ANALYSIS: Musharraf leaves doubts

ANALYSIS:

The long-anticipated resignation of President Pervez Musharraf on Monday may not hurt the U.S. war on terror because the Pakistani leader had not done a particularly good job of confronting al Qaeda and the Taliban, U.S. counterterrorism officials and Pakistan analysts said.

However, Mr. Musharraf’s civilian successors may have an even more difficult time containing the terrorism menace, the analysts said.

Mr. Musharraf “was never the indispensable man that George Bush saw him as and he never delivered on many of the promises he made to Bush,” said Bruce Riedel, a former senior official on the White House National Security Council and author of an upcoming book, “The Search for al Qaeda: Its Leadership, Ideology and Future.”

Mr. Musharraf, Mr. Riedel said, “practiced selective counterterrorism,” pursuing a few top al Qaeda figures such as Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the purported mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, but allowing the terrorist organization to build a new sanctuary in Pakistan “that is growing by the day.”

TWT EDITORIAL: Musharraf’s resignation

The Bush administration relied on the Pakistani leader, who seized power in a 1999 coup, to help combat al Qaeda and the Taliban after the 2001 attacks in the United States. President Bush repeatedly praised Mr. Musharraf as a moderate and a strong ally.

In the aftermath of Mr. Musharraf’s resignation, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice called the former general “a friend to the United States and one of the world’s most committed partners in the war against terrorism and extremism.”

She said Mr. Musharraf “made the critical choice to join the fight against al Qaeda, the Taliban and other extremist groups that threaten the peace and security of Pakistan, its neighbors and partners throughout the world. For this, he has our deep gratitude.”

However, Mr. Musharraf, who stepped down under threat of impeachment, had lost clout since he became embroiled in a battle with Pakistani judges and lawyers last year. His re-election as president by a lame-duck parliament was controversial and he lost more power after agreeing to step down as army chief. Parliamentary elections earlier this year resulted in victories for civilian-led parties who combined forces against him.

In a televised address Monday, Mr. Musharraf said he wanted to spare the nation an impeachment battle and he was satisfied that all he had done “was for the people and for the country.”

“I hope the nation and the people will forgive my mistakes,” he said.

Pakistani Ambassador to Washington Husain Haqqani said Mr. Musharraf’s resignation “should be seen as an opportunity for U.S.-Pakistan relations, not as a threat.”

“As a democracy, Pakistan and the U.S. should be able to deepen their friendship and partnership, which has been marred in the past by the perception that the U.S. backs military dictators in Pakistan in the hope of stabilizing the country,” Mr. Haqqani said during a live chat session Monday with The Washington Times. “Pakistan’s people have spoken and Pakistan will become more stable, not less, under democratic rule.”

U.S. officials, however, said they are not sure whether the new government headed by Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani is strong enough to address the issue of links between Pakistani security officials and militants.

“A change of leadership in Pakistan certainly doesn’t change the fact that terrorism emanating from the tribal areas of Pakistan presents a very real problem for that country and for the United States,” said one U.S. official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the subject. “It’s a problem of common concern and one that requires close coordination, shared focus and a strong partnership to solve.”

Karl F. Inderfurth, assistant secretary of state for South Asian affairs under President Clinton and professor at the Elliot School of International Affairs at George Washington University, said the key question is not who replaces Mr. Musharraf as president but whether the “current prime minister can rise to the occasion.”

Mr. Inderfurth said that “some of the current powers and authority of the Pakistani presidency will be modified or revoked,” thereby “cutting the Pakistani presidency more to size and making the prime minister the greater authority in the country.”

Mr. Riedel said the new government lacks influence over Pakistan’s security institutions, which helped create the Taliban in the late 1980s. “This government doesn’t control the army and has no control over the ISI,” Mr. Riedel said, referring to Pakistan’s intelligence service. He added that he is most worried about a recent flare-up of tensions with India and fears that the Pakistani army is behind those tensions.

Indian officials did not comment Monday on the Musharraf resignation, saying it was an internal Pakistani issue.

India implicated Pakistan in a recent attack on the Indian Embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan, and intelligence officials in Afghanistan said they are concerned that Pakistan will remain a safe haven for militants.

“The situation in the tribal areas grows worse by the day,” said an Afghan intelligence official who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “The insurgents come into Afghanistan to kill and then run back under the safety of the Pakistani government.”

Miss Rice urged the new Pakistani government to “redouble their focus on Pakistan’s future and its most urgent needs, including stemming the growth of extremism, addressing food and energy shortages and improving economic stability.”

Pakistani Taliban spokesman Maulvi Umar said Monday that Mr. Musharraf’s resignation was a “positive change” but “just the beginning” of meeting the Islamic movement’s demands.

He called for an end to Pakistani-U.S. cooperation, saying that “if the government ends these policies, the Taliban will stop their activities immediately.”

Attacks on U.S. and international forces have increased this year along Afghanistan’s border with Pakistan, and U.S. troop casualties for July were higher in Afghanistan than in Iraq. Insurgent groups have claimed responsibility for killing foreign aid workers, who the insurgents claimed worked for U.S. interests.