NATO’s irresponsible pursuits

The POST, Sun, Jul,01, 2007.

Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema

No self respecting nation accepts the presence of foreign forces on its soil even though they are meant to help and facilitate the incumbent government. Normally nations accept the presence of foreign forces only in special circumstances. The case of Afghanistan falls into this category. In fact not only there exist a special situation in Afghanistan but even the incumbent regime is known to have been initially installed by foreigners but later it was elected by the people of Afghanistan. 

Ever since the Karazai regime was imposed by the Americans and an international security assistance force was stationed in Afghanistan in order to protect and support the installed regime, untoward incidents relating to unnecessary killing of the civilians are frequently reported. The presence of foreign force by itself not only invokes reactions among the population of the target country but it also sometimes exasperates the situation. If the stay of foreign  force is prolonged because of various factors, its initial welcome gradually begin to be transformed into silent hostilities. When the foreign forces begin to kill innocent civilians, the chances for undesired drift from silent hostilities to active and vociferous hostilities quickly intensify. 

The advent of NATO in Afghanistan not only reflected that NATO has extended its area of operation which was originally confined to the defense of Europe to all those areas its members feel fit to operate but it also generated fears among many countries. Many in the region expressed apprehensions regarding the presence of NATO forces in the region. Even those who are deemed to be a close friends of the West in general and the US in particular did not hesitate to criticize the presence of NATO in Afghanistan. 

With the resurgence of Talibans NATO also began to undertake more operations despite the fact many of its component forces refused to fight at night or to fight at all or be deployed in combat zone. Being a foreign force that is not well versed in geographical terrain of Afghanistan and lacking the requisite cohesiveness along with the inbuilt Afghan resentment against the presence of foreign forces, NATO is not only experiencing many difficulties but it is also continuously making mistakes after mistakes. 

During the recent NATO operations against Talibans, many Afghan civilians have been killed. According to one report NATO has already killed more than 200 Afghan civilians this year. It is difficult to assess whether the civilians were deliberately targeted or were part of what is often referred as collateral damage. It is a well known fact the NATO soldiers rarely accord that kind of value to the life of an ordinary Afghan as they do to their own compatriots. Both the Vietnam and Iraq wars are studded with innumerable examples that are reflective of such behavior. 

Perhaps the most serious blunder the NATO forces have been committing in recent times revolves around targeting the adversaries beyond Afghan border. The excuse that they have subjected to attacks those militants who were seen near the border does not satisfy anyone in Pakistan. Rocket fired from inside of Afghanistan at the targets residing in the Pakistani tribal area amounts to a blatant violation of another country’s air space and cannot be at justified. Such violations invariably invoke strong protests from the people and government of the target area. 

According to Pakistani sources at least nine civilians were killed in the tribal areas of Pakistan when rockets were fired from the bases in Afghanistan across the border in the latest attack. The NATO spokesman admitted that one of its weapons hit a building which had number of civilians. It is not too far fetched to assume that they had the necessary information about the presence of civilians yet they deemed fit in their wisdom to attack this building and were willing to take such risks. 

But perhaps the more worrisome aspect of this tragic affair is that NATO’s periodic and repeated violations of ground and air space of Pakistan. This is indeed unacceptable and deserves condemnation. Merely offering regrets does not rectify the damage done and justify the wrong approach. For years the Pakistani have been stressing that all operation inside Pakistan must be well coordinated with Pakistani authorities yet one still comes across incidents which reflect non-coordination. A better way out is to supply the necessary intelligence information to the Pakistanis and let them take care of the situation. 

The repeated violations of Pakistani air space and ground border invariably produces serious and dangerous consequences. First, it invokes strong reactions among many Pakistani who begin to not just sympathize with those engaged in fighting against NATO but also become more inclined to buy adversary’s interpretation of the incidents rather than assessing the situation impartially. Many rational and independent thinking individuals also become prone to exploitations by the interested individuals or groups. 

Second, such acts cause not just embarrassment for the sympathetic government but also inject unnecessary complications for their own operations. Admittedly a strong protest has been launched by the Pakistani authorities over the killing of civilians in the tribal areas of Pakistan but this does not facilitate Pakistani efforts that are already well advanced to win total support from all the tribesmen of the area. 

Third, such actions also depict lack of desired level of coordination. Despite the existence of Tripartite Commission and its regular meetings the demonstrated lack of coordination does not make sense. Either an inexperienced and enthusiastic field officer ignores the agreed norms or it is undertaken deliberately. If it is undertaken deliberately, then one cannot but assume that the action meant either to put the Pakistani government in awkward situation or to exert pressures. 

Although NATO has admitted its mistakes and has also stressed that it would ‘do better’ but the question mark that is often raised revolves around ‘how would they improve upon the methods they have hitherto used’. If they are contemplating to cross the border, it would create major problem for Pakistan. However they can afford to be more careful with regard to their operations inside Afghanistan in order to minimize the anticipated civilian casualties. As far as the operations across the border are concerned, the appropriate way out is to improve coordination and let the Pakistanis to undertake the desired operation. In this connection the intelligence sharing is extremely important. 

The NATO officers must realize that irresponsible action which can result in the killing of civilians both in Afghanistan or the tribal areas of Pakistan, is bound to generate adverse vibes for the incumbent governments. While one often reads a fairly well developed mechanism of coordination at the higher official levels, the reports about the frequent killings of civilians clearly indicate the irresponsible behavior of field officers. Not only such event could greatly embarrass Pakistani government on one hand but would also severely undermine Karazai’s government in Afghanistan.

The writer works for Islamabad Policy research Institute.