Tweet
WASHINGTON—A new White House assessment steps up criticism of Pakistan's campaign against militants, stating bluntly that its government and military have been unwilling to take action against al Qaeda and like-minded terrorists.
The aggressive language of the report—which also criticizes the leadership of President Asif Ali Zardari—could further strain difficult relations with a key ally and undercut support in Congress for providing billions of dollars in aid to Islamabad.
The report, viewed by The Wall Street Journal, also raises questions about the U.S.-led coalition's progress battling the Taliban and improving governance in Afghanistan two months before the White House will review its war strategy.
The administration and Pentagon have until now tried to keep their harshest criticisms of Pakistan private to avoid a public rift, but the report shows growing U.S. frustration, officials said. "The report reflects that there are real challenges we have with Pakistan," said an Obama administration official. Officials at all levels are in talks with Pakistan to address these issues, the official added.
U.S. officials say they are increasingly frustrated by Pakistan's decision not to send large numbers of ground forces into North Waziristan. "This is as much a political choice as it is a reflection of an under-resourced military prioritizing its targets," the unclassified, 27-page report finds.
In the neighboring tribal region of South Waziristan, "Pakistani military operations advanced slowly" because they haven't been able to stabilize areas after they clear them of militants, the White House found.
There, "the military largely stayed close to the roads and did not engage against those [Pakistani Taliban] militants who returned after fleeing into North Waziristan."
While the Pakistani military has dedicated 140,000 forces to the tribal areas, "the Pakistan military was nonetheless constrained to disrupting and displacing extremists groups without making lasting gains against the insurgency."
The report, issued by the National Security Council in response to a congressional requirement for regular progress updates, reflects the input of numerous agencies, including the State Department, Pentagon and intelligence agencies.
Questions about aid to Pakistan have been growing in Congress in recent months, and congressional aides said the downbeat assessment could fuel lawmakers' qualms and calls for putting more conditions on U.S. funding.
The report notes the wide gap in public esteem for civilian and military institutions. Confidence in the civilian government has fallen from 38% at the end of 2009 to 31% in mid-2010, while confidence in the military has grown from 75% to 82% during the same time period.
Lack of will has also hampered Pakistan's budget management, the report concludes. While the Pakistani government has worked closely with the U.S. Embassy to improve the use of U.S. aid, "a lack of political will on budget implementation and overall donor assistance continues to be a major challenge."
full report: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...orld_LeadStory
The aggressive language of the report—which also criticizes the leadership of President Asif Ali Zardari—could further strain difficult relations with a key ally and undercut support in Congress for providing billions of dollars in aid to Islamabad.
The report, viewed by The Wall Street Journal, also raises questions about the U.S.-led coalition's progress battling the Taliban and improving governance in Afghanistan two months before the White House will review its war strategy.
The administration and Pentagon have until now tried to keep their harshest criticisms of Pakistan private to avoid a public rift, but the report shows growing U.S. frustration, officials said. "The report reflects that there are real challenges we have with Pakistan," said an Obama administration official. Officials at all levels are in talks with Pakistan to address these issues, the official added.
U.S. officials say they are increasingly frustrated by Pakistan's decision not to send large numbers of ground forces into North Waziristan. "This is as much a political choice as it is a reflection of an under-resourced military prioritizing its targets," the unclassified, 27-page report finds.
In the neighboring tribal region of South Waziristan, "Pakistani military operations advanced slowly" because they haven't been able to stabilize areas after they clear them of militants, the White House found.
There, "the military largely stayed close to the roads and did not engage against those [Pakistani Taliban] militants who returned after fleeing into North Waziristan."
While the Pakistani military has dedicated 140,000 forces to the tribal areas, "the Pakistan military was nonetheless constrained to disrupting and displacing extremists groups without making lasting gains against the insurgency."
The report, issued by the National Security Council in response to a congressional requirement for regular progress updates, reflects the input of numerous agencies, including the State Department, Pentagon and intelligence agencies.
Questions about aid to Pakistan have been growing in Congress in recent months, and congressional aides said the downbeat assessment could fuel lawmakers' qualms and calls for putting more conditions on U.S. funding.
The report notes the wide gap in public esteem for civilian and military institutions. Confidence in the civilian government has fallen from 38% at the end of 2009 to 31% in mid-2010, while confidence in the military has grown from 75% to 82% during the same time period.
Lack of will has also hampered Pakistan's budget management, the report concludes. While the Pakistani government has worked closely with the U.S. Embassy to improve the use of U.S. aid, "a lack of political will on budget implementation and overall donor assistance continues to be a major challenge."
full report: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...orld_LeadStory
Comment