Critical Triangle continues....

However, Pakistan’s internal politics took a toll. Civilian politicians wondered aloud, why the Pakistan military had not detected the US intrusion, and if the US could repeat such a raid to take out Pakistan’s nuclear weapons. The ISI promptly turned the tables focusing instead on how civilian collaboration with the US had allowed it to violate Pakistani sovereignty.

Suddenly on the back foot, the civilian government found it expedient to its political interests to reverse its stand completely. On 3 May, the Pakistan Foreign Office, expressed “deep concerns and reservations” in the manner in which the operation had been carried out, and rapidly public opinion too turned decisively against the US, focusing on the violation of sovereignty.

The US for its part concluded that the ISI had been deeply penetrated by jihadi sympathisers and as such was unlikely to take any serious action. The civilian government for its part was too unstable and too mindful of public opinion, which was affected by the ISI’s influence of the Pakistani press.

After Senator Mark Kirk (representative from Illinois) openly called Gen Shuja Pasha a “bold faced liar,” Admiral Mullen went one further in his congressional testimony.

Describing the Haqqani network as a “veritable arm of Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence agency,” he stated that Pakistan’s “support of terrorism is part of their national strategy.” On 12 May 2011, Ambassador Haqqani was called into the White House.

In the meeting the threat of declaring Pakistan a state sponsor of terrorism was raised, with a public revealing of intelligence that the US had collected. Yet this was to remain merely a hollow threat.

Pakistan promptly retaliated, demanding that the US vacate the Shamsi Air Base it had used as a base for drone operations in Pakistan, and the demand was complied with. On 13 September, the US embassy in Kabul was attacked by the Haqqani Network.

To be continued..