Posted on 13 February 2012 by Tea Server
Pakistan’s leading militants have called on fighters to honor an agreement not to attack the Pakistani military in the most important sanctuary for the Taliban and al-Qaida along the Afghan border.
Militants have long used the North Waziristan tribal area as a base to attack U.S.-led forces in neighboring Afghanistan. American officials have accused Pakistan of supporting some militants
Posted on 06 February 2012 by Tea Server
Kenya’s military had one of its biggest victories this past weekend when two of its helicopter gunships attacked an al Shabaab convoy in Southern Somalia, killing more than 100 militant fighters, according to Kenyan Military spokesman Emmanuel Chirchir. This comes after the January 21 announcement that Kenya’s military incursion passed the halfway point in its “battle to crush the al Qaeda-linked insurgency in southern Somalia.”
This conflict has raged on for months. Many hope that the Kenyan offensive in the South and the African Union (AU) force in Mogadishu will quell the violence and stabilize Somalia after years of death and destruction.
Al Shabaab announced a ‘tactical withdrawal’ from the Somalia capital in August after an offensive by AU and government forces.
The main players on the Kenyan side have to be the Americans and the French. In October, the US revealed that it has sold military equipment and offered logistical support and training, although this has been taking place for sometime now. The US is also supporting the AU mission in Somalia (AMISOM), providing drones, body armor and night vision capability.
This equipment has been put to good use. In Late January, an alleged al-Qaeda member from London was killed in a missile attack on his car from an American drone on the outskirts of Mogadishu.
France, like Washington, is also providing logistical support to Kenyan forces. Col Thierry Burkhard said in late 2011 that French planes would transport military equipment to Kenyan soldiers near the Somali border. However, he denied Kenyan military claims that a French warship had shelled a Somali town.
With the help of both the French and the US, the Kenyan military is definitely no Mickey Mouse fighting unit. The Kenyan Air Force is well-armed with F-5 Tiger Attack jets, MD-500 and Chinese-made Harbin Z-9 helicopters.
In early January, F5 air strikes killed at least 60 Al-Shabaab militants in southern Somalia. The combination of air strikes by the jets and attack helicopters has helped pave the way for the Kenyan army and their tanks and armored personnel carriers to advance. This includes Vickers Mk3s, T72s, Humvees and the South African Puma M26.
Al Shabaab, or the ‘Youth’ in Arabic, has been using guerilla tactics to thwart the Kenyan firepower and they have been successful. Besides utilizing the typical terrorist group arsenal of AK-47’s, RPGs and hand grenades, they have become masters of the Improvised Explosive Device or IED.
A typical example of how Al Shabaab uses the IED is as follows: “when they need to target a suicide attack to its opponents, first they arrange a single person to carry out this attack as to be the suicide man, they put on his body a number of explosive belts and then they dress the person with the uniform of a TFG military soldier, which they are capable to find. They then load the vehicle with the explosive materials mostly containing eminent flammable items, and they also pack with the vehicle mixture of gun powder, car batteries, acids, a number of mobile phones, and sometimes a missile is put inside the vehicle to cause destructive power to the entire vehicle.”
Al Shabaab does have allies. First and foremost are their Yemeni counterparts, who recently shipped two boats loaded with military logistics, light weapons, Kalashnikovs and ammunition, and hand grenades. It is also believed to have the support of Eritrea, but this is something that the Eritrean government denies.
Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me. This old saying might not ring true for Al Shabaab or does it? It is believed that al-Shabaab is losing political support in Somalia due to the famine and its preventing humanitarian aid from reaching those who desperately need it. There are also accusations of internal divisions within the al-Qaeda faction.
In retaliation, al-Shabaab is using a similar campaign of propaganda with the use of social media like twitter. They joined in December (@HSMPress) and now have over 10,000 followers. The Kenyan Defence Force joined about a month earlier, in November (see KDF spokesman Emmanuel Chirchir @MajorEChirchir who has over 21,000 followers). Al-Shabaab trys to persuade the Somalian people by saying Kenyan troops are violating the sovereignty of their country and that they are the main line of defense against the hostile foreign invaders.
The BBC’s East Africa correspondent Will Ross says it is increasingly hard to know who is telling the truth in what is a hard-fought propaganda war (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-15559584). And this will not change over the coming months.
Photo 1- Courtesy of Reuters (Al Shabaab militants parade new recruits after arriving in Mogadishu October 21, 2010, from their training camp south of the capital of Somalia). Available at: http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/235664/20111021/at-least-10-peacekeepers-killed-in-somalia-battle.htm
Photo 2- Courtesy of Daryl Chapman, Bauhinia Photography (Z9 Helicopter, taken on July 6th, 2010). Available at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/darylchapman/4768078868/
Posted on 06 February 2012 by Tea Server
http://www.facebook.com/nadeemmalik
A Gallup poll shows 38% Pakistanis do not know about the President’s immunity, 37% believe that the President enjoys NO immunity whereas 25% believe that the President enjoys immunity provided to him by the constitution.
ISLAMABAD TONIGHT WITH NADEEM MALIK
nadeemmalik.wordpress.comوزیراعظم سوئس عدالت کو خط لکھ دیں اور عدالت سے معافی مانگ لیں ورنہ چارجز لگ جایں گے۔ ایس ایم ظفر میرے خیال میں اب یہ مشکل ہے کہ وزیراعظم سوئس عدالت کو خط لکھیں۔ وزیراعظم کے لئیے اس وقت صورت حال خاصی مشکل ہے۔ یاسین آزاد عدالت اپنے فیصلوں پر عمل نہیں کروا پائی۔ اگر وزیراعظم کیس لڑے اور ہار گئے تو پھ…
Islamabad Tonight – 2nd February 2012
www.awaztoday.comوزیراعظم نے بلا ضرورت اور بے وقت اپنی قربانی دی ہے۔ وزیراعظم سوئس عدالت کو خط لکھ دیں اور عدالت سے معافی مانگ لیں ورنہ چارجز لگ جایں گے۔ ایس ایم ظفر میرے خیال میں اب یہ مشکل ہے کہ وزیراعظم سوئس عدالت کو خط لکھیں۔ وزیراعظم کے لئیے اس وقت صورت حال خاصی مشکل ہے۔ یاسین آزاد عدالت اپنے فیصلوں پر عمل نہ…
Islamabad tonight – 2nd february 2012
www.zemtv.comIslamabad Tonight with Nadeem Malik -:- Guest: S.M. Zafar, Yaseen Azad, Ahmed Raza Kasuri, Azam Swati and Nayyar Bokhari on Contempt of the Court
Islamabad Tonight – 1st February 2012
awaztoday.comسینٹ کے الیکشن کے بعد فوری طور پر ملک میں الیکشن کا اعلان کر دیا جائے گا۔ شیخ رشید الیکشن کی پہلی دھاندلی آئندہ بجٹ ہو گا جو ایسا بنایا جائے گا کہ آئندہ آنے والا اس پر پورا نہ اتر سکے۔مسلم لیگ ن ایک دفعہ پھر ٹریپ ہو گئی ہے۔ نواز اور شہباز شریف کی سوچ میں بڑا فرق ہے شہباز فرنٹ فٹ پر کھیلتے ہیں۔ مسلم…
Islamabad tonight on aaj news – Shaikh rasheed interview – 1st febuary 2012
www.zemtv.comIslamabad Tonight with Nadeem Malik -: – Guest: Sheikh Rashid Ahmed
-Afghan civilians frequently prefer Taliban governance over the Afghan government, usually as a result of government corruption
Pakistan ‘backs Afghan Taliban’
www.bbc.co.uk-NATO report alleges Taliban in Afghanistan are being directly assisted by Pakistani security services -Afghan civilians frequently prefer Taliban governance over the Afghan government, usually as a result of government corruption
Relatives allowed to see ‘missing’ brothers
www.dawn.comPESHAWAR, Jan 31: Five family members of two missing men, Abdul Basit and Syed Abdul Majid, were allowed to visit the plastic and reconstructive surgery unit of the Lady Reading Hospital and meet them for a few minutes
Islamabad tonight – 31st january 2012
www.zemtv.comPPP to support changes proposed by PML (N) in the 20th Constitutional Amendment: Qamar Zaman Kaira Amendment to regularize 28 senators, MNAs, MPAs elected after 18th amendment as a one-time special case- Law to be amended for regularization of women reserved seats- Ishaq Dar PPP Must also negotiate …
Islamabad Tonight – 31st January 2012
awaztoday.comہم فئیر اینڈ فری الیکشنز چاہتے ہیں تا کہ کوئی انگلی نہ اٹھے۔ بہتری کی خاطر آئین اور قانون میں کسی بھی ترمیم کے لئیے تیار ہیں۔ قمر زمان کائرہ بیسویں ترمیم کے لئیے چیف الیکشن کمشن کی تقرری اور عبوری حکومت کی تشکیل پر مزید مشاورت کی ضرورت ہے۔ اسحق ڈار چیف الیکشن کمشن کی تقرری کے لئیے پارلیمانی کمیٹی بن…
NADEEM MALIK Punjab Institute of Cardiology: 122 dead so far. No responsibility fixed yet. NADEEM MALIK YOUTUBE: http://www.youtube.com/NadeemMalikLive Nadeem Malik : ندیم ملک www.youtube.comISLAMABAD TONIGHT: The programme gives independent news analysis of the key events shaping future of Pakistan. A fast paced, well rounded programme covers almost every aspect, which should be a core element of a current affairs programme. Discussion with the most influential personalities in the fed… NADEEM MALIK عوام سے غلط بیانی کی جا رہی ہے ڈرون حملے حکومت کی اجازت سے ہو رہے ہیں۔ ہمارے جاسوسی کے ادارے اب بھی نہیں سمجھ رہے۔ صبح شام اسلام کا ڈھنڈورا پیٹا جاتا ہے کیا اسلامی ملک ایسا ہوتا ہے۔ قائد اعظم کے علاوہ کسی نے عوام کو فیصلے کا حق نہیں دیا۔ میمو کی تحقیقت شروع ہو گئیں لیکن مشرقی پاکستان کی علحیدگی کی آج تک تحقیقات نہیں ہوئیں۔ جو بھی آئین توڑے عوام کو اس کے خلاف سڑکوں پر آ جانا چاہئیے۔ سٹیٹ کا کام ہے… کہ لوگوں کو عزت دے اور ان کا تحفظ کرے۔محمود اچکزئی وزیراعظم کی کوئی کریڈیبلٹی نہیں ہے ان کی کسی بات کا اعتبار نہیں کیا جا سکتا۔ خواجہ آصف میرے خیال میں حکومت کے پنڈی والوں سے بھی معاملات طے ہو چکے ہیں۔ تمام ادارے زاتی مفاد کی خاطر امریکی مفاد کا تحفظ کر رہے ہیں۔ خواجہ آصف میرے خیال میں پیپلز پارٹی اور مسلم لیگ ن دونوں الیکشن پر متفق ہیں۔ محمود اچکزئیSee MoreIslamabad Tonight – 30th January 2012 www.awaztoday.com عوام سے غلط بیانی کی جا رہی ہے ڈرون حملے حکومت کی اجازت سے ہو رہے ہیں۔ ہمارے جاسوسی کے ادارے اب بھی نہیں سمجھ رہے۔ صبح شام اسلام کا ڈھنڈورا پیٹا جاتا ہے کیا اسلامی ملک ایسا ہوتا ہے۔ قائد اعظم کے علاوہ کسی نے عوام کو فیصلے کا حق نہیں دیا۔ میمو کی تحقیقت شروع ہو گئیں لیکن مشرقی پاکستان کی علحیدگی کی… NADEEM MALIK امريکا ميں پاکستان کے سابق سفير حسين حقاني ابوظہبي روانہ ہوگئے. حسين حقاني کووزيراعظم ہاؤس سے اسلام آبادپوليس کي حفاظت ميں ايئرپورٹ پہنچايا گيا. امريکا نے کہا ہے کہ پاکستان کي سپريم کورٹ کي جانب سے سابق سفير حسين حقاني پر سفري پابندياں ختم ہونے کي خوشي ہے.امريکي محکمہ خارجہ کي ترجمان وکٹوريا نولينڈ نے بريفنگ ديتے ہوئے کہا کہ امريکا ميں پاکستان کے سابق سفير حسين حقاني اب آزاد ہيں اور جہاں چاہيں جاسکتے ہيں.10,775 People Reached · 199 People Talking About This
7,646 People Reached · 79 People Talking About This
Islamabad tonight – Mehmood Khan Achakzai – 30th january 2012
www.zemtv.comعوام سے غلط بیانی کی جا رہی ہے ڈرون حملے حکومت کی اجازت سے ہو رہے ہیں۔ ہمارے جاسوسی کے ادارے اب بھی نہیں سمجھ رہے۔ صبح شام اسلام کا ڈھنڈورا پیٹا جاتا ہے کیا اسلامی ملک ایسا ہوتا ہے۔ قائد اعظم کے علاوہ کسی نے عوام کو فیصلے کا حق نہیں دیا۔ میمو کی تحقیقت شروع ہو گئیں لیکن مشرقی پاکستان کی علحیدگی کی آ…
NADEEM MALIK Islamabad Tonight with Nadeem Malik -:- Guest: Mahmood Khan Achakzai Chairman PKMAP and Khawaja Muhammad Asif PML (N)Video Islamabad Tonight with Nadeem Malik 30th January 2011 – Mehmood Khan Achakzai www.friendskorner.comIslamabad Tonight with Nadeem Malik -:- Guest: Mahmood Khan Achakzai Chairman PKMAP and Khawaja Muhammad Asif PML (N) NADEEM MALIK TWITTER: http://twitter.com/nadeemmalik Twitter twitter.comTWITTER: http://twitter.com/nadeemmalik
Filed under: CURRENT AFFAIRS
Posted on 04 February 2012 by Tea Server
…Pants on Fire
“I want to make sure the people understand actually drones have not caused a huge number of civilian casualties. For the most part, they have been very precise precision strikes against al-Qaeda and their affiliates. And we are very careful in terms of how it’s been applied.”
Barrack Obama (Obama Defends Drone Strikes, Denies Civilian Toll)
Posted on 01 February 2012 by Tea Server
As Reported by The BBC
The Taliban in Afghanistan are being directly assisted by Pakistani security services, according to a secret Nato report seen by the BBC.
The leaked report, derived from thousands of interrogations, claims the Taliban remain defiant and have wide support among the Afghan people. It alleges that Pakistan knows the locations of senior Taliban leaders.
A BBC correspondent says the report is painful reading for international forces and the Afghan government. Pakistan has strenuously denied any links with the Taliban on previous occasions.
“We have long been concerned about ties between elements of the ISI and some extremist networks,” said US Pentagon spokesman Captain John Kirby, adding that the US Defence Department had not seen the report.
The BBC’s Quentin Sommerville in Kabul says the report – on the state of the Taliban – fully exposes for the first time the relationship between the Pakistani intelligence service (ISI) and the Taliban.
The report is based on material from 27,000 interrogations with more than 4,000 captured Taliban, al-Qaeda and other foreign fighters and civilians.
It notes: “Pakistan’s manipulation of the Taliban senior leadership continues unabatedly”. It says that Pakistan is aware of the locations of senior Taliban leaders.
The report states: “As this document is derived directly from insurgents it should be considered informational and not necessarily analytical.”
Despite Nato’s strategy to secure the country with Afghan forces, the secret document details widespread collaboration between the insurgents and Afghan police and military.
Lt Col Jimmie Cummings, a spokesman for Nato’s International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) in Afghanistan, said the document was “a classified internal document that is not meant to be released to the public”.
“It is a matter of policy that documents that are classified are not discussed under any circumstances,” he said.
The report also depicts the depth of continuing support among the Afghan population for the Taliban, our correspondent says.
It paints a picture of al-Qaeda’s influence diminishing but the Taliban’s influence increasing, he adds.
In a damning conclusion, the document says that in the last year there has been unprecedented interest, even from members of the Afghan government, in joining the Taliban cause. It adds: “Afghan civilians frequently prefer Taliban governance over the Afghan government, usually as a result of government corruption.”
The report has evidence that the Taliban are purposely hastening Nato’s withdrawal by deliberately reducing their attacks in some areas and then initiating a comprehensive hearts-and-minds campaign.
It says that in areas where Isaf has withdrawn, Taliban influence has increased, often with little or no resistance from government security forces. And in many cases, with the active help of the Afghan police and army.
When foreign soldiers leave, Afghan security forces are expected to take control. However according to the report, rifles, pistols and heavy weapons have been sold by Afghan security forces in bazaars in Pakistan.
Filed under: Afghanistan, Pakistan, Pakistan Army, Pakistani Taliban, Pakistanis, Taliban Tagged: Afghanistan, BBC, Hamid Karzai, Islamabad, Kabul, NATO, Pakistan, Pakistan Army, Taliban
Posted on 01 February 2012 by Tea Server
2,500 years ago the warrior philosopher Sun Zsu said:
“The art of war is of vital importance to the State. It is a matter of life and death,
a road to safety or to ruin. Therefore, it is a subject that must be thoroughly
studied.”
I start out with a quote from the old guy because the Defense Department folks are tasked with the difficult problem of designing a military that protects against 21st Century threats in an era of fiscal hardship. The challenges they face are not just financial but also in identifying what are the threats? Some are fairly obvious like North Korea and Iran and its “possible” nuclear weapon development program. I put possible in parenthesis because there are “declared” nuclear powers and those nations we suspect may have or are in the process of trying to develop nuclear weapons.
There are many other potential problems. Just because Bin Laden is gone does not mean terrorism will go away. Terrorism was a problem before Al Qaeda and it will remain one after that group is wiped out. The issue will always be which terrorists groups only have the capability of “trash talk” and which groups or lone individuals are real threats. Cyber also presents an ongoing threat which so far has not resulted in a Cyber Pearl Harbor because of the hard work of countless people working to counter the situation but much still remains to be done.
I initially wanted to name my book A Woman’s War, War On Any Given Day, because as I worked in military intelligence I knew if the intelligence community didn’t get it right war could erupt on any day. There are any numbers of potential flash points but it’s difficult to predict if, when and/or which ones will erupt. Speaking before a conference in San Diego last week, Marine Corps Lt. Gen George Flynn, Director, J-7, Joint Staff, speaking on potential threats said, “We guess wrong 100% of the time.” This is why I consider the concept of “reversibility”, one of the points mentioned in the Obama administrations new defense policy, probably the most important part of the strategy. Basically as I understand it if we have “guessed” wrong we can reverse our defense policy and strategies as needed.
George Little and Captain John Kirby. (Department of Defense)
This brings me to the main topic of today’s blog, the defense budget. Last week I participated in a Department of Defense Bloggers Roundtable With Dr. George Little, Pentagon Press Secretary, and Captain John Kirby, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Media Operations, on the subject: “Programmatic Preview of
the FY 2013 Defense Budget”.
Dr. Little opened the proceedings by stating the budget decisions “flowed from the strategic guidance that the department issued earlier this month…And that was the mechanism that secretary and other senior department officials insisted on, and that’s how we view these budget decisions…the Congress of the United States, through the Budget Control Act last summer, required that the department find nearly $500 billion in savings over the next 10 years. So we have undertaken a multi-month effort to define a strategy based way ahead for framing the budget decisions that we’re starting to see come out. We’ve kept in mind the men and women of the U.S. military. We want to make sure that we don’t break faith with them.”
Here is the guidance they were working on as presented in the January 2012 Department of Defense publication Defense Budget Priorities and Choices:
“I. Rebalance force structure and investments toward the Asia–‐Pacific and Middle East
regions while sustaining key alliances and partnerships in other regions
II. Plan and size forces to be able to defeat a major adversary in one theater while
denying aggression elsewhere or imposing unacceptable costs
III. Protect key investments in the technologically advanced capabilities most needed for
the future, including countering anti–‐access threats
IV. No longer size active forces to conduct large and protracted stability operations while retaining the expertise of a decade of war
V. To the extent possible, structure major adjustments in a way that best allows for
their reversal or for regeneration of capabilities in the future if circumstances
change “
Last Thursday, the day before the bloggers roundtable, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and Army General Martin E. Dempsey, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff announced the major changes. Panetta said there was a need to make $487 billion in cuts over the next 10 years. The budget request for 2013 is $525 billion with an additional $88 million for overseas contingency operations. Last year’s budget request was $531 billion plus $115 billion for overseas contingency operations.
Some of the major changes are a reduction in the size of the Army from 570,000 in 2010 to 490,000 by 2017. The Marines will go from 202,000 in 2010 to 182,000 by 2017. The Air Force will loose some of its transport aircraft, while the Navy gets to keep all 11 of its aircraft carriers and all of its amphibious ships but will loose some of its older cruisers.
Captain Kirby provided some more information on what the proposed cuts mean to the Navy:
“…there are some platforms in the fleet that are going to be curtailed in the near term, in
terms of the buys. And some of them, the purchases are going to be pushed a little bit beyond the future years’ defense plan — in other words, beyond the next five years.
But I think it’s also important to remember that we’re still at the end of the FYDP going to have a fleet that is roughly the same size as it is as you and I speak today — over 280 ships — so certainly, still the biggest, most capable navy in the world. And … while we may not have the same number of decks in some categories of some classes of ships that we do right now, we’re very comfortable that the — that what we will have will be commensurate with our Fleet Marine Force requirements. I mean, as the Marine Corps gets smaller, to the tune of about 20,000 Marines, there’s — we want to — they want to get back to expeditionary amphibious warfare, as does the Navy. But as the Marine Corps
gets smaller, so, too, will, probably, get smaller the requirement for sealift for them and for support. So we understand there’s a risk there, but we’re very comfortable that we’re able to mitigate that risk.”
I asked was there any provision in the budget to finance Black Swan (unpredicted bad events) in the budget. Dr. Little responded:
“…that’s something that we grapple with all the time in the national security community. I would not be credible if I said to all of you today that we could perfectly crystal ball the future. That is simply impossible. That being said, we think we have an understanding of the near-term strategic horizon and where the threats are likely to come from. And we’re adapting to be able to meet those threats. Now we have factored in the possibility of surprise. As we’ve gone through this strategic review and the budget decisions, we’re preserving capabilities that enable agility — rapidly deployable forces, the most advanced technology to be able to account for and put capabilities against any challenges that come our way — any unanticipated challenges that come our way in the future. So I don’t know that we have a specific fund set up for that. That’s really something kind of that we believe we need to account for across the defense budget, because we know that we can’t always perfectly predict what’s going to occur. So your point is one that is well-taken, and I — and I appreciate it. And the bottom-line answer is: absolutely. We need to preserve the mix of skill sets and capabilities and of course people. People are the heart of our enterprise here. Without our people, the rest of it falls away. And we need to make sure that we’re ready for whatever comes down the pike.”
One of the bloggers brought up what he called the “monkey in the room”; the issue of health care for retirees and did the proposed health care (Tricare is the military health provider) cuts break faith with the retiree community. In the spirit of disclosure I have to remind the reader I am a military retiree. Here’s the response:
“Captain Kirby: these TRICARE fees, as you know, have not gone up since they’ve — since they were first implemented for our retirees. And the only retirees affected by this are those that are under 65. And therefore most — and most retirees under 65 are working and have other means of income and oftentimes have health care plans in conjunction with that civilian employment of theirs that can help offset their health care plans and needs. We understand that any change to compensation and health care fees is an emotional thing. And we understand that there’s — there is an impact. But we really believe that this was the right thing to do for — to help us get control of spiraling health care costs and to keep — to keep pace with the kind of — with the kind of commitments we — that we have to our people, our retirees, and realizing that they have other — these retirees under 65 have other options as well. Now, I say another thing that — you know, you talked about breaking faith. We would be breaking faith with our retirees and our active-duty if we didn’t make some of these difficult decisions because health care costs and the cost of personnel, which run roughly 60 (percent) to 70 percent of the department’s budget year to year, can very well eat you alive if you don’t try to take care of it. If we don’t try to do something to stem that, we’re going to — it would
force us to cut back on other things that are absolutely vital to the force, like training and readiness.”
I challenged the assumption that all military retirees under 65 were working and had other health care programs by telling Dr. Little and Captain Kirby I was under 65, self employed and had no other health insurance. I also told them I had undergone 3 surgeries since September. I suggested they do a survey with retirees before implementing any new health care policy. General Dempsey and Secretary of Defense Panetta say no new health care policy will affect those that are medically retired from the current conflicts. I believe if they go back on promises they’ve made to military retirees of my generation, they’re setting a precedent that might encourage future administrations to go back on promises to this current generation. Think I’ll end here. As always my views are my own.
Posted on 31 January 2012 by Tea Server
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan on Tuesday acknowledged “tactical advantages” to US drone strikes on the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, but appeared to shrug off the unexpected confirmation by Washington of attacks on its soil. The remarks from Pakistan’s foreign ministry came as President Barack Obama confirmed for the first time that drone aircraft had targeted militants in Pakistan’s [...]
Posted on 31 January 2012 by Tea Server
By Zaheerul Hassan U.S. President Barack Obama stated in Capitol at the annual address to Congress that about 23 thousand U.S. troops would be withdrawn from Afghanistan by the end of the summer of 2012, U.S. He said that ten thousand of our soldiers have already returned home. Another 23 000 troops will leave Afghanistan [...]
Related posts:
Posted on 30 January 2012 by Tea Server
By Saeed Shah for McClatchy Newspapers
A senior American official has for the first time admitted that a Pakistani doctor played a key role in tracking Osama bin Laden to his hideout in northern Pakistan, and called for his release.
The comments by U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta were the first public confirmation of a part of the bin Laden operation reported by McClatchy Newspapers in July, about how the CIA used Shakil Afridi to try to establish whether the al-Qaida leader was really living in a large house in Abbottabad, northern Pakistan.
This morning in Islamabad, Pakistan’s Inquiry Commission on the Abbottabad Operation issued an order to charge Afridi with treason, local media reported. The timing makes it appear that Pakistan is rebuking Panetta for his public acknowledgement of Afridi’s role. Afridi has been in Pakistani custody since the country’s own spy agency, Inter Services Intelligence (ISI), learned of the secret task performed by the doctor, who set up a fake vaccination program in Abbottabad to get DNA samples from those staying at the compound.
The CIA was never certain that bin Laden was present in the house. Afridi worked for the American intelligence agency in the weeks leading up to the Navy SEALs raid on May 2, setting up an elaborate scheme that was supposedly going house to house to vaccinate residents in Abbottabad.
Panetta told CBS’ “60 Minutes” “I am very concerned about what the Pakistanis did with this individual (Afridi). This was an individual who, in fact, helped provide intelligence that was very helpful with regard to this operation.” Panetta also voiced his belief that elements within Pakistan must have known that bin Laden, or at least someone significant, was present inside the compound. The interview was posted on the “60 Minutes” website. However, it was not included in the segment telecast on Sunday night. The McClatchy investigation discovered that Afridi was arrested by the ISI in late May and was tortured. It is believed that he remains in the custody of the intelligence agency, which is part of the military.
The whereabouts of Afridi’s family, including his American wife of Pakistani origin, is still unknown. The fate of the doctor has become another source of tension between Islamabad and Washington, with American officials pressing Pakistan to free him so he and his family can be resettled in the United States.
The military, which will decide what happens to Afridi, is furious that the CIA recruited Pakistani citizens for clandestine operations inside the country. Privately, officials point out that it is a crime to work for a foreign intelligence agency.
The doctor has turned into a bargaining chip in the failing U.S-Pakistan alliance. It is thought that Pakistan will let him go after public attention on the case wanes and it gets something in return from the U.S. “He was not in any way treasonous towards Pakistan. He was not in any way doing anything that would have undermined Pakistan,” Panetta told “60 Minutes.”
“Pakistan and the U.S. have a common cause here against terrorism,” he said. “And for them to take this kind of action against somebody who was helping to go after terrorism, I just think it is a real mistake on their part.”
Panetta, who was in charge of the CIA at the time of the bin Laden raid, also said that while there was no evidence of Pakistani complicity in keeping the al-Qaida chief, suspicions must have been raised about his hideout. “I personally have always felt that somebody must have had some sense of what was happening at this compound. Don’t forget, this compound had 18-foot walls. … It was the largest compound in the area.
“So you would have thought that somebody would have asked the question, ‘What the hell’s going on there?’” Panetta said.
But asked whether he knew for sure that Pakistan was aware of bin Laden’s presence, he said: “I don’t have any hard evidence, so I can’t say it for a fact.”
Filed under: Afghanistan, Pakistan, Pakistan Army, Pakistani Taliban, Pakistanis, Taliban, terrorism, United States Tagged: Abbottabad, CIA, Leon Panetta, Osama Bin Laden, Pakistan, Pakistanis, Shakil Afriidi, Treason, U.S. Navy SEALs, United States
Posted on 29 January 2012 by Tea Server
Until the Arab spring movement and its legion of revolutionaries came to clash with President Ali Abdullah Saleh’s regime, demanding an end to decades of autocracy and repression, the Americans considered Yemen’s autocrat a “bulwark” against terrorism, a strategic ally in the region in the fight against al-Qaeda, the well-known Islamic organization.
When it became clear that Yemenis were determined to depose the aging dictator, no matter the amount of blood his armed forces were willing to shed, the White House started to shift its rhetoric, calling for reforms and a transition to more “democratic institutions.”
The “beautiful friendship” which united the 2 countries started to melt away at the pyre of people’s anger, threatening to damage America’s foothold in the region.
Although many democracy militants have accused the United States of America of siding with dictators for it served their middle-eastern policies, accusing them of protecting and in the case of President Saleh harboring war criminals; one could wonder whether America is not playing a much sinister game of plots and betrayals.
One does not need to go back to far up in the history book to remember another well-known autocrat whose friendship was discarded when he failed to fulfill his purpose. Mohamed Reza Shah of Iran was abandoned by his “American friends” and almost sold back to the Ayatollahs when he failed to live up to the White House foreign policies’ expectations.
Could the Obama’s administration turn against Saleh and hand him over to those who are clamoring for his arrest? Could Yemen’s infamous statesman become the new Shah of Iran in his desperate search for political asylum?
One cannot draw away from the remarkable symmetry in between the two deposed leaders. One ran away for his allegiance to the West angered his people so that he feared they would execute him, another was forced to relinquish the power America’s helped him to master for 3 decades. Both turned to the United States and were denied entry, both insisted, both were eventually allowed.
One was betrayed, one is awaiting his fate.
Mohamed Reza Shah of Iran
The very countries which are claiming to be promoting Democracy and Freedom across the Globe, saying that they will always side with those who seek to emulate western standards, are the very ones who crushed the little hope Iran had at becoming a successful democratic state.
Because Iran’s emancipation stood in the way of their economic interests, the United States and Britain decided to assert the Shah’s absolute power over his people.
When Mohamed Mosadeqq, the founder and leader of the National Front of Iran was elected Prime Minister by the Parliament, he immediately announced the nationalization of Iran Oil industry, shutting out the immensely lucrative Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, which at the time was one of Britain main economic pillars.
The British then convinced the Americans of the need to overthrow Mosadeqq and re-establish the Shah of Iran as the only authority in the country, arguing that the move would serve both nations interest in the region.
Iran strategic geo-political position and its vast Oil reserves represented too much of an asset for western hegemony to let something such as democracy get in the way.
After a “coup d’état” known as the “operation Ajax” failed, the Shah was pressured into issuing a decree stating Mosadeqq’s demotion. Subsequently the Shah fled to Iraq, then Italy for he feared for his life. He later came back under the protection of his allies.
2 decades later, the Shah was ousted by his people as his attempts to westernize and secularize Iran had anger the people and the political class to such an extent that they sought his execution.
In exile and ill with cancer the monarch turned to the United States of America for safety only to be denied asylum. After he insisted for he said he needed urgent medical treatment, the Pentagon agreed to allow him in for a limited period of time. It turned out that the visit of the Royal coincided with an attack against the American Embassy in Tehran and the kidnapping of some 400 American nationals.
Caught in the middle of much controversy, shun away by his former friends, a terminally ill Shah sought refuge in Latin America to finally come to die in Egypt where he is buried.
Ali Abdullah Saleh
In the wake of the attack on American soil by al-Qaeda in 2001, President Saleh realized that if he had any chance of surviving the military wave which was threatening to come his way he had to quickly seal an alliance with the Western giant.
The Yemeni-American fight against terrorism was born.
And if Saleh manipulated his new “friends” by playing up their fear in exchange for financial support the alliance cost him dearly on the political front.
As Drones attacks became more frequent and civilian casualties mounted, Yemenis started to speak of treason, accusing the autocrat of allowing foreign forces to enter Yemen air space in exchange for cash.
The seeds of revolt were planted.
And although it took Yemen nearly 2 decades to finally mobilize the needed momentum to rise up against the state apparatus, Saleh’s opponents proved impossible to stop.
Having witnessed first-hand the power of the people in Egypt, the White House decided to operate differently in Yemen, preferring to prepare the autocrat’s exit according to a specific set of terms rather than let the mob overtake the presidential palace and potentially ruin any hope of further cooperation on the al-Qaeda front.
But if Saleh successfully secured his political and financial safety as well as that of his extended family, his troubles might not be over yet.
Just as Yemen is preparing to welcome a new president, Saleh who was victim of a bomb attack in 2011 at the very heart of his presidential compound has since been suffering from ill-health, requiring extensive medical attention.
As the Shah did before him, Saleh asked to be allowed to travel to the United States to undergo some much needed medical treatment, only to be refused. Following weeks of intense negotiations and much political controversy, the White House finally agreed to allow Saleh in, providing that his visit be brief and strictly confined to the hospital.
And as the Shah before him, his countrymen are already gathering, demanding that he’d be deported to the International Criminal Court of Justice for crimes against humanity and his assets frozen for having pillage Yemen’s riches.
Only weeks after Yemen’s parliament granted him immunity, Saleh runs the risk, like the Shah did, of being sold out to his opponents for he no longer serves his purpose and has become somewhat of a liability. And since United Nations, Secretary General Ban Ki Moon declared that no immunity would stand in a court of law when it came to war crimes and gross violations to human rights, the White House could in all good conscience leave the autocrat to suffer the fate he deserves.
Posted on 28 January 2012 by Tea Server
By Usmann Rana
One of the rallying points in favor of the rise of Pakistani politician Imran Khan, apart from the utter disillusionment of the masses and corruption of both the major and leading parties, has been his charismatic personality. But Khan’s recent interview to NDTV’s Barkha Dutt, seemed to have lost that element and for once laid bare the stark contradictions between his own statements showing his inanity.
For example, Khan believes, to quote him, ‘the age of martial law is over… Whatever happens I don’t see military takeover.’ Yes, Mr Khan it is. But the ‘military Raj’ has not ended, it has found new ways to penetrate back into the Pakistani society. To believe that military makes its presence felt only through martial laws and coups is naïve. Furthermore according to Khan the parliament may be sovereign but the ‘constitution is supreme’. No doubt that constitution must be upheld at all times and given utmost respect. But if the constitution is supreme and not the parliament, what about the fact that the parliament can amend the constitution? Would that not be against the supremacy of constitution? If not, then would that not make parliament supreme and not constitution?
Khan has a problem with stereotyping but would not hesitate to label Pakistani liberals across the board as drone loving ‘fascists’, or ‘scum of Pakistan’ against the interests of Pakistan. One is but bound to wonder the expression Shirin Mazari and Yasir Lateef Hamdani must be wearing while the great Kaptaan uttered the words. Ironically he uses the typical image of a liberal woman in Pakistan, wearing jeans, to show how his jalsas had garnered the presence of Pakistani people across the board from all sections of society.
The inspirational philanthropist and cricket legend deems the corruption of PPP and PLMN so despicable, and perhaps rightly so, that he would not join hands with them. Not until they declare their assets. According to him once they honestly do so, they would lose out in the game even before he accepts or rejects partnership with them since they are corrupt and an impartial Election Commission of Pakistan would preclude them from running.
However Khan seems to have made corruption the only criteria, or so it seems. That may not be wrong. But one is to ask some questions on that account. He may have problem shaking hands with PPP and PMLN but is alright having representative from his party, Pakistan Tehreek-I-Insaaf, attend Defaye Pakistan Rally holding hands with the religious zealots such as notorious Hafiz Sayeed, whose inflammatory speeches the talk show host Barkha Dutt raised issue about. Khan failed to answer adequately why he would send PTI representatives to Saeed, save the explanation that one needs to reconcile the polarized sections of society than to marginalize themg. But not marginalizing the voices of the likes of Hafeez Saeed would in turn mean silencing the voice of progressive Pakistanis, and sanity. Is that really the price Mr Khan is ready to pay in hope that Hafeez Saeed and company might have a change of heart given their status quo depending on blind Islamic nationalism? How mature of Khan to believe that people like Saeed once brought to table may leave aside their fundamentalist demand for further rigid application of Shari’ah laws. It is true that the strategy would most probably work for the low levels of such fundamentalist movements, where the support and muscles are derived from the poverty stricken sections of society but let us not forget the strategy would most probably fail for the higher cadre of these movements where more than poverty it is power status quo and rigidly jihadi mindset at work. How can you reconcile them, without compromising on fundamental principles of democratic and open societies in 21st century, is my question.
One may deem it easier to imagine that if given a chance to reconcile and leave their old ways, PPP and PMLN, including notorious Zardari may turn all saints and leave corruption. On what grounds is it exactly that a misogynistic, anti-religious minority party with no sense of what the demands of a 21st century open and democratic Muslim society are, is to be given leverage over corrupt albeit progressive and secular parties. The point is not to defend any party in particular but to raise a serious question regarding the future prospective partnerships between PTI and others. While Khan is not ready to work in alliance with liberal ‘fascists’ (read: drone loving liberals), he is fine having talks and attending rallies with Islamist fascists.
For many perhaps such questions may sound moronic. Are not PPP or PMLN guilty of such crimes, leave alone almost all the so called secular parties in Pakistan? Correct. But not in the way Khan and company does it. If it was a political alliance only, we could have justified it in the name of real politik. But the darling takes it a step further and repletes his speeches, interviews and even on stage actions with ‘I Used To Be A Playboy But Now Am A Humble Sinner’ statements, while openly promising us a religious freedoms and rights in an ‘Islamic welfare state’. We know how well that promise works, in an Islamized society. Also, not only freedoms and rights Mr Khan but religious equality should be the goal of any man seeking to change the ‘status quo’ to quote you favorite word.
But how would Khan be able to change status quo when he is not ready to take on the Military/Mullah axis in Pakistan? Do the problems of Pakistan begin and end with PPP and PMLN? Surely corruption by political parties is a serious crime but one ought to ask are these parties and their corruption the disease themselves or mere symptoms of a much more serious issue lying underneath? If Khan wish to change status quo in Pakistan he would have to be a bit more courageous and call spade a spade. It comes with a price of course. But wait! Was he not the one promising us unprecedented change and the one Pakistani society deems to be an honest and upright man of principles? After all according to Khan “Religion liberates you from fear; fear of being killed.”
During the interview Khan somewhat admitted he thinks it dangerous to discuss the whole blasphemy law controversy. His solution to the problem? Reconcile the polarized society by eradicating poverty (and of course drone attacks). But is it that simple? To deal with the controversy of the misuse of blasphemy laws we would always need an unpopular iron fist move. Is Khan ready to speak up for real change? Nobody wants to end up dead but nobody should be allowed to give such reductionist explanations, making him seem like a simpleton and misleading people.
Khan speaks of revolution but why is it that there is little attention paid by him to the issue of Balochistan and how military is using its might? Why is it that he is silent on the persecution of religious minorities, especially Ahmadiyyah and Hindu community? Similarly if Khan believes, as he stated elsewhere, that ‘any law that discriminates between human beings is unjust’ and if one is to believe ,as he puts it, ‘Tehreek-I-Insaaf stands for justice’ why is it that Khan has not talked about the unjust religious laws against religious minorities in Pakistan, in the face of their ever more increasing persecution day in and day out, save the same old mantra by almost all of the political class in Pakistan stating under their rule religious minorities would enjoy liberties and freedoms? But by playing his Islamic cards he is doing exactly the opposite. His explanation that Allah is Rabb-Ul-Aalaameen (Lord of the Worlds) and not Rabba-Ul-Muslimeen (Lord Of Muslims) sounds just in an idealized Islamic state. But the fact is Khan is more than sixty now and would soon be with his Rabb-Ul-Aalaameen. What about then? Would the next leadership of PTI show the same reformed mindset while pandering to the Islamic voters on the party lines set down by Khan? That is the reason a clear cut party line for PTI must be set out now, a party line which is all-inclusive, a secular one. If Imran Khan has reached such an enlightened understanding of Islam ( “In my opinion someone who is religious, who is spiritual is going to be compassionate, leftist,” he says while his party’s Ijaz Chaudhry along with religious parties declare al Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden the ‘martyr of Islam’ at the Istehkaam-e-Pakistan Caravan on The Mall in Lahore), it does not mean every PTI voter would think like him nor would be watching every interview of his explaining his understanding of Islam. For voters, the Islamic symbols that adorn Khan’s speeches may well represent a common understanding of ‘Muslim identity’, and thus add to the present status quo’s power Khan would like to deconstruct, without an intellectual exercise to comprehend the real meaning behind Khan’s usage of them. That is the reason playing with religious politics, even with a reformed mindset, is a dangerous deed. That should answer Khan’s question to Dutt, “Am I not respecting the sentiments of my own people?” when asked about his praying on stage in front of 100,000 people.
Khan goes on to tell Dutt how “if I was not spiritual I would not have been in politics” and “if I did not have faith in God I would not have been in politics”. Good Mr Khan. Now stop shoving your spirituality down our throats. Pakistan has religious minorities, and nonreligious minorities, apart from Liberal and Secular Muslims. Do you not count them in when you tell Ms Dutt that PTI “is a party that hopes to get all the country on the platform”?
In 2002 when he was elected into the parliament as the sole spokesman from PTI, Imran Khan aligned with Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA), and criticized the idea of madrassah reforms as well as the mixed sex races being held. Can we be sure now that he has support even from the moderates Khan will shake off the earlier influence of MMA? To convince his critics just as he has conceded his wrong by once supporting Musharraf, he ought to concede publicly being wrong on this note as well. Above all he ought to admit how wrong he was in his reservations on the Women’s Protection Bill in 2006. If he did have the problem with bill and not the freedoms and rights of women it was seeking, Khan could have proposed amendment(s). But he did not. Unless he does so his saying to Ms Dutt that “youth and women are always in the forefront of the change” is futile and contradictory to his actions for he would have failed to protect the very harbingers of change he is counting his support and hopes from a change on.
What then is the alternative seems to be the favorite question of PTI supporters. You, one should tell them. Supporting Imran Khan does not and should not mean pinning down all on him. Your vote does not mean you have lived off your responsibilities as a citizen. It is time that PTI youth should start asking Khan critical question and form a pressure group within party to pressurize him into not only fulfilling his commitment but to move beyond rhetoric and contradictory statements. Today Imran Khan may be Pakistan’s symbol of hope, but the real force is the support behind the symbol. Liberals (if they have any shame and self-respect they should have left the party by now) and Moderates within the party must pressurize PTI to bring itself in line with common sense. Or else, if what we are seeing is the coming of a revolution, a tsunami, we better cross our fingers and hope it dies out soon.
Posted on 26 January 2012 by Tea Server
INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION OF JURISTS
Commission internationale de juristes – Comisión Internacional de Juristas
” Protecting and promoting human rights through the Rule of Law”
PRESS RELEASE For immediate release – 25 January 2012
Former Pakistan Ambassador to the US faces threats to his life – ICJ
Geneva, Switzerland – The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) today expressed its
grave concern for the infringement of rights of Hussain Haqqani, former Pakistan
Ambassador to the United States of America.
Hussain Haqqani has been embroiled in a political and judicial conflict stemming from a
leaked political memorandum that he was alleged to have authored, only a few days after
al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden was killed by US military forces.
“Hussain Haqqani faced a vicious media trial following which the Supreme Court of Pakistan on a petition filed debarred him from travelling abroad, despite the fact that he has not been charged with any crime,” said Sheila Varadan, International Legal Advisor at the ICJ Asia-Pacific Regional Office. “Hussain Haqqani continues to receive threats and has been painted as disloyal to the country. There is, though, no proof of any betrayal of his
duties as an Ambassador of Pakistan to the United States.”
His counsel, Asma Jahangir, confirmed that Hussain Haqqani is under threat and has taken refuge in the compound of the Prime Minister’s residence.
The leaked memo, which on 10 May 2011 was delivered to the U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen, was said to contain promises of greater cooperation with the Americans in counter-terrorism operations from President Zardari’s People’s Party of Pakistan (PPP) Government in exchange for support from the United States to subvert a potential military coup d’état.
News of the memo was leaked to the media by an American-Pakistani businessman, Ijaz Mansoor, in early October 2011.
Hussain Haqqani was recalled to Islamabad and resigned his post as Pakistan Ambassador to the United States in November 2011. The PPP Government denied allegations of involvement in the memo scandal and a Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry was set up on 21 December 2011 to investigate the matter. A few days later, the Supreme Court of Pakistan established its own Commission of Inquiry.
There are legitimate concerns that in convening this Commission, the Supreme Court may have overstepped its constitutional authority and that this action could undermine the ongoing Parliamentary inquiry.
“We are calling on the Pakistani Authorities to respect Hussain Haqqani’s right to be presumed innocent and to remove the restriction on his right to leave the country and any other restrictions on his right to freedom of movement,” added Sheila Varadan. “They
must also ensure his personal safety at all times and respect his right to a fair and impartial hearing throughout the Inquiry process.”
For further information, please contact:
Sheila Varadan, International Legal Advisor, ICJ (Bangkok), tel + 66 2 619 83 04
Posted on 25 January 2012 by Tea Server
In Obama’s third State of the Union, foreign policy and defense achievements were only used as opening and closing components to his one hour long speech. This was not a surprise considering the current domestic and economic situation of the US as well as the successes of President Obama in foreign affairs.
Obama opened his speech by listing his accomplishments in foreign policy: return of all combat troops from Iraq; the end of the threat from Osama Ben Laden and the perpetual attacks against his operatives around the world; and the progressive removal of troops from Afghanistan. The use of the foreign policy and military successes were used as a transition towards the core of his speech: how to transform America and shape a strong economy.
Obama started the core of speech with a reference to the end of WW2 when the US “built the strongest economy the world has ever known.” He then declared that the “defining issue of our time is to keep this promise [American dream] alive.” Very quickly President Obama launched his attack against Wall Street and the unregulated economy. With no surprise this State of the Union was directly oriented towards the domestic economic problems such as health care, education, tax reform, manufacturing, immigration, consumer protection, financial regulation, and energy independence among others.
Very interestingly, President Obama spent a considerable amount of time on the theme of the reform of the government and the American institutions. As a politician and individual, Obama strongly believes in role of institutions. Despite this philosophical conviction, he rightly declared that “Washington is broken.” His institutional and government reforms did not generate a large support among elected officials present in the House. President Obama talked about the corrosive influence between money and politics. He even called for bills ending the legal inside trading benefiting members of Congress, limit and monitor economic conflict of interests, as well as controlling the lobbying of Congress. He also discussed the need for a reform of the executive branch.
The last segment of his speech went back to foreign policy, as a virtuous circle, by underlining the killing of Osama and the perpetual attacks against Al Qaeda operatives around the world. Then, Obama spoke of the return of troops from Afghanistan and the progressive transition to the Afghan government. His mention of the Arab Spring was used in order to talk about the end of old authoritarian regimes such as the one in Libya, and soon to be in Syria. His claim was that even with an uncertain transformation and political direction in the region, the US will advocate for the same values shared at home: human rights and democracy. President Obama also reinforced his opposition to the Iranian nuclear program. His main strategy remains embedded in the power of diplomacy, which has generated international consensus leading to increasing isolation of the Iranian regime. America is determined to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons and Obama “will take no options off the table.” However, a peaceful solution will be preferred.
For Europe, the turning point was obviously when Obama defined the US as being a ‘pacific power.’ Europe was nonexistent and never mentioned, not even the Euro crisis. President Obama did not talk about the share mission and success in Libya with the use of NATO. Two scenarios can be made from the non-mention of Europe: either, it is time for Europe to pick up the burden; or Europe was yesterday’s concerns. Let’s face it, this was not a surprise.
In the concluding segment of the speech, Obama shouted that ‘America is back,’ leading to a lasting applause. He argued that the people that speak about the decline of America “do not know what they are talking about.” Such statement put me in a strange position as I am teaching this semester a course on the decline of Great Powers, and the US is one of them. Hopefully, my students were not watching the State of the Union otherwise I may end up with a revolution in the classroom. Obama went on by declaring that US soft power and influence is still powerful across the globe and the US remains the leading world power. The closing statement of his State of the Union was based on a message and call for unity. In order to foster unity, promote success and fulfill American promises two elements were advanced: the protestant ethic and the military.
This State of the Union was a solid speech incorporating clear and feasible components for the coming years as well as points for his program of reelection. For Europe, this 2012 State of the Union is one more indication that the US is looking West; Obama has always looked towards Asia for personal and strategic reasons, rightfully so. Europe is and will remain America’s strongest ally. However, it is time for Europe to finally accept its role and responsibilities without having the US looking over its shoulder.
Posted on 23 January 2012 by Tea Server
As Reported by Reuters
The death of a senior Al-Qaeda leader in a US drone strike in Pakistan’s tribal badlands, the first strike in almost two months, signaled that the US-Pakistan intelligence partnership is still in operation despite political tensions. The Jan 10 strike-and its follow-up two days later- were joint operations, a Pakistani security source based in the tribal areas told Reuters. They made use of Pakistani “spotters” on the ground and demonstrated a level of coordination that both sides have sought to downplay since tensions erupted in January 2011 with the killing of two Pakistanis by a CIA contractor in Lahore.
“Our working relationship is a bit different from our political relationship,” the source told Reuters, requesting anonymity. “It’s more productive.” US and Pakistani sources told Reuters that the target of the Jan 10 attack was Aslam Awan, a Pakistani national from Abbottabad, the town where Osama bin Laden was killed last May by a US commando team.
They said he was targeted in a strike by a US-operated drone directed at what news reports said was a compound near the town of Miranshah in the border province of North Waziristan. That strike broke an undeclared eight-week hiatus in attacks by the armed, unmanned drones that patrol the tribal areas and are a key weapon in US President Barack Obama’s counter-terrorism strategy.
The sources described Awan, also known by the nom-de-guerre Abdullah Khorasani, as a significant figure in the remaining core leadership of al Qaeda, which US officials say has been sharply reduced by the drone campaign. Most of the drone attacks are conducted as part of a clandestine CIA operation.
The Pakistani source, who helped target Awan, could not confirm that he was killed, but the US official said he was. European officials said Awan had spent time in London and had ties to British extremists before returning to Pakistan. The source, who says he runs a network of spotters primarily in North and South Waziristan, described for the first time how US-Pakistani cooperation on strikes works, with his Pakistani agents keeping close tabs on suspected militants and building a pattern of their movements and associations. “We run a network of human intelligence sources,” he said. “Separately, we monitor their cell and satellite phones. “Thirdly, we run joint monitoring operations with our US and UK friends,” he added, noting that cooperation with British intelligence was also extensive. Pakistani and US intelligence officers, using their own sources, hash out a joint “priority of targets lists” in regular face-to-face meetings, he said. “Al-Qaeda is our top priority,” he said. He declined to say where the meetings take place. Once a target is identified and “marked,” his network coordinates with drone operators on the US side. He said the United States bases drones outside Kabul, likely at Bagram airfield about 25 miles (40 km) north of the capital. From spotting to firing a missile “hardly takes about two to three hours”, he said.
It was impossible to verify the source’s claims and American experts, who decline to discuss the drone program, say the Pakistanis’ cooperation has been less helpful in the past. US officials have complained that when information on drone strikes was shared with the Pakistanis beforehand, the targets were often tipped off, allowing them to escape. Drone strikes have been a sore point with the public and Pakistani politicians, who describe them as violations of sovereignty that produce unacceptable civilian casualties. The last strike before January had been on Nov 16, 10 days before 24 Pakistani soldiers were killed in what NATO says was an inadvertent cross-border attack on a Pakistani border post. That incident sent US-Pakistan relations into the deepest crisis since Islamabad joined the US-led war on militancy following the Sept 11, 2001 attacks. On Thursday, Pakistani foreign minister Hina Rabbani Khar said ties were “on hold” while Pakistan completes a review of the alliance.
Filed under: Afghanistan, Nuclear, Pakistan, Pakistan Army, Pakistani Taliban, Pakistanis, United States, US Army, US-Pakistan Relations Tagged: Afghanistan, al-Qaida, Aslam Awan, Drone Attacks, Hina Rabbani Khar, NATO, Pakistan, Pakistani Spotters, Taliban, US-Pakistan Intelligence Partnership