Militants ambushed Frontier Corps troops on Monday, killing nine soldiers in gunbattles and underscoring the gravity of the insurgent threat on the outskirts of Peshawar amid growing American frustration with Pakistan’s handling of militancy.
“It was an ambush in the afternoon. It continued for two to three hours, and there have been casualties in the ambush. There have been killings of the terrorists as well,” Inter-Services Public Relations Director General Maj General Athar Abbas told AFP. Other military and political officials in the northwest said nine troops from the Frontier Corps were killed and three others wounded in the attack in Khyber Agency, while at least 14 militants were killed. Ambushes on such a deadly scale are rare, underscoring the pernicious Taliban-led insurgency plaguing the tribal areas and the challenges facing Pakistan in containing the unrest while under US pressure to take tougher action. “The militants attacked FC troops during a search operation. They came under attack from a small hill where militants were hiding,” the political agent of Khyber, Rehan Gul Khattak, told AFP. At least 14 militants were killed in retaliatory fire in the Akakhel area of Bara district, the officials said.
NYT REPORT: Meanwhile, the New York Times said in a report on Monday that in a series of recent statements, Pakistani officials had rejected the notion of robust military action against insurgents based in its tribal belt and instead called for meaningful dialogue. At a recent summit, political leaders issued a resolution that did not condemn terrorism but said their policy dialogue. The decree was widely viewed as having been rubber-stamped by the powerful military, whose top two figures briefed the conference, said the report. The approach had puzzled US officials and renewed debate in Pakistan about how to handle insurgents who have killed thousands in nationwide attacks, it added. The Times said much remained unclear about the potential for peacemaking, including which militant groups would be included or willing. But the report quoted some analysts as saying Pakistan had lost the resolve to battle homegrown insurgents who many here view as disgruntled brethren. “Everyone went along with what the army wanted” at the recent political summit, the report quoted Rahimullah Yousafzai, a Pakistani journalist and expert on militancy in the northwest, as saying. “It became obvious that the military has no appetite for military operations,” he added.
SCEPTICISM: Many here express scepticism about talks, arguing that such efforts had failed in the past. But the idea is backed by Islamic parties and other political leaders. In interviews, politicians and security officials said Pakistan viewed the Pakistani Taliban, an umbrella insurgent group that is an offshoot of the Afghan movement, as splintered enough to be open to peace deals mediated through tribal elders or clerics. And the United States, they noted, was supporting a similar approach in Afghanistan.
“If by giving a chance to peace, any terror is eliminated, it’s the best option,” the Times quoted Interior Minister Rehman Malik as saying in an interview. He added that he had received armistice offers from militants: “They want to talk.” Meanwhile, said the report, Pakistan was jockeying for inclusion in any Afghan political settlement, which security officials here believed would bring Afghan Taliban representatives into the government. The army therefore saw little incentive to antagonise Pakistan insurgents, who could mingle with their Afghan counterparts, said the Times, citing security analysts.
