At the time of writing, protests were still taking place in the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) and FATA over the attack and politicians had not stopped issuing statements to condemn the missile strikes. Families of those killed in the strikes were mourning their near and dear ones and some of the injured were fighting for life in military and public hospitals.

This incident in which 27 Pakistanis, including 13 soldiers from the paramilitary Frontier Corps (FC), were killed will continue to haunt and influence the uneasy relations between Pakistan and the U.S. Their unequal partnership has seldom grown into a sincere relationship. In fact the killing of Pakistani troops could further widen the distrust that has characterised their ties since the 9/11 attacks in America and the subsequent U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001.

The U.S. attack has further inflamed anti-America sentiment in the NWFP and FATA in particular and rest of Pakistan in general. The U.S. refusal to offer an apology has added fuel to the fire. The fact that the U.S. forces came to the aid of the Afghan National Army that was trying to set up a border post at the contested Durand Line was seen as evidence that Washington was backing Kabul's claim to territory on the disputed Pak-Afghan border. This was unacceptable for Islamabad as it wanted the U.S. to use its influence with Kabul to resolve the border issue once and for all instead of taking sides.

The U.S. further provoked Pakistan when it used its pilotless Predator or Reaper planes to fire two Hellfire missiles directly at the FC's border post and killed 13 soldiers including one major. Civilians were also killed and injured in the attack. According to Pakistani Taliban spokesman Maulvi Omar, several militants too lost their lives in the airstrikes. The killing of militants certainly gave credence to the U.S. claim that its forces were attacked inside Afghanistan's territory not far from the border with Pakistan and that they were in 'hot pursuit' of the attackers and had retaliated in self-defence. However, by striking at the Pakistani border security post, the U.S. military overdid its job and hit the wrong target. It is even possible that the U.S. drones were used to deliberately attack the FC border post after a number of American officials, military commanders, scholars and mediapersons pointed fingers at the same paramilitary force for helping Taliban militants launch attacks across the border in Afghanistan.

Some U.S. government spokesmen rubbed salt on Pakistan's wounds by insisting that they were not sure if Pakistani troops had been killed in the airstrikes in Mohmand Agency. They were making these statements at a time when the media was providing reports and pictures of the funerals of the slain soldiers and some of them were seen under treatment at public hospitals in Peshawar. U.S. attempts to justify the missile strikes against the Pakistani security post at the border also raised tempers in Pakistan.

The U.S. belatedly realised the gravity of the situation and offered a joint military probe of the Mohmand Agency incident. A U.S. military team was to arrive in Pakistan to carry out the joint investigation with Pakistan Army.

However, the probe is unlikely to fix responsibility or recommend disciplinary action against anyone, not least against the mighty Americans. All that one can expect from the inquiry is to give assurances that more care would be taken in future to avoid such incidents. There would also be talk of better coordination between the U.S. and Pakistan Army. The U.S. may also belatedly console the families of the Pakistani soldiers killed in action but one doesn't know if Washington would offer monetary compensation to those killed and wounded.

While talking about U.S. military's suspicions about Pakistan Army, particulary the FC, it is pertinent to mention recent comments made by American General Dan McNeil, who was until recently the Nato commander in Afghanistan. He recalled that two U.S. military officers were shot dead by FC personnel during flag meetings between American and Pakistan army officers on the Pak-Afghan border. Some U.S. military commanders and scholars have also pointed out that FC was composed of Pakhtun tribesmen, who are of the same ethnic stock as the Taliban and would therefore sympathise with the Taliban cause. Rand Corporation's researcher Seth Jones also made the same accusations against the FC and Pakistani intelligence agencies.

It is also relevant to mention that the FC has suffered the most in military operations against Taliban fighters in the tribal areas and a significant number of its troops have deserted their jobs. Ironically, the U.S. is offering assistance to train the same FC personnel whom it suspects of supporting the Taliban. The U.S.-backed training programme for FC was already running behind schedule and could be delayed further following the Mohmand Agency incident. FC soldiers may not like the idea of being trained by U.S. military trainers after 13 of their colleagues got killed by the Americans.

All this makes the situation confusing and complex. The dramatic rise in Taliban attacks in Afghanistan this summer is testing the patience of the U.S.-led Nato forces. The daring jailbreak in Kandahar from where more than 1,100 prisoners including about 390 Taliban escaped and the subsequent Taliban capture of Arghandab district, barely 10 kilometres from Kandahar, has both embarrassed and angered the Nato forces and Afghan government. Though Nato and Afghan forces quickly recaptured Arghandab after killing dozens of Taliban militants, the fact that Taliban came so close to Kandahar city and forced Nato to mount a costly campaign to retake the district showed their capacity to undertake similar and even more spectacular attacks.

President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan was unable to control his anger as he threatened to send Afghan troops to Pakistan to kill Pakistani Taliban commanders Baitullah Mahsud, Maulana Fazlullah and Maulvi Omar. It was undiplomatic on his part to issue such a threat even if he was somewhat justified in asking as to why Pakistanis were coming to Afghanistan to fight and kill Afghans and their western allies. It was, therefore, hardly surprising that his outburst provoked Pakistan to issue a strong-worded protest and term his comments irresponsible. The incident also contributed to the distrust that characterises the uncertain relationship between Afghanistan and Pakistan and made it even more unlikely that the governments would offer each other sincere cooperation while fighting the militants. The same uncertainty now haunts Pakistan's ties with the U.S., which hasn't helped matters by continuing to stand by the discredited Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf and by missing no opportunity to interfere in the country's affairs.

top