The US Shift To AfPak Front.

While the foreign policy debate in Washington has focused on Afghanistan and Iran since late September, the US has moved to tighten ties with Pakistan. Congress had finally cleared legislation to triple US non-military aid to Islamabad over the next five years to an annual rate of $1.5bn. Only a fraction of the $11bn provided to Pakistan under George W Bush from late 2001 was devoted to non-military assistance.

While the additional aid is likely to help bolster Washington's badly damaged image among the general public in Pakistan, however, the new bill omitted a key provision which would have granted generous trade preferences for exports from the country's regions where both Taliban insurgencies in both Afghanistan and Pakistan have gained most of their recruits. Passage of the bill, which President Obama signed this week, came amid preparations for the Pakistani Armed Forces (PAF) to launch a big offensive (long encouraged by Washington) against the Pakistani Taliban's and al-Qaeda's main stronghold in South Waziristan.

The offensive, which follows PAF's conquests of Bajaur and Mohmand agencies in Pakistan's Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and the Swat Valley in North-West Frontier Province (NWFP), is designed to take advantage of the Aug. 5 killing - by a US Predator drone strike - of the Pakistani Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud, and ensuing in-fighting among Taliban leaders. While Washington had hoped the PAF would have moved earlier into South Waziristan, it has been encouraged by the PAF's recent performance in taking on the Taliban in North Waziristan and the NWFP.

Bruce Riedel, a former CIA analyst who chaired the White House's review on AfPak after Obama came to office, says the move on South Waziristan would be significant, noting: "More pressure is being put on al-Qaeda's safe haven [in Waziristan] today than at any time since 2003 and 2004". He credits the PAF's recent aggressiveness against the Taliban and the increasingly effective US use of drone strikes against suspected Qaeda and Taliban leaders on Pakistani territory. But he says al-Qaeda and its close Taliban allies remain dangerous, both fielding fatal suicide bombers in almost daily attacks.

Supporters of a ramped up US war effort in Afghanistan on Oct. 7 were confident Obama would send more troops, a day after the US president met congressional leaders as he tried to thrash out strategy. Some of the most prominent backers of a bigger US force emerged from an Oct. 6 meeting claiming Obama would eventually sent 30,000-40,000 more troops, the option being pushed by the top US/NATO commander in Afghanistan, Lt-Gen Stanley McChrystal. The White House had received the request in the previous week.

House Armed Services Committee's Democratic Chairman Ike Skelton, one of more than 30 lawmakers at the meeting, said: "The president's going to have to listen to Gen McChrystal. He's his man. He's his pick. I can think of no incident where holding back forces and reducing forcesled to victory". The White House stresses the US neither has "the option to leave" AfPak nor is contemplating a rapid draw-down in forces.

The debate pits VP Joe Biden, who favours emphasis on strikes against al-Qaeda, against McChrystal's lot who back a broader "counter-insurgency" approach to win the hearts and minds of ordinary Afghans - mainly by defending them from the Taliban.