This episode comes shortly after his administration has decided to approve a US $ 450 million F-16 fighter jet fleet sustainment programme to Pakistan. The justification offered by the US is that the decision would help the Pakistan army to boost its counterterrorism capabilities against al-Qaeda and ISIS. But this is an extremely ridiculous and inept excuse for a geopolitical miscalculation that has nothing to do with counterterrorism.
Afghanistan fell to the Afghan Taliban last year. Many of us interpret the Taliban’s military triumph as a failure of counter insurgency and counter-terrorism. This question is also being asked frequently: Will al-Qaeda’s much-anticipated resurgence in the Taliban-led Afghanistan threaten regional security? What should the future of American counter-terrorism strategy be? But the answer to these many complex questions cannot be found in F-16 fighter jets.
Despite a huge loss of face following the humiliating exit from Afghanistan, the US has some reasons to be proud of in its counterterrorism policies. After 9/11, it not only prevented al-Qaeda from orchestrating more mass-casualty terror attacks on the US homeland, but America’s counter-terrorism intelligence has also improved considerably as numerous terrorist sanctuaries have been eliminated across the region. Moreover, razor-sharp focus on counter terrorism has allowed the US and its allies to create strong financial safeguards through banking networks. Another important achievement is the growing sophistication in counter-insurgency approaches through raids or strikes using special operations forces. This particular element has been made possible by evolving role of technology in counter-terrorism.
As the US expanded its foreign-intelligence infrastructure during the last two decades of ‘war on terror’, Washington came to acquire a remarkable capacity to target individuals anywhere in the world. Afghanistan was the main theatre to witness this impressive ‘over the horizon’ capability when the US armed drone attacks increasingly targeted terrorists in the Af-Pak region. In fact, the main counter-terrorism innovation of the Obama administration was the expansion of drone attacks. The frequency of such special operations strikes escalated further during the Trump administration’s tenure. After all, decapitation has been a time-tested method to terminate any kind of criminality including terrorism. Their supporters argue that armed drones are more discriminate than classic military operations as they minimize civilian losses and reduce the count of hazardous individuals. Eliminating key strategists and decision-makers in terror outfits tends to save many lives by preventing further attacks.
What has made this innovation valuable in US counterterrorism is not the fighter aircraft but the digital-communications links. Remarkable increases in both the quantity and quality of data that could travel via satellites and fibre-optic cable have improved aerial targeting systems. The American military’s deadly use of Reaper and Predator drones against al-Qaeda has been watched carefully by security forces across the globe. That is why now everyone wants armed drones. Once seen as prohibitively expensive, armed drones are now far cheaper. Even smaller countries are trying to acquire and use them for different purposes. Military-use drones vary extensively in size, operating altitude, and flight trajectory, and therefore pose severe challenges in detection and tracking. The ongoing Russia-Ukraine war has seen increasing use of battlefield drones.
In view of the technological sophistication in counter terrorism via armed drones, it is beyond comprehension that Pakistani military is going to use advanced fighter jets for its counter terrorism operations. One should not forget that the insurgency and counter-insurgency landscape in Pakistan has been very complicated ever since the Pakistani Taliban had turned hostile in 2007. The most important issue is that of legitimacy as counter insurgency operations have been unpopular in the eyes of a large section of the Pakistani population, elected politicians, and a large part of the armed forces themselves. Recent electoral victory of Imran Khan-led PTI in by-elections testifies the growing dominance of Islamism among Pakistani masses. Such feelings have been rooted in the perception that jihadists and Islamist insurgents are not really rebelling against Pakistan state but only trying to help the legitimate Islamic cause. With the Afghan Taliban in power across the Durand Line, sentiments favouring Islamism have been on the rise in Pakistan.
That is why the Pakistani military has been careful not to rely heavily on firepower for its counter-insurgency campaigns in the tribal areas, the only exception being nationalist insurgency in Balochistan. In fact, Pakistan has made extensive use of arbitrary detention, enforced disappearances, and extrajudicial executions against terrorists targeting the state. And regarding Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and the other anti-Indian terror groups which have not engaged in revolt against Pakistan state, neither the military nor the civilian governments have demonstrated remotest will of bowing to American or Indian demands on cracking down on them. On many occasions, the Pakistan army has not even hesitated to pull back completely in favour of so-called ‘peace deals’ with insurgents.
With a traditional outlook focused entirely on fighting a conventional war against India, the Pakistan military has largely been ad-hoc in its counter terrorism strategy. As the Americans gradually learnt the futility of firepower-intensive approach in its counter-insurgency campaigns in Afghanistan, they modified their approach, and the use of military drones was one such modification, though a controversial one due to its implications on human rights. Nobody can believe that the wily generals in Pakistan army have not learnt anything from American expertise on how to selectively eliminate hardened terrorists. Did they now witness how al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri was eliminated by an American drone at a Kabul safe house in early August this year?
It is therefore foolish to argue that Pakistan’s security establishment which has used a combination of intimidation, sympathy and sheer incompetence in its counter terrorism policies will make use of F-16 jets against terrorism. In reality, the biggest challenge is to ensure that the Taliban-ruled Afghanistan is not used to shelter terror outfits to regroup. Hence, the US Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s arguments that America is obliged to ensure that the F-16 are maintained and sustained to enhance Pakistan’s capability to deal with “clear terrorist threats” from al Qaeda and ISIS are hollow, self-defeating and counter-productive.
In reality, transitioning to the law enforcement paradigm of counter insurgency is proving extremely difficult in a fragmented Afghan polity. The so-called Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan remains internally divided, with the Afghan Taliban being pulled in different directions by the Kandahar faction led by Mullah Yaqub, the son of late Mullah Omar, and the pro-Pakistan faction led by the Haqqani Network. The Afghan Taliban’s unresolved relationship dynamics with the Tehrik-e Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and by extension with Pakistan’s security establishment has only deepened the fault lines. Amid this chaos and insecurity, the Biden administration has sent unmistakable signals that it will continue to strike targets in Afghanistan that pose a threat to America’s national security. However, without boots on the ground, drone operators will need to depend on reliable local intelligence as well as Pakistani acquiescence for the aerial domination of Afghanistan. The F-16 package should therefore be seen as a geopolitical reward to the Pakistani army, and not as a force multiplier in its counter-terrorism campaign.
Under ordinary circumstances, conceding ‘something’ to Pakistan might be reasonable, but when the country is viewed as one of the most dangerous and Rawalpindi’s systematic abuse of American taxpayer money for its own narrow aims in Afghanistan is no secret, Washington’s decision on F-16 amounts to an extraordinary failure of political judgment as well as undesirable reversion to Cold War habits.
(Vinay Kaura is an assistant professor in the Department of International Affairs and Security Studies, Sardar Patel University of Police, Security and Criminal Justice, Rajasthan, and a Non-resident Scholar in the Middle East Institute, Washington, DC.)
For all the latest world News Click Here
