• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • U.S.-Pakistan Tensions Jeopardize Afghanistan Mission

    Pakistan’s closure of one of the main NATO supply routes into Afghanistan and the string of attacks on NATO convoys transiting Pakistan over the last few days highlights the vulnerability of the entire coalition mission in Afghanistan to events inside Pakistan. Nearly eighty percent of supplies for the war effort in Afghanistan currently transit Pakistan. There have been several militant attacks on NATO trucks in the past but this is the first time Pakistan has formally closed down one of the border crossings.

    The border closure demonstrates Islamabad’s furor over last week’s NATO strike that accidentally killed three Pakistani troops. NATO officials did not immediately issue an apology and instead claimed they had fired in self-defense. Islamabad is signaling the international community not to take for granted its sovereignty and cooperation with the Afghan war effort. NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen’s official apology to the Pakistani Foreign Minister today should help soothe Pakistani anger over the incident.

    The incident is similar to one that occurred in June 2008 in which a U.S. air strike on the border killed 11 Pakistani troops. Both of these unfortunate incidents point to the challenges of fighting an effective campaign against insurgents who cross freely back and forth along a porous Afghan-Pakistani border. While the 2008 incident raised tensions between the U.S. and Pakistan, it did not cause a major rupture in the relationship nor did it lead the Pakistanis to halt NATO convoys like they have this time.

    The U.S. should focus on opening access routes outside of Pakistan to resupply its troops inside Afghanistan. Not only are the Pakistani supply routes increasingly under threat of militant attacks, the U.S. dependence on Pakistani supply routes provides Islamabad leverage to resist U.S. pressure to shut down Taliban sanctuaries and to crack down more forcefully on terrorist networks, like the Haqqani network, that attack coalition forces across the border and threaten the overall mission in Afghanistan.

    Washington has begun to build up the so-called “Northern Distribution Network” through Russia, the Caucasus, and the Central Asian states and has already opened five supply routes from the countries north of Afghanistan, including Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan. A more robust dialogue with Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan regarding supply of Afghanistan and the future of Central Asian security could help the U.S. secure even more routes through the north, thus reducing its dependence on Pakistan.

    Posted in Ongoing Priorities [slideshow_deploy]

    3 Responses to U.S.-Pakistan Tensions Jeopardize Afghanistan Mission

    1. neel123 says:

      It is inconceivable that the American war planners failed to foresee the consequences of 80% dependence on the Pakistani supply routes. However a gradual removal of the supplies through Pakistan would certainly have its desired effects .. !

    2. Bruce says:

      This war is one that we have no place in.

      The longer we are there the more recruits the Taliban will recruit

    3. Pingback: Foreign Demand May Jeopardize Uranium Supply for U.S. Utilities | Latest news on renewable energy and effective utilization

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×