage the Feb. 18th elections. Dawn added, "Sources said that high-level talks were being held to review plans for the protection of sensitive installations and important political figures." Also interesting is that the government has indicated threats of attacks on some Arab diplomatic missions in the country, namely Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and Iraq.

Despite today's bombing and security-related developments, much press coverage surrounding Monday's election have been devoted to the issue of "poll rigging." According to the aforementioned AFP piece, "Opposition groups have accused Musharraf's administration of rigging the polls to head off possible impeachment if a hostile parliament is voted in."

In response to this widespread concern that the polls will be manipulated, "Tens of thousands of Pakistani civilians have signed up as election monitors," reported the Wall Street Journal yesterday. The news agency added, Pakistan can ill afford the kind of problems that have sparked unrest following past contests. "Voters will be choosing members of Parliament. The party that winds up on top will nominate the next prime minister, who will share power with embattled President Pervez Musharraf. Voters will also select governments in the nation's tribal regions and four provinces, two of which have been run by a coalition of conservative Islamist parties [referring to NWFP and Balochistan." If Monday's elections are seen as credible, that could defuse national tensions and unrest and perhaps "nudge Pakistan's fractious political parties to form a more unified government," the WSJ assessed. The article cited some significant statistics based on the IRI poll released this past week - namely, if the main party that backs Musharraf, the PML-Q, wins the elections, 79% of Pakistani polled would feel the elections had been rigged. One can only imagine the riots that could follow if such a result occurred.

The President is obviously fully aware of these allegations and concerns and has pledged free and fair elections. According to the Daily Times editorial today, Musharraf told political parties, "The winner should not be arrogant and the loser should accept his defeat with grace." The Daily Times called the worries associated with the polls and the President's subsequent responses, "a complex psychology of action and reaction between those who are holding the election and those who are participating in them." The editors added, "The rigging fear is a genuine fear, not nursed by the political parties alone. The media and neutral observers in Pakistan have raised very convincing objections to the way the Election Commission has handled the electoral list. In fact a case against these apparent irregularities is in the Supreme Court, investing the whole issue with legal significance."

As someone who watches the current U.S. presidential race and the upcoming Pakistani elections with equal fascination, the differences in the political atmosphere stand in stark contrast to one another. Whereas U.S. voters' biggest complaint seems to revolve around super-delegates, Pakistanis are worried about rigged polls, security surrounding election stations, and whether a perceived rigged election would bring further unrest to a country already laden with overflowing tensions. I am not saying this is not expected of a developing nation recovering from years of conflict, corruption and ping-ponged authoritarian rule - I am merely highlighting the scale of our problems. Although the number of political parties participating in this election have dropped dramatically, there seems to be so much more international attention, so much more at stake, and so much more that could happen if the results are not to our liking.

Before I end today, I'd like to highlight another great piece by Khaled Ahmed in Pakistan's Friday Times. He wrote, "The new government will be a 'negotiating' government. It will negotiate with Al Qaeda and Taliban Tehreek in the Tribal Areas about the nature of the state...It will negotiate with the elements behind the insurrection in Balochistan on what the federal government will retain out of the powers mentioned in the Constitution...It will similarly have to negotiate with the sub-nationalisms gathering strength in the NWFP and Sindh..." In his opinion, new elections will be demanded soon enough after this new government "is shell-shocked by the challenges of governance it faces and loses its head." - Thoughts?

Pakistan Attack Victims Mourned

On Saturday, 25 people were killed and 35 were injured in a suicide attack targeting an Awami National Party election rally in Charsadda. The ANP is a secular political party that competes against Islamist parties for support among the NWFP's ethnic Pashtun community. One man, who attended the funeral of two of Saturday's victims, told the Associated Press on Sunday that the ANP has "promoted peace" in the turbulent province, adding, "We do not understand why such a big attack happened." According to the AFP, Interior Minister Hamid Nawaz linked the attack to the wave of bombings perpetrated by Al Qaeda-linked militants, "that have claimed more than 70 lives this year."

Pakistan's Daily Times reported that the ANP announced a three-day mourning period for the victims. Dawn cited Afrasiab Khattak, the party's provincial chief, who asserted the explosion was "a conspiracy to delay the polls." Reuters, in its article today, also quoted ANP spokesman Zahid Khan, who reiterated Khattak's statements, noting, "This attack is carried out by the forces who want to subvert elections." The AFP added, "The bombing has further raised fears for the security of general elections on February 18..." Image from the AP.

2 Suspects Arrested in Bhutto Killing

On Thursday, Pakistani police arrested two suspects in the suicide attack that killed former PM Benazir Bhutto on December 27th. According to the Associated Press, "Interior Ministry spokesman Javed Iqbal Cheema said the two men were arrested in Rawalpindi... but gave no further details." Cheema added that he expected the two to appear in "anti-terrorism court" Friday but declined to say whether the two were figures in the assassination. The arrests follow those of two more suspects last month, including a 15 year old who was allegedly part of a suicide squad sent to kill Bhutto, [see CHUP post for January 19]. Details surrounding the arrests are vague and conspiracy theories over who perpetrated the attack are still abound, although U.S. and Pakistani officials assert the assassination was masterminded by Beitullah Mehsud, the elusive leader of the Tehreek-e-Taliban, the umbrella organization of Taliban-linked militants that have been battling Pakistani security forces near the Afghan border.

Yesterday, news sources reported that the Tehreek-e-Taliban declared an indefinite ceasefire in this fighting, although the Pakistani military spokesman denied knowledge of such a development, [see yesterday's post for more information]. Today, however, media outlets did note that the government was preparing for peace talks with the militants. According to Pakistan's The News, the development will likely be "greeted with skepticism by the United States and Pakistan's other Western allies, who believe Islamic militants exploited a failed truce last year to expand their reach into this turbulent, nuclear-armed country." The Daily Times reported that the military spokesman, Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas, warned that this declaration of a ceasefire by militants "could be a move to regroup for another attack."

Abbas's assessment was echoed by a piece in the Christian Science Monitor today, which called the development "curious," adding it further highlighted "the confusion in Pakistan's tribal areas." According to the Monitor, "It appears that the militants in the tribal belt are maneuvering for time and space. Taliban leader Mullah Omar has recently been trying to turn the Taliban's attentions toward Afghanistan, not Pakistan. This cease-fire claim could represent an effort to call off Pakistan operations so that the Taliban can refocus and regroup." Ahmed Rashid, the author of Taliban [a book, which if you haven't already read, you really should] told the news outlet, "In the past, these cease-fires have resulted in militants being able to bide more time, build up resources, and then make much more effective attacks." Any solution, Rashid noted, must include restoring moderate tribal chiefs to power, many of whom have fled to Peshawar or Lahore amid the escalating violence and growing Taliban presence. If these leaders don't return, he said, "you are leaving the region in the hands of these militants." The military must also integrate FATA [Federally Administered Tribal Areas] into Pakistan in order to reduce the current power vacuum that has allowed to region to be susceptible to extremist influence.

In the continuing effort to blunt the influence of these militant groups, the U.S. confirmed today that they are "helping the Pakistanis double the size of their elite commando force," reported the International Herald Tribune Thursday. A senior Department of Defense official, Mike Vickers, told the news agency that the U.S. military presence in the country is fewer than 100 people and is focused on "targeted training." He stated, "It's been ongoing for a while. They're expanding their capability substantially; they're essentially doubling their force. So we're helping them with that expansion and trying to improve their capabilities at the same time. There's also some aviation training. It's been ongoing for several years." The IHT added, "The number of U.S. forces in Pakistan is a sensitive issue. Many Pakistanis openly support or sympathize with Al Qaeda, the Taliban or other militant groups and would view a sizable American presence in their country as an unwelcome intrusion."

Given the recent reported developments related to U.S. training and aid to Pakistan, I would be curious to know how Pakistanis in the FATA react to even this reportedly small amount of U.S. presence, given the anti-American sentiment on the ground. In an area plagued by violence, could this influence be depicted in a positive light? Could the Pakistani military do more to aid perceptions in that regard?

Note: the Council on Foreign Relations released an interesting interview with Ashley Tellis on the security situation in Pakistan, as well as a good backgrounder on the various militant groups in the country, [thanks Jessica!]. Image courtesy of the AFP.

Militants Declare Ceasefire as Pakistan General among Eight Dead in Chopper Crash

On Wednesday, a Pakistani helicopter crashed in the Southern Waziristan area, killing 8, including Maj. Gen. Javed Sultan, the commanding officer of the Kohat garrison. An army spokesman told the BBC that the copter crashed because of a "technical fault" near the Afghan border. The News echoed the BBC News report by citing statements by chief military spokesman Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas. The cause of the crash is "not believed to have been caused by hostile fire," he asserted, although Reuters noted the incident was a "setback" for Pakistan forces. South Waziristan has been wracked by fierce fighting between Taliban-linked militants and Pakistani security forces in recent weeks.

In related news, newswires reported that the Tehreek-e-Taliban, an umbrella organization for Taliban-linked militants, declared an "indefinite" ceasefire in fighting against the Pakistani military. According to the Associated Press, Maulvi Mohammed Umar, a "purported" spokesman for the militant coalition, said the ceasefire was declared following talks with the government. Umar told the AFP, "We have announced ceasefire for an indefinite period because the government stopped attacking us." However, sources reported that Pakistani military spokesman Abbas "denied knowledge of any talks" and said they had "no formal communication" with the militants regarding a ceasefire. Abbas told the AFP, There is no formal information conveyed to us from them about a ceasefire. When they stopped firing we thought it was because of the severe weather conditions in the region...Our position is very clear -- the operation has not ended, it will continue as long as the objectives the operations are achieved." According to the AP, "...any agreement by Pakistan to a cease-fire would likely be frowned on by its Western allies. A cease-fire in North Waziristan in September 2006, which collapsed the following July, was widely seen as giving Taliban and Al Qaeda a freer hand to stage cross-border attacks into Afghanistan and expand their reach inside Pakistan."

Suicide Bomb Kills 6 in Rawalpindi

On Monday, a suicide bombing in Rawalpindi garnered significant press attention, and news sources reported the bomber, who was riding a motorbike, rammed into a minibus carrying security personnel, killing 6 people and wounding 30, [although Pakistan's Geo TV reported that 10 people were killed]. The attack occurred during Monday's morning rush hour. The Associated Press cited Bisharat Abbasi, the local police chief, who said, "The bus was destroyed during the blast on a road running through a bazaar near the offices of the army's National Logistics Cell." The AFP provided eyewitness accounts in its report today. One motor mechanic told the news agency, "The bus was completely destroyed. I saw dozens of people lying injured and dead on the road, covered in blood -- most were wearing army uniforms. One was a woman." Another man asserted, "There was a big ball of fire and smoke. Some pellets from the bomb hit the wall of my shop and I dived down, because I was injured in the arm in another blast that happened at this spot last year."

According to BBC News, authorities have blamed Taliban-linked militants for the attack. The news piece added, "A series of suicide bomb attacks have hit Rawalpindi in the last year. In December opposition leader Benazir Bhutto was killed at a rally there." Although the perpetrator of Bhutto's assassination has still not been confirmed, [the Pakistani government claims she was killed by Al Qaeda-linked militants], news sources on Sunday revealed details of her soon-to-be published book, entitled, Reconciliation: Islam, Democracy and the West that promised to add to the speculation. According to the Dawn newspaper, Bhutto noted, "I was told by both the Musharraf regime and the foreign Muslim government that four suicide bomber squads would attempt to kill me. These included, the reports said, squads sent by the Taliban warlord Beitullah Mehsud; Hamza Bin Laden, a son of Osama Bin Laden; Red Mosque militants; and a Karachi-based militant group." According to The News, she had informed Musharraf about the involvement of Hamza bin Laden in planning her assassination. Pakistan's Sunday Times published excerpts of the book, set to be released the second week of February.

The Rise of Tehreek-e-Taliban

The recent fighting between militants and security forces has dominated news coverage of Pakistan. Yesterday, the hostage-taking of 250 schoolchildren and subsequent surrender of the "gunmen" garnered major media attention, although sources differed on whether the incident was perpetrated by a "criminal gang" or by "Islamic militants." According to an article in today's Daily Times, Interior Ministry spokesman Brig. Javed Cheema told the AFP that the gunmen were members of a "kidnapping gang," although President Pervez Musharraf called them "extremists" at yesterday's news conference in London. Today's UK Times further asserted the hostage-takers were "pro-Taliban militants."

Despite the contradicting accounts, the increasing presence of the extremists in the region is very problematic for the current security situation in Pakistan, as well as the region as a whole. Today's Daily Times' editorial focused on the rise of the Tehreek-e-Taliban, the umbrella organization that was formed last month in an effort to coordinate extremist activities and wage a joint struggle against the Pakistani military. According to the Times' editorial, the organization is made up of 40 groups "commanding an army of 40,000 gathered in Peshawar to unite under a single banner." During a television interview cited by the Daily Times' editors, the leader of Tehreek-e-Taliban, Beitullah Mehsud claimed "he had never met Osama bin Laden but had known Abu Musab Al Zarqawi, the Al Qaeda leader who died in Iraq fighting the Americans." However, according to sources inside the FATA (Federally Administered Tribal Areas), Mehsud does receive funding from the overarching AQ organization.

As has been noted before, very little is known about Beitullah Mehsud [see CHUP! post for January 18th], perhaps adding to his hype. On Tuesday, U.S. News and World Report released an article on the militant leader, entitled, "Pakistan's Most Wanted Warlord." In the piece, Kevin Whitelaw wrote, "While the United States has been urging Pakistan to scour its largely ungoverned tribal regions for Al Qaeda leaders like Osama bin Laden, the Pakistanis have been more focused on tribal extremist figures like Mehsud, who has mounted a serious challenge to the authority of Pakistan's embattled government." Christine Fair, a South Asia expert at RAND, commented, "Baitullah Mehsud is a primary ringmaster for cultivating and deploying suicide bombers. He himself has said so. It's a banner of honor he drapes about himself."According to a report from the United Nations last August, a Taliban source claimed 80 percent of suicide bombers in Afghanistan pass through recruitment centers, training facilities, or safe houses in the Waziristan region before they "reach their targets." [Image courtesy of Reuters]

44 Killed in Pakistan Militant Fighting

Today, Pakistani security forces' struggle with militants along the Afghan border and more statements by President Pervez Musharraf dominated press coverage of the country today. According to the Associated Press, the army said that the Islamic militants attacked a fort on Tuesday, "one of two clashes with government forces that left seven troops and 37 fighters dead." The attack on the fort occurred in southern Waziristan, an area the AP described as, "a lawless tribal region where Al Qaeda and Taliban-linked militants operate." It was the second clash on the fort this month.

Speaking in Paris, France today, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf insisted the remnants of the Taliban regime in neighboring Afghanistan is the "most serious issue" plaguing the country. He told reporters, "The 100,000 troops that we are using ... are not going around trying to locate Osama bin Laden and Zawahiri, frankly. They are operating against terrorists, and in the process, if we get them, we will deal with them certainly." However, the President still rejected claims that the violence was a sign of resurgent Taliban, insisting, "There is no Taliban offensive ... being launched. These are pinpricks that they keep doing — and we have to manage all of that." According to BBC News, the President also stressed on Tuesday that it was impossible for "militants to gain any access to Pakistan's nuclear arsenal." More specifically, he stated, "There is a zero percent chance of either one of them, they (the weapons) cannot fall into any wrong hands...We don't think it is possible that this Al Qaeda or Taliban can take over in Pakistan. We cannot be defeated like this."

An article in today's NY Times, entitled, "Musharraf Trip Shadowed by Troubles at Home," commented on the "troubles" in Pakistan as the President continues his four-nation tour in Europe, where he intends to show his resolve in fighting terrorism and to "talk up investment opportunites." However, noted the Times, "his pitch, after the assassination of the opposition leader Benazir Bhutto will be made in the shadow of a rapidly escalating jihadist insurgency, an economy suffering from sudden power and wheat shortages, and worries that elections, which have been delayed to Feb. 18, will not be free and fair." Both supporters and critics of Musharraf feel that his past "pillars of strength" as a leader are now being severely challenged."

Today's NY Times editorial also discussed the issue of Pakistan, particularly the rise of violence and the Islamist militancy, developments that are problematic for the country's future. On the topic of U.S. involvement in Pakistan, the Times' editors advised, "The United States, already bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan, must be extremely careful about further military entanglement in Pakistan. As a long-term solution, it must encourage political and legal reforms in the tribal areas and spend as quickly as possible a new $750 million allocation by Congress that could improve the lives of Pakistanis and deprive militants of new converts."

I have attempted to provide daily news briefs to keep readers of this blog updated on the media's portrayal of the current events in Pakistan. What has struck me while monitoring the press is that in the struggle between militants and Pakistani security forces, we, as Pakistanis, seem very divorced from this conflict. If you look at the Iraq war, and the way the American media addresses that conflict in the United States, there seems to be unflinching support for U.S. troops - American citizens and lawmakers may criticize the administration's strategy in the war, but never will they "be against" the soldiers fighting in Iraq or Afghanistan. In contrast, the military also seems isolated in their fight against Taliban-linked militants. Maybe I'm wrong, but why are we so divorced from the struggle of our own troops? Is it because we do not identify with the Pakistani military, an institution in the country that has acted largely of its own accord, or is it something else?

Breaking News: Pakistan Arrests Teen Suspect in Bhutto Assassination

In yet another twist to the unfathomable Bhutto assassination: news sources reported this morning that the Pakistani police has arrested a teenager who was allegedly part of a five-man squad in the plot to kill the former PM last month. According to the AFP news agency, "The suspect, 15-year-old Aitezaz Shah, was arrested from the northwestern city of Dera Ismail Khan on Friday while planning a suicide bombing during Ashoura." The Associated Press cited an intelligence official, who said "the 15-year-old told investigators that the five-person squad was dispatched to Rawalpindi, where Bhutto was killed, by Baitullah Mehsud." Newswires cited Interior Ministry spokesman Iqbal Cheema who stated he had not received information about any arrests, or about any new developments in the Bhutto case.

The development further supports previous government allegations that Mehsud and Al Qaeda-linked militants were behind the assassination. However, what's interesting is whether the recent news - the CIA announcement and the arrest of a teen who allegedly confessed to the crime - changes perceptions about who killed Bhutto. Although the majority of people in the sidebar poll affirm that AQ was behind the assassination, a significant portion of those polled, as well as those surveyed in the recent Gallup Pakistan poll, suspect that government agencies were complicit in the attack. So here's a question - does this change your mind? Or are you still a skeptic?

CIA, Pakistan Concur on Bhutto's Death

An interesting development was released today: According to news sources, the CIA (the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency) has added its support to the Pakistani government view that Al Qaeda and Pakistani militant, Baitullah Mehsud were behind the assassination of Benazir Bhutto on December 27th. In an interview released by the Washington Post today, CIA chief Michael Hayden specifically said the former PM was killed by militants allied with Mehsud with support from the AQ network. He said, "What you see is, I think, a change in the character of what's going on there. You've got this nexus now that probably was always there in latency but is now active: a nexus between Al Qaeda and various extremist and separatist groups." He added, "It is clear that their intention is to continue to try to do harm to the Pakistani state as it currently exists."

Most Western press coverage of Pakistan focused on this announcement. The LA Times, in its article, reported, "The intelligence official said he could not disclose how the CIA had reached that conclusion, including whether the assessment was based, at least in part, on a telephone call that Pakistani authorities say they intercepted shortly after Bhutto was killed. In that call, a man said to be Mehsud congratulates a cleric who claims that his associates carried out the killing." Despite Hayden not revealing the source of his claim, BBC News noted, "Correspondents say that Mr. Hayden's comments are the most comprehensive public assessment by U.S. intelligence of Ms. Bhutto's death." Although the Pakistani government (and now the CIA) has claimed that Baitullah Mehsud was behind Benazir's assassination, the pro-Taliban leader has denied involvement, although the LA Times noted he has not commented on the purported call.

Just who is Baitullah Mehsud, however? Just this morning, before I read this latest development, I was listening to a profile by NPR on the militant leader, and was intrigued by how little is actually known about him [the picture above was posted by the BBC, whose caption read: "Baitullah Mehsud has an aversion to publicity and photographs"]. According to NPR, these are the facts we know: Mehsud is in his early 30s, he is from the Mehsud tribe in southern Waziristan, he fought against U.S. forces in Afghanistan and wants to see the introduction of Shari'a law, and has been fighting against the Pakistani Army. President Pervez Musharraf has called Mehsud a "facilitator for Al Qaeda" and has accused him of organizing a wave of suicide bombings that have left 400 dead and 900 wounded in the last few months. According to the government's logic, Benazir's convoy was attacked by a suicide bomber; ergo, the attack must have been perpetrated by Al Qaeda-linked militants. However, the details become fuzzy when the video of her attack shows her being shot at before the blast occurred. Moreover, noted NPR, although the government cited the transcript of Mehsud's conversation with another man as proof of his responsibility, there is no way to know whether they were indeed talking about Benazir's assassination, or the authenticity of the recording.

With the paralleled poll [see the sidebar] still ongoing, readers of this blog seem torn over just who was responsible for Benazir's assassination. This controversy aside, the rising power of Mehsud is a significant and problematic development for the current situation.

Oh, and another interesting article in today's NY Times that I forgot to list - about the state of the Taliban insurgency in Peshawar.
(Picture from BBC News)

Bomb Blast in Peshawar Kills 5

According to breaking news reports today, a suicide bomber detonated explosives in Peshawar, killing 5 and injuring 23 others. Although western news sources noted the bombing occurred at "a Shiite mosque" in the city, several Pakistani news sources, including The News, specifically reported the attack happened "at the door of [an] Imambargah when people entering there were being scanned." Imambargahs are also known as Hussainias, which are congregation halls for Shiite ritual ceremonies, particularly those associated with Muharram. The AP reported, "The blast comes as minority Shiite Muslims prepare to mark the Ashoura festival, which in previous years has been marred by sectarian violence involving rival Sunnis." The news agency also cited Pakistan's Dawn TV that noted, "the Imambargah Qasim Baig mosque was crowded with worshippers at the time of the attack." A "crowd of enraged Shiites," crying and beating their chests, reportedly prevented the Associated Press reporter from reaching the scene. A separate article from The News reported that Karachi declared a "security high alert" on Thursday following the Peshawar bombing. Sectarian-motivated attacks often occur during Ashoura - just yesterday, a suicide bombing in Iraq targeting Shiite worshipers in Diyala province killed at least 8 people, and the bombing in Peshawar today reportedly occurred in the same quarter of the city where a suicide attack during Ashoura last year killed 11 people.

Most sources in today's Western press focused their coverage more heavily on an incident that occurred yesterday - when Islamist militants attacked and seized a small Pakistani army fort near the Afghan border. According to the LA Times, "Although the fighters did not gain significant ground in the attack Tuesday night on Sararogha Fort, they did further erode confidence in the U.S.-allied government's ability to control the frontier area where the Taliban and Al Qaeda flourish." The news agency cited Talat Masood, a retired general who is now a political analyst, who said Wednesday, "The militants are now challenging the army openly. They have become very bold and are consolidating their positions." The NY Times reported that Tehreek-i-Taliban, "an Islamic group that is sympathetic to the Taliban," said that it had carried out the attack and had killed 16 soldiers and captured 24. The newspaper added, "Militant groups operating in the tribal region formed Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan ­ the Taliban Movement of Pakistan ­ last month, to coordinate their activities and wage a joint struggle against Pakistani forces."

An article in Pakistan's Daily Times newspaper reported today that Pakistan is "taking a more welcoming view of U.S. suggestions for using American troops to train and advise its own forces in the fight against anti-government extremists." The news agency cited U.S. commander of U.S. Central Command Adm. William Fallon who said Wednesday that "he believes increased violence inside Pakistan in recent months had led the country’s leaders to conclude that they must focus more intensively on Qaeda hideouts near Afghan border." Fallon said expanded U.S. military assistance to Pakistan would include a U.S. training program for tribal groups in the FATA (Federally Administered Tribal Areas).

Fallon's statements yesterday are extremely significant given the same tribal model that is currently being applied to Iraq. The organizations, known as the Awakening Councils (or interchangeably in some provinces as the Concerned Local Citizen Groups), has turned predominately Sunni tribes against Al Qaeda in Iraq, and has subsequently been hailed as a success. The question, however, is could such a model be applied to Pakistan? Are there inherent differences in Pakistani tribal culture that may not allow such an approach to take root?