The C.I.A. seems to have been more confrontational than in the past and their recent assessment earmarks the links between members of the spy service, the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI, and the militant network led by Maulavi Jalaluddin Haqqani, who appears to act as a proxy for Al Qaeda.
A C.I.A. official, Stephen R. Kappes, the agency’s deputy director, was apparently more direct in communicating American displeasure with Pakistan while on a recent visit. The public face is the one displayed by Bush with the Pakistani Prime Minister but behind the scenes the communication must have been blunter.
The loyalties of the various players is unclear. Just last weekend for example, Pakistani military and intelligence officials thwarted an attempt by the central government to put the ISI more directly under civilian control. Thus, it is unclear whether Pakistan officials are covering for the insurgents, or if the ISI has rogue elements that the government chooses to ignore.
The Afghan government has stated that the recent suicide bombings which killed dozens at the Indian Embassy in Kabul was conducted with the approval of the ISI.
According to the Times article: it was the ISI, backed by millions of covert dollars from the C.I.A., that ran arms to guerrillas fighting Soviet forces in Afghanistan in the 1980s. It is now American troops who are dying in Afghanistan, and intelligence officials believe those longstanding ties between Pakistani spies and militants may be part of an effort to destabilize Afghanistan.
Is there likely to be any fruit borne by Pakistan's latest effort at countering the insurgency? What happened yesterday is indicative I believe. According to the Times: "On Tuesday, Pakistani security forces raided an abandoned seminary owned by Mr. Haqqani, Pakistani officials said. No arrests were made."
This is simply more of the same, the Pakistanis make another feeble attempt at counter-terrorism as a show to the Americans. Oops! Haqqani is not at his abandoned seminary, who knew?