What's new

Pakistan's Baghdad Bob

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bhushan

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
1,319
Reaction score
0
Country
India
Location
India
Pakistan's Baghdad Bob

Officials in Islamabad are notorious spinmeisters, but military spokesman Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas is fast becoming a prevaricator without peer.



As American tanks rumbled in to Baghdad on April 7, 2003, Iraqi InformationMinister Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf, who became affectionately known as BaghdadBob, tried mightily to convince Western journalists to ignore the facts infront of their eyes. "I triple guarantee you, there are no American soldiers in Baghdad," he told reporters as American troops gathered a few hundred yardsaway. Later, he stated that American soldiers were "committing suicide by thehundreds on the gates of Baghdad," mere hours before coalition forces securedthe city.

Today,Baghdad Bob might have found a successor in the form of Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas,the director general of Pakistan's Inter-Services Public Relations, which handles media relations for the Pakistani armed forces. In a recent Washington Post column, David Ignatius celebrated Pakistan's new determination in confronting the Taliban, quoting Abbas saying that the ongoing offensive in South Waziristan brings an end to the Pakistani government's thinking that "somehow we'll be able to manage them, co-opt them, bring them on board."

Statementslike that are music to American policymakers' ears. But somehow, it seems like we've heard all of this from General Abbas before. In less than two years, the general has provided the media with a fairly impressive list of promises, assertions, and projections -- none of which have more than a tenuous basis in reality. Here are a few of his greatest hits. But don't worry: We're sure that, this time, he means every word he says.

Sponsorship of the Taliban

Claim: In the recent Frontline documentary aired on Oct. 13, "Obama's War," a perplexed correspondent tried to get a straight answer from Major General Abbas. Is it true, he asked, that the Pakistani government knows where Taliban leaders such as Mullah Omar and Siraj Haqqaniare located? But Abbas would not budge: "There is no truth in Mullah Omar and Siraj Haqqani remaining in Pakistan side of the border. I refute that. No one has shown any intelligence to the Pakistanis."

Taliban groups such as these, Abbas said, "operate from Afghanistan. If somebody claims that everything is happening from this side of the border, I am sorry, this is misplaced, and we refute it."

Reality: In 2008, the chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Michael Mullen traveled to Islamabad topresent the Pakistani government with evidence that elements of Pakistan's Directorate of Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) were supporting the Taliban. Mullen reportedly provided the Pakistani government with intercepted communications between the ISI and the Taliban to prove his point. "We spoke to, clearly, the ISI's relationship with various militant groups that they've had for some time," said Mullen in the same Frontline documentary. U.S. officials, from Barack Obama on down, have continued to emphasize Pakistan's role as an incubator of terrorist activities. The president stated this past March: "Multiple intelligence estimates have warned that Al Qaida is actively planning attacks on the United States homeland from its safe haven in Pakistan."


Waziristan



Claim: On May 17, 2008, Abbas accompanied journalists to Waziristan to speak of the military's recent offensive in the region. He attempted to reassure reporters about a recent relocation of Pakistani Army troops: "The Army will still have a dominating presence [in Waziristan]. ...Until we are fully sure that the tribal elders and 'jirga' (tribal council) are fully in place, we will stay here."

Reality: On May 23, Taliban commander Qari Hussain -- whom the Pakistani military took credit for killing during another offensive in Waziristan in January -- held a press conference mocking reports of his death. "I am alive, don't you see me?" he said. Baitullah Mehsud, then the most influential Taliban leader in Waziristan, also addressed a news conference at a government school building to announce that the Taliban would continue its war against NATO forces in Afghanistan. For the Pakistani military, this all amounted to something considerably less than a "dominating presence" in Waziristan. In any case, the military presence there soon waned, precipitating the recent offensive into the region.

Drone strikes

Claim: Abbas has repeatedly criticized the U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan, and emphasized that the Pakistani military had no need for American help in its recent offensive. For that reason, the drone strike in the area of Bajaur on Oct. 24 was particularly inconvenient. Abbas, however, was unfazed: "Our information suggests that explosive material being loaded ata vehicle blew up," he told journalists.

Reality: The "vehicle"detonated near a bunker where Maulana Faqir Muhammad, deputy chief of Hakimullah Mehsud's Tehrik-e-Taliban, happened to be holding a secret meeting. That's either the most fortuitous location for an explosives accident in history, or a strike from a Predator drone. The International News and the Daily Times, both Pakistani newspapers, didn't fall for Abbas's spin -- they reported the explosion as a drone strike.

Shamsi Airbase



Claim: On Feb. 17, Abbas was handed a bona fide public relations disaster. The Times of London reported that the United States was using Pakistan's Shamsi airfield, which lies about 200 miles away from Mullah Omar's stronghold of Quetta, to launch Predator drone strikes. After spending the past year issuing government condemnations of U.S. drone strikes, Abbas was faced with the inconvenient fact that the Pakistani state was quietly complicit in the launching of these attacks. But, like a good soldier, he pressed bravely on. As the Times of London reported: "Major General Athar Abbas, the chief military spokesman, confirmed that US forces were using Shamsi [airfield]. ‘The airfield is being used only for logistics,' he said, without elaborating."

Reality: Abbas's denial would have been more believable if the Google Earth images accompanying the Times's article did not clearly show Predator drones on the ground at Shamsi airbase. The U.S. government also evidently did not believe that Abbas's explanation would pass muster. Two days later, on Feb. 19, U.S. officials would admit publicly to operating drones from Shamsi, and that the Pakistani government had been providing them with the locations of potential targets in the tribal areas.

Swat Valley



Claim: After a year of fighting in the contested Swat Valley, the New York Times profiled the "terrified" residents caught between the Taliban and the Pakistani army on Jan.24. The article reported that Taliban fighters roam around the region freely,while the military hunkers down in its camps. Abbas, however, took issue withthe accusation that the military lacks the will to fight, calling it "very unfair and unjustified." He also disputed that Mingora, the largest town in Swat, had fallen to the militants. "Just because they come out at night and throw down four or five bodies in the square does not mean that militants control anything," he argued.

Reality: On Feb. 16, the Pakistani government would sign a treaty in the Swat Valley that allowed for the imposition of sharia law in the region, in exchange for a "permanent cease-fire" with the Taliban. It turns out that the Taliban's ability to "throw down four or five bodies in the square" did, in fact, say something about their ability to control the area - and at the height of their power the militants were able to assert their authority within 60 miles of Islamabad. The Pakistani government would only regain control of the Swat Valley after another offensive, begun in May 2009.

Its an OCTOBER 27, 2009 article but interesting to read.
 
writer and paster of this essay from their inner heart know where they stand

as for US, the info centric army is failing in afghanistan and that to from the hands of stone age religous fanatics. their main ally Hamid Karzai is getting against them due to their failures and mass killings


as for indians, you tried 3 times in this decade to go to war with us and each time you stopped because you knew the results. read Gen Padmabahans interview to TOI and read his book INDIA CHEAKMATES USA and you will know who is who and where

as for Pakistan, Our DG ISPR is the best man. Our army has done on ground what you all fail even in air. so my advice "LAY OF" and learn to respect if at all you want respect
 
So why doesn't foreign policy magazine says the same about the US, where Bush came up with the Iraqi WMD claim and reality was the opposite, later the claim of Bush that Iraq had AQ links, later found out to be opposite, the NO ABUSES takes place in American run prisons, but we saw the reality. US will not negotiate with Taliban and then we see them talking to them, Americans kill civilians and say we did not and later investigations reveal something else, should the US involvement in destabilizing Pakistan be mentioned, under the US nose 3rd party countries working to destabilize Pakistan and US looking the other way, ISI having given evidence to CIA chief Panetta of CIA involvement, should I go on ??



One sided biased article, not worth to be discussed.
 
So why doesn't foreign policy magazine says the same about the US, where Bush came up with the Iraqi WMD claim and reality was the opposite, later the claim of Bush that Iraq had AQ links, later found out to be opposite, the NO ABUSES takes place in American run prisons, but we saw the reality. US will not negotiate with Taliban and then we see them talking to them, Americans kill civilians and say we did not and later investigations reveal something else, should the US involvement in destabilizing Pakistan be mentioned, under the US nose 3rd party countries working to destabilize Pakistan and US looking the other way, ISI having given evidence to CIA chief Panetta of CIA involvement, should I go on ??



One sided biased article, not worth to be discussed.

no you should not because the hypocrites will never acknowledge

they know what they are thats why they are jealous
 
1. mullah omar and haqqani spend most of their time in afghanistan. there is enough land there which is not and will never be under the control of Nato forces. its highly illogical for them to hide in pakistan knowing that drone attacks are looking for them. and if they have fled the battlefield and are hiding in karachi then again you cant do much about that. just lik US gov can do nothing about maxican drug lords crossing the border and hiding in US big cities.

2. if ISI is not to have links with taliban then why is it an intelligence agency? a gud intelligence agency should have links with all groups to provide the state with more than one options for a particular problem.

3. if states policy is not to reveal about their cooperation regarding drone attacks to public then how the hell is Athar abbas responsible for that? not everything of intelligence nature is to be revealed to public for many reasons and especially when majority of your population is anti american

4. dont think i need to say anything on swat anymore



i hope this kills the purpose of this article.
 
In Waziristan Pakistan has an unprecedented military presence and we have destroyed most of the setup of TTP.
Both due to political and military reasons this is one of the toughest areas to operate in and all hats off to the high command for conceiving one of the the toughest operations in history of our Army and making it successful by dominating the land...
However for few persons to gather and give some recording in front of chosen and willing local media reps (who are usually blindfolded and taken to an isolated location) is not impossible.
Many leaders of TTP have been killed and do not give any more public audience...that is a fact.

In Swat the issue was of lack of political will of the government to tackle the militancy problem by undertaking a huge military offensive as opposed to pursuing a diplomatic solution, in this regards for ISPR to accept that militants were in control despite direct military intervention was not correct since the militants had not been taken on via a dedicated all out military operation.
It would have been akin to accepting defeat without putting up a fight, the crux of ISPR statements was that there was no lack of will to fight on part of Army.
There was an alternate strategy being used by the government so for Army to give other signals would have caused another uproar in the already increasing ranks of conspiracy theorists who would have blamed Army for war mongering instead of allowing a negotiation.
The Army did not lack the will to fight which was the main argument of the ISPR, the fact remains that it was not deployed to fight a war with TTP before the Swat offensive in 2009, that was the first time Army got a green signal to go all out and engage the insurgents instead of just deploying paramilitary formations and maintaining status quo.

Regarding the drones, it is a very complicated matter.
Here is my take on it, i think there was an agreement between Musharraf and Americans...however as the anti US sentiment increased it became more and more inconvenient for Americans to take the blame solely and they were not happy with continuation of Pakistan policy of denying the drone strikes as having any sort of mutual setup.
Americans could have blocked the Google image showing drones since it is their own satellite imagery and intelligence sensitive information could have been blocked...however the cat had to come out of the bag sometime.
The reason for hiding this would have been the extreme case of America Phobia in this region, Musharraf may have thought that once Al Qaeda is taken care of this thing will no more be an issue, sadly Al Qaeda found new allies in the region.
It was not that the ISPR was hiding something new but it was merely continuing the past strategy of not acknowledging the drone strikes as something agreed or within mutual setup, this could also have been substantiated by the fact that the new Army high command sought more intelligence sharing with US.
It is also possible that once there was some middle ground reached the information was made public via the satellite images and press articles.
Now there is more intelligence sharing and many strikes are based on our intelligence against targets fighting the Pakistan Army, still the Army wants our own drones to be used in such strikes due to the negative perception of such strikes by a foreign country.

For the people who took over from Musharraf there were lot of headaches since Musharraf and Bush entered into many agreements but the military high command or intelligence apparatus in Pakistan was not taken into complete confidence regarding every detail due to many reasons right or wrong, this is proven by the fact that there was friction when our agencies caught US personnel in sensitive areas unaware of the fact that the personal were present due to some past agreement, this led to an unpleasant situation and confusion but things have improved.

The Taliban had links with Pakistan and not just our agencies, however these were the old guard Taliban who had links with Pakistan since the Afghan Jihad which had support of most western world and Muslim world, those links do not die overnight and are not due to nefarious designs of terrorism.
Once you train and fight together you do not forget it all the next day, things are not that simple.
This old guard of Taliban is not the same as TTP which is composed of mostly young commanders who were not even teenagers during Afghan Jihad, these are quite different people and do not share the same background or links with the Pakistani agencies.
The Afghan Jihad experience is the common thing that is shared between the Afghan Taliban leaders and the Pakistani Agencies, however it does not mean that we are pulling the strings or hiding these people, they have had ample support in the past and know when and where to hide.
To say that ISI had links with Taliban is a tremendous act of oversimplification to say the least and in no way can be used to link Pakistan to terrorism or promoting violence.

The article does not take into account that despite many constraints ISPR has done a reasonable job. It has not gone overboard in its claims, many terrorist commanders who were killed were not pronounced dead immediately but time was taken to investigate.
The military operation was supposed to be a long haul with take, hold and build phases.
The manner in which Pakistan military has confronted the militants and taken them on in their strongholds in face of tremendous odds is more than proof enough of what GHQ has planned...the casualty counts and tales of valor and sacrifice of our troops reflect an epic war in which Army is not holding back at all.
If somebody thinks this is all a gimmick by Pakistan Army then there is no point in arguing with such a moron.
 
Due to journalists not being allowed for their own safety to go into the battles taking place, clearly the Military needs to have some sort of PR for the prople in Pakistan and the International community for which we are part of the WoT.

Unlike India, where Naxals and Maoists are killing people, mutilating people, attacking institutions, conducting bomb attacka, and all you get is the Indian Home Minister barking out loud of it not being a terrorist organisation and allowing terrorists to train, arm and fester in their own country.

At least, Pakistan has taken steps to deal with terrorists, unlike the Indians who harbour terrorist activities in India, and conduct state sponsored terrorism itself
 
Indians seem Pee'd off at the fact that the PA has broken the RAW sponsoring of terrorism in Pakistan and they are hindered in their efforts..........something I have said many a times on this forum, an eye for an eye........the ISI needs to be given a clear mandate with its focus on and in India......reply in kind and believe me, soon these attacks will come to an end when the Indians find their economy being targeted....they will quickly back off from milking the TTP and Al-Qaeeda for their game and PA can finally get on with finishing the problem off.
 
Ahhh so RAW was behind TTP and AL_Quieda.. i belive RAW must be behind 9/11 too..

if raw was behind for example ,LTTE worlds deadliest terrorist organization and its acknowledge by indians and westren officals then why are u surprized that its behind TTP. after all TTP fights pakistan not others. and we know Pakistan is indias competitor and indian security policies are pakistan centric:cheers:
 
It has to be kept in mind first that DG ISPR is a post that bridges the People of Pakistan and Pakistan Armed Forces. The statements of ISPR are sometimes have a shadow of the general thinking of Pakistani people. This is important so that Pakistan Armed Forces and People of Pakistan don't engulf each other.

Baitullah Mehsud, then the most influential Taliban leader in Waziristan, also addressed a news conference at a government school building to announce that the Taliban would continue its war against NATO forces in Afghanistan.For the Pakistani military, this all amounted to something considerably less than a "dominating presence" in Waziristan. In any case, the military presence there soon waned, precipitating the recent offensive into the region.

It is really a great achievement of Pakistani govt. that despite of countinous resistance in Waziristan, we did have schools in the remotest area of Waziristan. Great na!!!

Waziristan was a place where Taliban had been in bulks. Now the situation is entirely changed. When you say Waziristan, which the learned Journalist might not know, you sum up two vast area of two seperate Agencies, North Waziristan and South Waziristan. Pakistan army's operations were mainly emphasised on South Waziristan recently and the change is obvious. The so-called stronghold of Taliban has turned into a loyal district of Pakistan.

Things in South Waziristan are totally changed. I am amazed the author did not comment on the role of US and Allied Forces when Pakistan Army was operating in Waziristan and they left there posts to give a chance to terrorists to move in or out from the operating areas of Pakistan.

Abbas has repeatedly criticized the U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan, and emphasized that the Pakistani military had no need for American help in its recent offensive. For that reason, the drone strike in the area of Bajaur on Oct. 24 was particularly inconvenient. Abbas, however, was "Our information suggests that explosive material being loaded ata vehicle blew up," he told journalists.

The "vehicle"detonated near a bunker where Maulana Faqir Muhammad, deputy chief of Hakimullah Mehsud's Tehrik-e-Taliban, happened to be holding a secret meeting. That's either the most fortuitous location for an explosives accident in history, or a strike from a Predator drone. The International News and the Daily Times, both Pakistani newspapers, didn't fall for Abbas's spin -- they reported the explosion as a drone strike.

What this very well-aware journalist is continously ignoring, is the position of Maj. Gen. Athar Abbass. He is DIRECTOR GENERAL INTER SERVICES PUBLIC RELATIONS. The word PUBLIC includes his duty to atleast record the thinking of Pakistani people about Drone attacks. Most of us don't want them, but it is obvious that Pakistani Govt. allowes it, and Pakistan army is bound to coupe up with the decisions made by the Govt.

The statement about his opinion about a drone attack to be a Blast can be due to the defects every intel faces in Initial Reports.

Swat Valley

On Feb. 16, the Pakistani government would sign a treaty in the Swat Valley that allowed for the imposition of sharia law in the region, in exchange for a "permanent cease-fire" with the Taliban. It turns out that the Taliban's ability to "throw down four or five bodies in the square" did, in fact, say something about their ability to control the area - and at the height of their power the militants were able to assert their authority within 60 miles of Islamabad. The Pakistani government would only regain control of the Swat Valley after another offensive, begun in May 2009.

Two things, it has been showen that the Peace Pact was with Taliban. Totaly wrong. It was with Tehrik-e-Nifaaz-e-Shariat-e-Muhammadi. Secondly, it was to make people aware that Taliban do not want peace and not even Islamic law for even after Govt. approved Niffaz of Shariah, Taliban continued to be hostile and hence the public opinion, which has always been a very important thing and a key to success during any military expedition, ended to be in favour of Pakistani Govt.

Secondly, Its not a hitch-hike to Islamabad. Amratsar is 32 KM from Lahore so is Lahore or Amratsar in trouble? The concept of Provincial borders, plus ICT Security, if you ever heard of that, Rangers deployment, Army's posts in bulk in Maragallas etc etc make Islamabad one of the safest zones in the whole country. More secure than many Bordering Areas of Pakistan with India.

Aftermath of Swat Operation, the militants of Swat are in hell and remaining humiliated, themselves shove their beards and went to their dens. With no hope to recover this burst. For your information the tourists have started to visit Swat again. Even a group of Foreign Tourists have visited Swat, a group of Budhists.

Waziristan, Swat and Drone attacks were the main emphasis of this article. The learned journalist made the points which can be refuted very easily. The above evidence prove that what DG ISPR said was more or less true. The situation of Pakistan, which has been melodramatically presented as the worst by International media and bordering propoganda is just beating by the bush, with no physical presence.

The terrorist activities in Pakistan are a result of the War against Terrorism Pakistan is fighting inside its premises. Once we have, just like in SW and Swat, put a fullstop to terrorists in regions, they are impossible to establish themselves there again.

About Drones, it is the continous opposition of Pakistan Army, People of Pakistan and Pakistan Govt. that US is thinking to deliver this technology to Pakistan.

Its an OCTOBER 27, 2009 article but interesting to read.

There are many INTERESTING-TO-READ articles, recently about the killing of 81 Indian soldiers, but not everything is for sharing.

KIT Over
 
The validity of many of the claims made in the article regarding the veracity of statements made by the ISPR have been addressed by multiple members already. No evidence has been provided about these so called 'intercepts' that were allegedly shared with Pakistan.

If every 'Tom, Dick and Harry' journalist and analyst in the US knows about these intercepts, talks about them freely, and some even claim to have heard them, then why are they not available to the public to analyze and for any possible refutations and/or explanations from the Pakistani side to be given?

Because these intercepts, if they exist at all, are likely no where close to the 'smoking gun' the US administration wanted to portray them as in its propaganda war against Pakistan at that time. It therefore serves US propaganda interests better to merely have these claims of 'evidence provided to Pakistan of ISI complicity' floating around, because the lack of anything concrete makes it hard to establish the credibility of the claims one way or the other. The US generates enough 'smoke' through the willing US media juggernaut to propagate its propaganda and tarnish/burnish whichever entity is being targeted and manipulate domestic opinion to support its FP causes.

On 'erroneous claims', lets not forget that the US herself has claimed insurgent/AQ leaders killed, who have later surfaced alive - this is not something limited to the PA. And as for 'bad intelligence' and public statements by military and political leadership based on that bad intelligence, Baghdad Bob is put to shame by the US performance in selling lies to the world and its own people when attacking Baghdad.

The US is extremely capable in information warfare, and the US establishment is able to manipulate opinion on furthering its foreign policy objectives through both willing and unwitting cooperation from its media juggernaut - a media that is jingoistic to the core lest it be labeled as 'unpatriotic', and is therefore completely willing to push whichever foreign policy agenda the US establishment wants it to push.

Why else do the NYT and WAPO headline articles based on nothing but US military/intelligence establishment sources? Where is the objective journalism in that?

How is it that Egypt and Saudi Arabia, that paint even Iran in a favorable light when it comes to representative governments, get away with little to no criticism, and mere allegations of election fraud in Iran hog the limelight for weeks on end in the US media?

The US mainstream media is no different than the Times of India and its ilk in India - when it comes to foreign policy, so long as domestic public opinion is not split (eg. the later stages of the Iraq war when things were falling apart) they have and will continue to push whatever message the White House and the Pentagon want them to push - there is no objectivity or responsible journalism to be found here.

Do you wonder where all the criticism that Pakistan was being barraged with just a few months ago vanished to? And that criticism (propaganda at the behest of the US establishment) started drying up before the Baradar arrests.

For all the mention in the US media of anti-US messages in the Pakistani press (allegedly planted by the ISI), the US media was itself used as a similar tool to propagate an anti-Pakistan, and specifically and anti-ISI/PA message.

Coincidentally, the frequent articles in the Pakistani press about US spies, covert activities, diplomats driving around toting guns and breaking through checkpoints etc. have also largely dried up in the Pakistani press.

The moral of the story - the US, Pakistani and Indian media (and perhaps any other nation) just cannot be trusted to be objective when it comes to reporting on certain foreign policy issues where strategic interests are at stake, such as Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan - we have seen this time and time again.

Thread closed.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom