Pakistani Border Incursions & Khyber Supply Lines

By Steve Hynd

Following cross-border raids by US troops in hot pursuit of insurgents, Pakistan is threatening consequences for a violation of its sovereignty.

Pakistan has told NATO leaders it will stop protecting U.S. and NATO supply lines to Afghanistan if foreign aircraft stage further cross-border attacks against fleeing militants, security officials said Tuesday.

If carried out, such a threat would have major consequences on the war in Afghanistan as well as on Pakistan's relationship with the United States, which is vitally important for both nations. Analysts said there was little or no chance of Islamabad carrying though with it, however.

The threat was therefore seen as mostly aimed at tamping down criticism inside Pakistan, where anti-American sentiment runs high and where conspiracy theories that the U.S. army is poised to invade the nation from bases in Afghanistan are rampant.

But it was also a clear sign of Pakistani unease at the attacks on Saturday and Monday by NATO aircraft against militants in its northwest tribal areas and a reminder of the leverage the country has in its complicated alliance with Washington.

...While Pakistan has remained largely silent about U.S. drone strikes in the northwest, Pakistani security officials say they are drawing a line at direct interference by U.S. and NATO manned aircraft. They rejected NATO statements that NATO air defense teams were acting to protect an Afghan border post against militants who had attacked it, then fled to Pakistan.

The Pakistani officers said Pakistan's foreign ministry had conveyed the threat to stop protecting NATO convoys to NATO headquarters in Brussels. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to give their names to the media.

If there are any more attacks by U.S. or NATO choppers "we will not be able to ensure the safety of their convoys," one of the officials told an Associated Press reporter at a private briefing.

If I were General Petraeus and his logistics people, I wouldn't be discounting Pakistani action - or to be precise, inaction - so completely, and I think those analysts poo-pooing the chances of disruption to NATO supplies are plain wrong. Pakistan's military is far more strongly opposed to cross-border incursions than to drone strikes, as has been proven in the past.

I suppose some others must have noticed how similiar this all is to the last time NATO/US forces crossed the border, in Sept 2008, to loud condemnation by Kayani et al. Back then, Gen. Tariq Majid said ""Pakistan reserves the right to appropriately retaliate" and some fire was even exchanged between Pakistani border troops and US military raiders. Mullen and Kayani hurredly met on the USS Abraham Lincoln and everything was meant to be OK, only to have Kayani announce a few days later that Pakistan's sovereignty would be defended "at all cost."

At the time, Gareth Porter noted that Obama had backed cross-border raids, even though the intelligence community had told Bush they would be counterproductive and would be vastly destabilizing to Pakistan's political/military wire-walking.

Over the next few months to February 2009, the Khyber Pass was closed to NATO supplies no less than five times, either by "insurgent activity" or as a safety precaution while the Pak military "hunted insurgents" until the US military got the message that cross-border raiding had consequences.

The dynamics of the Pass as a chokepoint haven't changed any since 2008/09. Expect a repeat performance. The Pakistanis don't actually have to say they're closing the Pass to NATO traffic as punishment, they just have to arrange matters so that the Pass is closed. The sum result is the same and I'm sure Petraeus, like General David McKiernan before him, will get the message loud and clear.

Update: Pakistan has now closed the NATO supply routes in protest at alleged civilian and Pakistani border force casualties.