Is Pakistan facing a Taliban takeover?

By Julien Mercille

A street in Kushlak, Pakistan, near Quetta. United States officials say Taliban leaders have been stirring violence in Afghanistan from havens in the Quetta area.

Over the last three years, American drone attacks have killed 687 innocent Pakistani civilians and 14 al-Qaeda members.

The current Pakistani military offensive against the Taliban has forced a million people to leave their homes, an exodus believed to be the worst in the country’s history.

According to the corporate media, this latest chapter in the “War on Terror,” now expanded to Pakistan, is taking place because the Taliban insurgents threaten the Pakistani regime and could put their hands on its nuclear weapons.

But this makes little sense, for at least two reasons.

First, the Taliban have little popular support in Pakistan, where the opposition to Islamic fundamentalism is significant.

For instance, a recent Gallup poll revealed that 47% of Pakistanis believe the Taliban’s presence in some areas of their country has a negative influence, whereas only 14% said it has a positive influence.

Moreover, analysts have noted that the Taliban, mostly located in the Pushtun areas of Pakistan, could not possibly overtake the whole country.

Indeed, 85% of the population is made up of Punjabis and Sindhis, who do not support Talibanism or Islamic radicalism and who mainly voted for political parties which are not fundamentalist in the February 2008 elections, such as the Pakistan People’s Party and the Muslim League.

Second, the Taliban based in Pakistan amount to fewer than 10,000 fighters who have no air force, no armoured vehicles, and no tanks; they stand no chance against the Pakistani army’s 550,000 troops.

Thus, Pakistan’s nuclear weapons are well protected?but in any case, if Washington is so concerned about preventing nuclear catastrophes, it should work to eliminate nuclear weapons worldwide (starting with American nukes), not to protect them.

So what is behind the demonization of the Pakistani Taliban and the current military operations against them?

First, as the dominant global power, the US seeks to project an image of strength to the world and show that those who challenge its rule will suffer harsh consequences.

There is nothing new in this policy: American policy makers have long believed that failure to react decisively to acts of defiance anywhere projects an image of weakness that can embolden others elsewhere.

That’s why, from Washington’s perspective, it is important to show resolve in the face of the Taliban insurgency.

Second, Afghanistan and Pakistan are at the centre of a great geopolitical game between the US and its industrial rivals, Russia and China.

Protecting friendly regimes in Afghanistan and Pakistan means a strategic foothold for the US right next to the Persian Gulf and Central Asia, which are rich in energy resources.

It would be a significant setback for US power if it were to be left out of the Eurasian landmass and Russia and China were able to co-opt the continent’s resources to an even greater extent than what they have achieved so far.

Even though the bulk of energy resources at stake is not located in Afghanistan and Pakistan, those countries are strategically located right next to those energy reserves and this is what makes them important to American power.

For example, the US has been interested for some years in building the TAPI (Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India) pipeline that would bring natural gas from Turkmenistan in Central Asia to India, via Afghanistan and Pakistan.

But there is a competing pipeline planned, the IPI (Iran, Pakistan, India) that could also bring gas to India, this time from Iran.

Washington opposes the IPI pipeline because it would integrate Iran regionally, whereas US policy seeks to isolate Tehran.

However, the US backs the TAPI pipeline because it conforms to its foreign policy objectives: it bypasses Iran and reinforces its isolation internationally; it reduces the amount of Central Asian energy resources available to Russia and China, and by the same token, reduces European energy dependence on Russia.

But for plans like the TAPI pipeline to become possible, the US needs friendly regimes in Afghanistan and Pakistan, undisturbed by Taliban bands who could blow up pipelines.

In short, the expansion of American power in energy-rich Eurasia and the need to show the world that Washington will not tolerate challenges to its dominance?more than the pretext of a Taliban threat that could seize Pakistan’s nukes?is what’s behind the latest phase of the “War on Terror.”