An icy eye on the ISI

Posted By Thomas E. Ricks Tuesday, March 31, 2009 - 4:43 PM Share

Pakistanis think the U.S. government is launching an offensive against the intelligence arm of the Pakistani military, the ISI. I think such an attack is a good idea. I mean, we've tried looking the other way for several years, and that doesn't seem to have been very productive.

TARIQ MAHMOOD/AFP/Getty Images

EXPLORE:INTELLIGENCE, MILITARY, PAKISTAN

(7)

HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE

CJMEWETT

4:13 AM ET

April 1, 2009

So you think the U.S. should

So you think the U.S. should wage war on Pakistan proper, then? The ISI is just pursuing Pakistan's interests in the way it sees fit, however controversial that may be on our end of things. So unless you're ready to fight the Pakistani military and the people, then you'd better figure out a way to get them to redefine their interests.

Schmidle is all over this in the magazine:

But what about the ISI? We hear so much about the ISI, or Inter-Services Intelligence, being manned by al Qaeda sympathizers, sponsoring regional terrorism, and forming the vanguard of Islamism in Pakistan. Aren’t they Islamist?

. . .

Are people within the ISI any more Islamist than any of the others? I don’t see why they would be. The ISI draws from the ranks of the regular Army (in addition to some civilians), the same Army that is commanded by Sandhurst-educated, Johnnie Walker Black Label-loving Anglophiles. What makes the ISI different is not so much its personnel as its agenda, an agenda that might, on any given day, include ferrying money to Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan or training Lashkar-e-Taiba fighters to wage jihad against India in Kashmir. These programs are considered to serve Pakistan’s national interests, not the religious preferences of its generals.

TALWAR

4:40 AM ET

April 1, 2009

Yup that's right

Pakistan Army is playing a bluffing game. The only power that can call its bluff is the US.

Until and unless the President of the US uses all of America's levers - political, financial, diplomatic and even the power to call out and shame them, the Pakistan army and the ISI will keep with the policy of marginally satisfying the US and supporting their favorite jihadists on the sly.

Pakistan needs an ultimatum and its "give me $ or I'll implode myself" nuclear blackmail must be exposed.

In reality, Pakistans Generals are dependent on US aid and World Bank/IMF support (also thanks to US). They are not suicidal and they will fall in line once a face saving option is given.

But first the stick needs to be shown.

So kudos to the Obama team for taking the first step. One hopes they follow through and call the Pakistan nuclear blackmail bluff.

CJMEWETT

4:44 AM ET

April 1, 2009

The worry isn't that the guys

The worry isn't that the guys with their fingers on the button might push, but rather that they might walk away from the button and let the bearded guy sidle up. I don't think that's a bluff anyone wants to call.

TALWAR

4:59 AM ET

April 1, 2009

Nonsense. That is a threat

Nonsense. That is a threat that only works with people who do not know Pakistan.

Any expert who has studied Pakistan for a long time, such as Stephen Cohen, or Lisa Curtis or Selig Harrison or Ashley Tellis would tell you that this bluff is precisely why Pakistan has gotten away with murder for decades, especially since 2001-02.

In reality, Pakistan's nukes are secure and the US has PALs installed on them following 9/11.

For a change a serving US President has brought in people who REALLY know the region to advise him and for a change he actually listened to the advice!

Bruce Riedel, who chaired the policy group, actually sat in the same room as Bill Clinton when Clinton delivered an ultimatum to then Pakistan PM Nawaz Sharif on July 5, 1999 and guess what, the threat worked! The Pakistanis are like a classic bully - you call their bluff and they fold like a lawn chair.

Just letting Pakistanis, especially the ISI, get paid to fight the bad guys while simultaneously tipping them off about US attacks and actually facilitating some attacks on US troops - all for the fear of the unknown - is simply not workable.

FPCOMMENTS

9:26 PM ET

April 1, 2009

The link to whatever

The link to whatever "Pakistanis think" above is broken, but how exactly would the U.S. "attack" or "launch an offensive against" the ISI--or any sovereign nation's intelligence agency, for that matter?

TALWAR

11:11 PM ET

April 1, 2009

Simple - call them out and cut their finances

Go the dawn.com and read PM Gillani's comments defending the ISI - that is the story linked.

As to how to launch an offensive against the ISI, you do this by calling out the people who give orders to the ISI. George W. Bush didn't so much as TALK to Musharraf about US knowledge of their double dealings until his last few months. A friend of mine was an army officer serving in Kunar and he said that his unit had video, radio and material evidence linking Pakistani military outposts giving direct support to the Taliban, including covering fire, logistical help and one some occasions Pakistan army helicopters ferried injured Taliban out of the combat zone.

Folks need to understand that most of ISI's leadership and mid-level people are Pakistan army officers serving on a rotational basis. The ISI's "institutional memory" is at a lower level, where they use retired soldiers and civilians as data collectors and hired thugs to intimidate people in cities. The actual military muscle is Pakistan army's.

Thus the ISI cannot do anything of this scale unless it was an institutional policy of the Pakistan military, with orders coming from the very top.

Now, if the US commander in chief tells the Pakistani military chief that this is unacceptable, we have a start. Next, we tie funds inflow to good behavior and cutoff funds at specific points in response to specific bad behavior and over time we set an acceptable behavior pattern.

But calling them out and giving them notice that their gig is up, is a great start.

WALKING WOUNDED

12:15 AM ET

April 2, 2009

Strategic surprise...

occurs when there is strategic blindness. Just as intel success starts with a clear appreciation of the situation. Mistake teeth for a smile, you get bit.

I don't see any mention here of Arabia's intel links (under Dark Prince Nayef) with the Islamic Republic of Pakistans nukes and ISI covert ops using foreign fundamentalists. Arabia-IRP may not be an 'axis of evil', but letting the spook-link slip from view strikes me as the kind of blind-spot a jetliner of jihadis or ship full of proliferation could still drive thru.

ISI isn't a single interest or enterprise, any more than WINPAC, the hamstrung division of Tenet's CIA tracking AQ Kahn, was of a piece with Doug Feith and Irv Libby's 'special projects' annex in Langley.

Of particular interest in this discussion is that ISI's 'S' wing is now fair game to mention in the NYT, along with it's links to the Haqqani network. Indians say that's who bombed their Kabul embassy. Also of interest is that clean-shaven toddy-drinking front-man Gen. Kiyani, now the IRP's Chief of Staff, was formerly ISI director-general.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Pak-set-to-reap-35-billion-windfall-from-terrorism/articleshow/4318277.cms
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/26/world/asia/26tribal.html?_r=1&ref=worldspecial