Pakistan not living up to its bargain with US

NY Times:

The departing American commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan, Gen. Dan K. McNeill, raised concerns on Thursday that Pakistan had not followed through on promises to tackle militancy on its side of the border, and in recent months had even stopped its cooperation with NATO and Afghan counterparts on border issues.

General McNeill said Pakistan’s failure to act against militants in its tribal areas and its decision to hold talks with the militants without putting pressure on them had led to an increase in insurgent attacks against United States and NATO forces in eastern Afghanistan.

“We have not seen the actions that we had expected late last year; we have seen a different approach,” he said before a news briefing in Kabul. “That is different from what most of us thought last year we were going to get.”

Militancy rose last year in Pakistan, where officials indicated that tougher measures against the militants were planned. Instead, the government has sued for peace, a policy tried in 2005 and 2006 that led directly to a rise in attacks across the border, as is happening now.

“Over time, when there has been dialogue, or peace deals, the incidents have gone up,” General McNeill told journalists in Kabul and others in Brussels listening via videoconferencing. “What you see right now is the effects of no pressure on the extremists and insurgents on the other side of the border.”

...

General McNeill said that Pakistan had stopped the high-level meetings among Pakistani, Afghan and NATO counterparts that were the main conduit for resolving border issues and coordinating operations to combat cross-border infiltration.

...

“My connection is military to military,” the general said, “and I think they know in the Pakistani military this is an issue they have to take on, and they have to do it in a way that is consistent with counterinsurgency doctrine.

“But they have also just gone through some rather huge changes within their government and, I think, are still trying to find their way to get something coalesced, to get it congealed to where there is a forward movement in the business of governance,” he said.

...

The bargain that we struck with Pakistan is that they would allow the US to move through Pakistan into Afghanistan to defeat the Taliban and al Qaeda and they would restrain the Taliban and al Qaeda who are in Pakistan. In return, the US would not make war against Pakistan and would provide Pakistan with a substantial aid package. We are not getting our money's worth. If Pakistan had lived up to the agreement, there would be much less fighting in Afghanistan. It is not as if we aren't eager to help Pakistan defeat the Taliban and al Qaeda within its borders. Its refusal to permit us to help is not logical. It is in Pakistan's interest to be rid of these people. If the Pakistanis don't comprehend this, they are going to have much bigger problems than what to do about the religious bigots on the border.