ALLY?:

U.S. Slams Pakistani Effort On Militants (ADAM ENTOUS And SIOBHAN GORMAN, 10/06/10, WSJ)

A new White House assessment steps up criticism of Pakistan's campaign against militants, stating bluntly that its government and military have been unwilling to take action against al Qaeda and like-minded terrorists.

The aggressive language of the report—which also criticizes the leadership of President Asif Ali Zardari—could further strain difficult relations with a key ally and undercut support in Congress for providing billions of dollars in aid to Islamabad. [...]

"The Pakistan military continued to avoid military engagements that would put it in direct conflict with Afghan Taliban or al Qaeda forces in North Waziristan," the White House concludes, referring to the Pakistani tribal region that U.S. officials say is being used as a staging ground for attacks on troops in Afghanistan, as well as to plot attacks on targets in Europe.

U.S. officials say they are increasingly frustrated by Pakistan's decision not to send large numbers of ground forces into North Waziristan. "This is as much a political choice as it is a reflection of an under-resourced military prioritizing its targets," the unclassified, 27-page report finds.

In the neighboring tribal region of South Waziristan, "Pakistani military operations advanced slowly" because they haven't been able to stabilize areas after they clear them of militants, the White House found.

There, "the military largely stayed close to the roads and did not engage against those [Pakistani Taliban] militants who returned after fleeing into North Waziristan."

While the Pakistani military has dedicated 140,000 forces to the tribal areas, "the Pakistan military was nonetheless constrained to disrupting and displacing extremists groups without making lasting gains against the insurgency."

At best they're neutral in the Tribal areas and since they're hostile to our Indian ally they might better be thought of as the enemy.

Posted by Orrin Judd at October 6, 2010 6:04 PM