WI; Hard line against Pakistan after 9/11

What if the US had chosen to take a hard line against Pakistan after 9/11 due to the funding of the hijacker Muhammed Atta by Pakistan's Inter- Services Intelligence (wired 100,000$ to Muhammed Atta shortly before the terrorist attacks), which the US chose to ignore. Could relations between the US and Pakistan escalatew to a point that President Bush add Pakistan to his Axis of Evil?
 
IIRC, the US took a quite hard line and delivered a ulimatum treatening Pakistan with war if them if they didn't cooperate and let US forces transit to Afganistan. If they didn't cooperate, the Afgan war would be harder to pull of.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
A slightly different POD would be: What If Pakistan had refused to cooperate with the Americans? There were (and are) very powerful elements within the Pakistani government and military that are ferociously anti-American and pro-Taliban.
 
My idea is that US would not threat, but act. Convinced that the Pakistani government is as guilty as the Talebans they never even think of the idea to threat them into cooperation. (Because I can't see the Pakistani government react any other way if they had a chance to avoid confrontation). A war on terror against both Afghanistan and Pakistan, would it be possible? How would India react?
 
Since in OTL the Pakistani student who attack the cars holding in line outside the CIA HQ was supposedly a revenge attack for the Clinton Administration cutting off funding to Pakistan.

I would imagine that if Musaraf hadn't been in power there, then Taliban who was mainly pastun (spelled wrong ;) who have tried to use this to take power in Pakistan, and maybe broading the US war.
 
I would imagine that if Musaraf hadn't been in power there, then Taliban who was mainly pastun (spelled wrong ;) who have tried to use this to take power in Pakistan, and maybe broading the US war.

the Pashtun would never have been able to seize outright power in Pakistan- the Baluchis, Sindhis and Punjabis wouldn't be too happy.
 

boredatwork

Banned
if the US considered Pakistan to be officially and formally responsible for 9-11, then we might well have skipped the threatening and gone straight to doing what Armitage discussed.

Result - tens, if not hundreds of millions of dead Pakistanis, disintegration of Pakistani government, likely short-mid term result would be strengthened talibani sovreignty over the NW territory areas (rural ones, anyway - the urban centers won't be around anymore).

Long term - who knows. Certainly not a TL I'ld be happy about, anyway.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
China and Pakistan are relatively close allies. How would the Chinese respond to an American attack on Pakistan?

As far as India is concerned, their general staff will doubtless pop open quite a few cases of Kingfisher to celebrate.
 
China and Pakistan are relatively close allies. How would the Chinese respond to an American attack on Pakistan?

As far as India is concerned, their general staff will doubtless pop open quite a few cases of Kingfisher to celebrate.


If Pakistan is presented as being responsible for 9/11, I doubt ANY nation in the world with a shred of sanity would stand with them. And China would rather sacrifice Pakistan and earn some goodwill than try to stand by Pakistan and earn an enemy that is angry enough to still go ahead and do it. Not to mention that with Pakistan, use of nuclear weapons might actually be on the table. Maybe even a preemptive nuclear strike against Pakistani nuclear facilities and military bases. Just after 9/11, it may not be as inconceivable as at any other time, and with threat of Pakistan using the nuclear weapons, I think that may even fly past the normally adverse public.
 
If US had invaded both Afghanistan and Pakistan, would India had made a move on Pakistani occupied parts of Kashmir, could it result in more religious tensions in India. Would there have been an invasion of Iraq if the US had to tackle both Afghanistan and Pakistan??
 
Top