MR. KOJO NNAMDIOne of America's most complicated diplomatic relationships with Pakistan is growing more complicated by the minute. Pakistan is seen as crucial to U.S. success in Afghanistan and in efforts to further destabilize al-Qaida. But the already strained relationship between the CIA and Pakistan's ISI continues to be stretched.

MR. KOJO NNAMDIThe New York Times reports officials in Pakistan arrested five informants who worked with the CIA leading up to the raid on Osama bin Laden's compound in Pakistan. Six weeks after bin Laden's death, we consider the latest fall out. Joining us by phone is Christine Fair, professor at the Center for Peace and Security Studies at Georgetown University School of Foreign Service. Christine Fair, thank you so much for joining us.

PROF. CHRISTINE FAIRThank you for having me.

NNAMDIFirst, the broad question. What do you make of these arrests?

FAIRWell, it's actually kind of stunning. I mean, I think they illustrate the complete dissonance between American and Pakistani publics. I think the American public and, I mean, policymakers would have been mightily impressed, had there been effort to figure out who was actually facilitating bin Laden's tenure in Pakistan.

FAIRBut the fact that the Pakistan Army, instead, has prioritized identifying those Pakistanis that helped facilitate his, you know, ultimate capture and killing really shows that they're more interested in trying to reorient their relationship with us than they are trained to understand the degree of support that bin Laden may have had, you know, within the areas that he was captured, which was, of course, the Pakistan military academy.

NNAMDI800-433-8850 is the number to call. It's Your Turn. What do you think the relationship between the U.S. and the Pakistan -- and Pakistan should be? 800-433-8850. Christine Fair, according to The New York Times, one of the people arrested is a Pakistani Army officer, a major. Pakistani officials are now denying that that major was among those detained, calling the reports of his detention false and totally baseless.

NNAMDIBut we'll notice they stopped short of confirming or denying the overall report about the detentions. Is this evidence of an ideological rift in Pakistan's military?

FAIRWell, there are -- there's actually other evidence of that, right? So the attack last month on a major naval base showed that there was a very large number of al-Qaida sympathizers within the Pakistan navy that facilitated that attack.

FAIRThere have actually been a number of attacks, including an attack in 2009 on army general headquarters, several attacks on the life of then-President Musharraf, all of which involved both civilian personnel as well as active, enlisted, junior non-commissioned officers, as well as commissioned officers in the facilitation of those attacks.

FAIRSo what we do know in the Pakistan Armed Forces is that there is a problem with actual terrorist radicalization, sympathy as well as facilitation of attacks. And, again, you would think that that would be a pressing issue of larger concern in the major, who may or may not have been complicit in identifying the world's greatest terrorist. But again, it really underscores that Pakistan has a different set of priorities than what American observers would like Pakistan to have.

NNAMDIWe're talking about Pakistan arresting CIA informants and taking your calls. It's your turn, 800-433-8850. You can offer your opinion about the nature of the relationship between the U.S. and Pakistan and what you think it should be. 800-433-8850. Christine Fair joins us by telephone. She's a professor at the Center for Peace and Security Studies at Georgetown University School of Foreign Service.

NNAMDIChristine, we don't know the fate of those who have been arrested. Pakistani army officials claim that some have been cleared and released while others remain in custody. Do you think these informants are in any kind of danger?

FAIRWell, I mean, it's hard to say. Let's also keep in mind that, from the Pakistani's point of view, these were Pakistani citizens that were collaborating with a foreign intelligence agency. We would take that very seriously. And so Pakistan is well within its right to understand the depth to which, within its institutions, there are people that are facilitating CIA operations.

FAIRRemember that, while the Pakistanis and Americans cooperate on a lot of counterterrorism initiatives, there's actually quite a bit where we disagree. CIA would love to take out groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba, the Jalaluddin Haqqani network, previously of North Waziristan, now operating out of another travel agency called Kurram.

FAIRSo while we inter-operate on issues that we have a (word?) of interest, it turns out that we are -- we're probably at odds over far more people and targets than we are in agreement. And so it is their national security interest to try to figure out who was in their system is collaborating with us. But I do think, from an American optic, we probably would have preferred that they prioritized identifying who facilitated bin Laden's tenure as being more important than trying to figure out who facilitated his capture.

NNAMDIAnd if, in fact, they are pursuing who facilitated his capture as a legitimate security interest of the Pakistani government, does the fact that they arrested or "arrested these people" make any significant difference between arrest and, say, just brought them in for questioning?

FAIRWell, we don't know. I mean, look, if the situation were reversed, the CIA wouldn't be terribly forthcoming either, right? We have our own process...

NNAMDITrue.

FAIR...for dealing with espionage. And so I don't know what the ISI process is for dealing with suspected espionage perpetrators. So I don't really have any insight into that. But, you know, it's easy to criticize them for it. Remember, we would be doing the same thing if we found people within our system were facilitating operations of another intelligence agency operating against us.

NNAMDIPakistanis are said to be very angry over the U.S. raid on bin Laden's compound. Are they strictly angry with the U.S.? Or is some of that anger directed at their own government?

FAIRWell, you know, Pakistanis -- you know, I traveled there recently. I was just there in May. I was actually there during the weeks that bin Laden was captured. And there's a lot of frustration amongst Pakistanis. And it's really difficult to sort of summarize it up in a sentence. On the one hand, you have to understand that the Pakistan army has really justified all of these interventions in the civilian governance of the country.

FAIRThey're arguing that it alone is capable of protecting the state, where all the other institutions fail. And the Pakistan army, in that measure, has quite a bit of support amongst Pakistanis.

FAIRSo you could imagine if you were an ordinary Pakistani waking up that Monday morning to learn that three American helicopters -- not fighter jets, nothing, you know, too terribly sophisticated from the point of a military operation -- infiltrated Pakistani airspace, engaged in a firefight for 40 minutes, including helicopter about a mile-and-change away from the Pakistan military academy in what was a cantonment town and were able to get out with their slain quarry even before the Pakistanis could scramble F-16s, that is a huge blow.

FAIRPakistanis were wondering, could Indians do this? Could Israelis do this? Could the U.S., on its own or working with Israel or India, take out its nuclear assets? So there really was this conjoined sense of the army has really let us down. But also -- this was, like, the final straw and as American temerity in violating and trampling their sovereignty.

FAIRFor Pakistanis that were also cognizant of its international image -- which, quite frankly, is not a majority of Pakistanis -- there was also a sense of shame that their government had said for 10 years, bin Laden is not here. Not only is he in Pakistan, but he's not living in the cave. He's actually living under the nose of the Pakistan military. And then what I thought was really interesting -- personally, I don't believe that bin Laden had ISI facilitation.

FAIRThat's my own personal adjudication looking at the situation on the ground. And, also, by the way, Secretary Gates has also made similar statements. Pakistanis, on the other hand, those that believe bin Laden existed anyway and was captured, one in three of them believe that they actually -- the ISI actually facilitated his tenure there.

FAIRSo Pakistanis, right now, are really submerged in a maelstrom of conflicted feelings. And they're angry at their own government. They're angry at us. And some of them that are, you know, a little bit more sensitive are really kind of angry with their own civil society, that their country has gotten so out of control and so violent. About 35,000 Pakistanis have been killed or injured since 2004 from domestic violence. That's a huge number -- 35,000.

NNAMDILet me go to Bart in Loudoun, Va. Bart, you're on the air. Go ahead, please.

BARTYeah, I frequently read the Pakistani newspapers' English editions online. And it's just incredible how many Pakistanis just have this delusional belief in conspiracy theories involving America. They blame us literally for everything. Although this seems bothering to me, there's no shortage of it. And I think -- I want to know what the professor thinks that we should do to counteract, you know, what we dismiss as nonsensical, but which they actually believe and which is apparently driving political decisions in the country.

NNAMDIChristine Fair?

FAIRWell, that's really true. And these conspiracy theories are often generated by Pakistan's intelligence agency. The Pakistan intelligence agency, the ISI, actually has a media wing. It will -- it actually has Pakistani journalists on its payroll. When there are important press briefs, they will actually plant journalists with planted questions. And so a lot of the conspiracy theories, you know, sort of percolate from Pakistani society.

FAIRAnd they have -- they've been there for a long time. They're not going away. They're -- it's a way of understanding the world, these conspiracy theories. But then they get amplified or, in some cases, simply begun by Pakistan's intelligence agencies, which has a long history and a longstanding interest in continuing to fuel anti-American sentiment because it uses that anti-American sentiment to create wiggle room to get out of obligations or -- or, constantly, Americans will say, we need to do more.

FAIRWe need to do more. Go after this terrorist group, after that terrorist group. And what they'll turn to the U.S. And they'll say is, look, we really can't because our people hate you. And you're really pushing us to the limit. And since we're a civilian government, we have other issues to be concerned about. Thank you very much.

NNAMDIIn other words, as we said right at the top, it's complicated, Bart. But thank you for your call. Here is Lee in Herndon, Va. Lee, your turn. We're running out of time. Please make your question or comment brief.

LEEHi, Kojo. I'm absolutely amazed that -- American political arrogance. It sounds like we want the Pakistani people to do exactly what we want. And we -- politically, that is. Cooperate on all levels. And when we're done with them, we'll throw them $2 or $3 billion a year as a bone and let the upper echelons of their military and ISI services split that money up. And this is exactly what's been going on. And...

NNAMDIWhat do you advocate, Lee?

LEEI'm not sure. But what I'd like to put forth is that we -- this is a game, a shadowy game. We should recognize that. Honestly, in my opinion, I would declare Pakistan as a non-friendly country, sever all ties and then literally start negotiating...

NNAMDIChristine Fair, if we were to do that, what would it mean for Afghanistan as we begin to draw down our presence there? What would it mean for our campaign against terrorism?

FAIRI understand the instincts that your caller...

NNAMDIAnd we only have about a minute left.

FAIRYeah, but it's simply not feasible. There are so many issues that are pressing and important in Pakistan, not even after this global war on terrorism is over, after our military presence in Afghanistan is over, which it will be over in some decade, things like nuclear proliferation, Pakistan's continued reliance upon militant groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba that want to attack us and our allies. We need to be there. We need to be engaged.

FAIRWe need to actually support those people in Pakistan that wants a different future. To your caller's first part of the comment, we have, for too long, supported Pakistan's military. And then we've been disappointed when the civilians have failed to fare better. We need to get our policy with Pakistanis right, and that's the only future for the country. In some sense, Pakistani civil society groups can bring the country into a genuine democratic foot with democratic security governance. That's a low probability event, though.

NNAMDIChristine Fair is a professor at the Center for Peace and Security Studies at Georgetown University School of Foreign Service. Christine, thank you so much for joining us.

FAIRThank you.

NNAMDIAnd thank you all for listening. I'm Kojo Nnamdi.