Thread by @umaraqti

In this thread I will share some facts to ascertain if PM criticism to Musharaf's and PPP Govts policy wrt WoT is valid or not?

PM IK in his NA speech mentioned that the US and West did not treat us like partners and never acknowledged Pak's sacrifices in WoT instead kept demanding "Do more". PM also criticized some of the policies of Gen Musharaf and PPP Govts.

Before I start, its important to mention that Musharaf tried to persuade Taliban to either handover OBL or banish him from AFG, Mullah Omer refused to do both despite Pak's DG-ISI meeting him personally 3-4 times before the US invasion trying to convince him to let go OBL.

There are many former Army officers that criticized Musharaf's giving in too much to US demands on WoT, one of them was Gen Gulzar Kiani who remained commander of the X Corps under Musharaf.

As per Gen Gulzar, spike in violence and suicide attacks in Pak was the direct consequence of Musharaf's WoT policy which was subserviant to the US.

General Musharaf allowed the US:
1/ Blanket overflight & landing rights for all necessary military & intelligence operations;

2/ provided territorial access to US & allied military intelligence & other personnel to conduct operations
3/ provided the US with intelligence information;

The US wanted carte blanche to proceed against whomever they thought had attacked it by establishing..

..extra-territorial rights in Pakistan, among other things. Here an important point that needs to be considered is that the US was not perceived very warmly in the streets of Pakistan at that time, especially since it had abandoned Pakistan multiple times in the past.

Gen Pasha's (former DG-ISI) in Abbottabad Commission also criticized Gen Musharaf's policy of caving in so promptly and so completely to the US.

Americans were anticipating some Pakistani reservations, thus prepared a second list of their demands only to learn that..

..their original demands had been accepted without any hesitation. The Americans were mystified and wondered how Pakistan had caved in so promptly and so completely.

As a result of this policy, many innocent civilians in CIA drone strikes in tribal districts were killed. On 13 January 2006, missiles from a CIA drone strike hit a village called Damadola, killing at least 18 civilians.

This, followed by another on 29 October that killed 83 madrassa students in Chenagai, was an important trigger for Pakistanis to join militant groups, some of whom were then used as suicide bombers in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

This is not it, due to this policy, the CIA was able to expand its footprint in Pakistan and its role in Pakistan was dubious, and dealing with ISI was duplicitous.
Even though ISI and LEAs did their best by going after AQ members in Pakistan..

.. ISI was able to defang AQ in Pakistan by either killing or apprehending top Al-Qaeda leaders/operatives and handed over them to the US i.e. Abu Faraj-al-Libbi (number-3 in AQ), Khalid Shaikh Mohammad, Khalid bin Attash, Hamza Rabia, Abu Laith-al-Libbi, Abu Jihad..

..Said-al-Masri, Salehi-al-Somali, Omar Patek, Yunis-al-Muritani.

On the other hand, the CIA provided disjointed and in some cases misleading intelligence information. This included information about OBL's alleged presence in Sargodha, Lahore, Sialkot, and Gilgit.

OBL in fact never visited any of these places. In 2010 various senior US officials made statements about the likely presence of OBL in Pakistan. The DG-ISI conveyed two memos asking for more precise information but there was no response from the CIA.

CIA was also using NGOs in Pakistan i.e Save the children for its activities in Pakistan.
During this era, another problematic policy that fanned extremism was arbitrary handing over Pakistanis to foreign countries, especially the US.

In a briefing to NA's committee on HR, Justice Javed Iqbal revealed that as many as 4k Pakistanis were handed over to foreign countries during the Musharaf era.

tribune.com.pk/story/1687073/…

Some may argue that drones and handing over Pakistanis to the US had their utility esp at the time when the Pakistan Army did not have the anti-terror capabilities to take on AQ and TTP in tribal districts, however, what they do not realize..

..that giving airbases, allowing drone strikes, and handing over Pakistanis without due process represented a breach of national sovereignty and became one of the main causes of fueling extremism in Pakistan.

The argument here is not about if we were in a position to decline US demands after 9/11. The point here is that under Musharaf, Pakistan ceded too many demands which even Americans weren't expected, and this policy had a blowback.

By the end of Mush's tenure, the US was eager to have a govt in Pak that continues the WoT policies of the Musharaf regime wrt drones & bases.

In this context, the US-brokered deal was carried out between Musharaf & BB. As PPP continued the drone policy of the Mush era.

PPP leaders denounced drone strikes in public but gave their tacit approval to the US in private meetings.

During PPP's tenure, there was also an influx of CIA operatives in Pakistan as they got visas from Pakistani missions abroad.

This was the time when penetration of the CIA extended in other spheres, they also bought elites and journalists who were ready to do their bidding.
A US intelligence officer said:
"Pakistanis are so cheap..we can buy u with a visa, with a visit to the US..we can buy anyone."

Sources:
Crossed Swords by Shuja Nawaz
An Enemy We Created by Alex and Felix Kuehn
Pakistan Foreign policy a concise history by Abdul Sattar
Abbottabad Commission Report
No Higher Honour by Condoleezza Rice