I'm referring to this article(NYT) that discusses how the Pakistani Army Chief is inclined to ignore U.S. demands for Pakistan's military to crack down on other militant groups in the wake of the targeted killing of OBL. So I want to draw out a couple quotes and then blast them. So first, from Gen. Javed Ashraf Qazi, former director of ISI:
“Without Pakistani support, the United States cannot win the battle in Afghanistan.”
I think Gen. Qazi greatly overstates our interest in "winning" in Afghanistan, particularly now that the boogeyman we sought to destroy has been destroyed. It's also worth pointing out that Pakistani reticence, likes oh say supporting the Haqquani network, makes if very difficult for the U.S. to make progress in Afghanistan. And yet, cutting support to the Haqquani network is exactly the kind of thing the Pakistani army chief doesn't want to do.
Quote number two:
"General Qazi said hard questions were being asked about whether the American financial support to the Pakistani military was 'worth the lives we have lost' in fighting Islamic militants."
You know what's a poorer bet then my Kentuky Derby wager on a horse I thought was named after the alias of King of the Hill's Dale Gribble (damn you Shackleford!)? Betting that not receiving aid from and not collaborating with the U.S. will convince Islamic militants to cease attacks against the Pakistani state.
And finally to poor a little salt in the wound, Andrew Exum reminds us that the Pakistan Army has never won a war. It makes one question the wisdom of such an army's leadership. Remove head from sphinkter, not because the U.S. is right or has always been a solid ally. That would be hard to back up, but because your alternatives are all worse.