Hearing of the House Armed Services Committee - Security Challenges Involving Pakistan and Policy Implications for the Department of Defense

Interview

Hearing of the House Armed Services Committee - Security Challenges Involving Pakistan and Policy Implications for the Department of Defense

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

REP. JOE COURTNEY (D-CT): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I'd like to focus for a minute on the security along the border of Afghanistan and Pakistan. A trip a number of us made back in May, talking to some of the NATO troops describing Taliban terrorists coming to and fro across the border and there being almost a dysfunctional relationship between the Pakistan, NATO and Afghanistan's -- whatever troops they have there. I mean, it seemed like there wasn't even communications systems established to talk about tracking people that were moving back and forth. And given the amount of money we're investing in Pakistan's military, and obviously the commitment in Afghanistan, it just seems like there should be a better security arrangement with the Pakistani government about tracking what people are seeing with their own eyes coming over the borders.

MR. WEINBAUM: You know, sir, that there is a tripartite arrangement of the three militaries -- the Afghan military, U.S. forces operating on the border, as well as the Pakistanis. And there has been some success with this in sorting out differences here, but what you're talking about here is tracking across the border. And I think that that can only come about when, on both sides of the border, there's a much more effective security arrangement. There are innumerable places along that border where one can infiltrate so that I don't think there's anyway in which, even with the best of intentions, that the governments involved here are going to be able to stop that. You've got to stop it from within. Once they get to the border, they're going to get across.

REP. COURTNEY: Well, it certainly seemed like the Afghanistan officials that we met with expressed a lot of frustration in terms of their interaction with the Pakistan government. So I mean, I think it -- I take your point but it just also seems that, you know, government to government there should be a better arrangement than what exists right now.

MR. WEINBAUM: Just one thing more --

MR. SCHAFFER: You'll hear frustration on both sides of the line. This whole issue could not be more difficult for both the Pakistanis and the Afghans. And they have tended to blame each other rather than to focus together on how to fix the problem.

This is one of the reasons that I urged, in my testimony, that the U.S. start trying to develop, with Pakistan and with Afghanistan, at least some elements of a common strategy for stabilizing the government in Afghanistan, because if you could start to fix the rather poisonous relationship between the two leaders, then you have a much better basis for trying to find ways of cooperating across a porous border.

REP. COURTNEY: Well, I mean, the arrests that took place in Germany this summer of the three terrorists, who were clearly being trained in some part of Pakistan, suggests that, you know, again, all the long-term economic development, all the things that you've talked about here today, obviously are important elements of the strategy. But clearly we've got an immediate security issue here.

I mean, if those guys were trained in Iraq, I mean, the political fallout from that would have been, I think, just overwhelming. I mean, for some reason, the fact that it wasn't in Iraq and in a different part of the world seemed to get sort of brushed a little bit aside.

But the fact is, I mean, to me, it just seems like, in terms of the U.S. national security interest, the threat of being hit either here or in Europe emanates from the tribal areas of Pakistan. And it just doesn't seem like, with all the money we're spending over there, it's not too much to ask our government to be a little bit better in terms of trying to get the security arrangements more functional.

MR. HAQQANI: If I may say so, one of the things that the U.S. government is not investing enough in is building the civilian law enforcement capability of Pakistan. You see, the thing is that to catch the kind of people you're talking about, the three people who were trained, you need law enforcement rather than an Air Force with F-16 aircraft. I mean, you know, we have given them F-16 aircraft, but that's not going to solve this problem. This problem is going to be with gumshoes and local police work.

And I think that that is an area that Congress could focus on, building Pakistan's law enforcement capability and making it better so that people can be intercepted before they get out of Pakistan while they are training there. And to the extent that there are elements within the government of Pakistan who are either tolerant of or supportive of the extremists, I think a lot more straight talk is needed between the United States intelligence service, the Pakistani intelligence service, and the Afghan intelligence service. So far the process of intelligence-sharing is one in which action doesn't always materialize in time.

MS. CURTIS: I think you're absolutely right; there needs to be better coordination between NATO and the Pakistan government. I think that seems quite obvious. So I wholly endorse what you had said. I think part of the problem in dealing with Pakistan on these issues is that so much of it is sort of under the radar.

And what is useful in terms of countering the terrorist threat may be politically unpopular, so there is a tendency to want to keep these issues below the radar. And on some of the issues that we do find Pakistani cooperation, perhaps it's not touted publicly. So this makes it very difficult, I think, to get to the heart of the matter. But I think you certainly have hit on something very important and it's something that should be pursued.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source