Admiral: Pakistan OKs Bigger U.S. Role

[fatman17]

Admiral: Pakistan OKs Bigger U.S. Role
By ROBERT BURNS

ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. (AP) — Pakistan is taking a more welcoming view of U.S. suggestions for using American troops to train and advise its own forces in the fight against anti-government extremists, the commander of U.S. forces in that region said Wednesday.

Navy Adm. William J. Fallon, commander of U.S. Central Command, said he believes increased violence inside Pakistan in recent months has led Pakistani leaders to conclude that they must focus more intensively on extremist al-Qaida hideouts near the border with Afghanistan.

He called this an important change from Pakistan's traditional focus on India as the main threat to its security, and it meshes with Defense Secretary Robert Gates' recent comment that al-Qaida terrorists hiding in the border area are increasingly aiming their campaign of violence at targets inside Pakistan.

"They see they've got real problems internally," Fallon said in a 20-minute interview with three reporters accompanying Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, at a private conference here of military chiefs from Middle Eastern countries, hosted by Fallon.

"My sense is there is an increased willingness to address these problems, and we're going to try to help them," he said, adding that U.S. assistance would be "more robust," but offering few details. "There is more willingness to do that now" on Pakistan's part, he said.

The Bush administration's anxiety about Pakistan's stability has grown in recent months, not only because of its potential implications for U.S. stability efforts in neighboring Afghanistan but also because of worry about the security of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal.

Fallon said expanded U.S. military assistance to Pakistan would include, but is not limited to, a U.S. training program for tribal groups in the federally administered tribal areas bordering Afghanistan.

The admiral is to visit Pakistan and Afghanistan next week.

He said he has been impressed with Pakistan's new military chief, Gen. Ashfaq Kayani, who took over in December from President Pervez Musharraf.

"I was very heartened by his understanding of what the problems are and what he's going to need to do to meet them," Fallon said.

 

[fatman17]

Fuller article...

US seeks stepped up counter-insurgency training for Pakistan


ST PETERSBURG, Florida (AFP) — The commander of US forces in the Middle East said Wednesday the Pakistani military appears willing to work more closely with the US military on counter-insurgency efforts in the tribal areas bordering Afghanistan.

Admiral William Fallon said the US military already has some training activities with the Pakistanis, but it would grow "in terms of focusing on the counter-insurgency, the unconventional problems that they are recognizing are really driving the program."

"We would like to -- assuming they are willing, and I think they are going to be -- make this more robust, to try to help them more. There is more willingness to do that now," said Fallon, who heads the Tampa, Forida based US Central Command.

In an interview with three wire service correspondents, Fallon said the new Pakistani military leader, General Ashfaq Kiyani, recognizes the threat to Pakistan emanating from Taliban and Al-Qaeda extremists ensconced in lawless tribal areas along the Afghan border.

"He understands," Fallon said. "I was very heartened by his understanding of what those problems are and what he needs to do to meet them. So we're going to try to help that."

Fallon provided few details, but said part of the effort involves US training and equipping of Pakistan's Frontier Corps, a tribally based force formed during British colonial rule to pacify the region.

The US overtures toward Pakistan come amid a wide-ranging review that Fallon is conducting of US strategy in neighboring Afghanistan, which has experienced rising violence over the past two years, amid the biggest insurgent challenge since the Taliban's ouster in 2001.

"You can't think about Afghanistan without Pakistan, because of the tremendous overlap on the border, (which is) the reality of the Pashtun tribal areas which encompass both countries," he said.

Besides the Taliban, US intelligence has warned that Al-Qaeda has regrouped in the border areas and Defense Secretary Robert Gates last month warned that it appeared to be turning its focus on destabilizing nuclear-armed Pakistan.

"Based on the events of the past six or so months in Pakistan, they (the Pakistanis) see now that they have real problems internally, and those are emanating from the west," Fallon said.

"My sense is, there is an increased willingness to address these problems, and we're going to help them," he said.

Fallon said coordination between US, Afghan and Pakistani has improved in recent months and "is really taking hold now."

But he said the border problems needed to be addressed in a comprehensive way with support of Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf and Afghanistan's President Hamid Karzai, who have had a contentious relationship in the past.

"If they are polarized, it's not going to work. My sense is that's improved," he said.

Fallon also gave an upbeat assessment of the situation in Afghanistan despite an upsurge in violence and the emergence of what officials say is a classic insurgency.

"Some say things are going to Hell in a handbasket and I'm trying to put a finger in the dike," Fallon said. "I think its the other way altogether. We're going to try to take advantage of where we are and spring forward to much better security next year."

The Pentagon announced Tuesday that it is sending 3,200 marines to Afghanistan in the spring, 2,200 of which will be used to beef up NATO-led combat forces in the south, a Taliban stronghold.

Fallon would not comment on the performance of the NATO-led troops in the south, but said US troops operating in eastern Afghanistan had sharply reduced violence in that troubled area through improved counter-insurgency tactics.

"I think we maintained the initiative, and what I'd like to do is push hard to expand security. I'd like to see more and more provinces in the situation that we find Khost province," he said.

"I will not pass judgement on the NATO gang down south, because I haven't spent that much time down there," he said. "But I see opportunities in the south that I would really like to capitalize on."

 

[blain2]

I am all for this stepped up COIN training. However this increased role in training should not be confused with US forces being allowed to operate in Pakistan against the elements in the tribal areas. All fighting, agreements, deals should be done by the PA and the political agents in the area.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

I am all for this stepped up COIN training. However this increased role in training should not be confused with US forces being allowed to operate in Pakistan against the elements in the tribal areas. All fighting, agreements, deals should be done by the PA and the political agents in the area.

That is the precise point.

The US does not have the expertise to train in COIN.

If Iraq is the example, then things can get difficult.

But then, are they really coming as trainers?

That is the question!

 

[fatman17]

That is the precise point.

The US does not have the expertise to train in COIN.

If Iraq is the example, then things can get difficult.

But then, are they really coming as trainers?

That is the question!

fair point! the PA should ensure clarity of roles which is possible

 

[blain2]

That is the precise point.

The US does not have the expertise to train in COIN.

If Iraq is the example, then things can get difficult.

But then, are they really coming as trainers?

That is the question!

I would say the US Army has as much experience in CI as any other Army involved in this business nowadays. All they have been doing in the Sunni provinces for the past 4 years or so has been linked with COIN operations involving infantry, USMC and SF operators along with Public Affairs Detachments to run the so called "Hearts and minds" campaign along with CI operations.

Although I do not foresee any real change in the way Pakistani units are employed in the FATA, US assistance in the form of equipment and lessons learned elsewhere would be welcome addition to the capabilities that Pakistan already has committed to this effort.

Americans actually fighting in Pakistan is something that would run totally contrary to the public sentiment (we feel that if the problem involves Pakistanis, then its the Pakistanis themselves who should sort it out insteaf of letting "gorays" running around taking pot shots at anyone wearing a beard, Turban and Shalwar Kamiz. There are sensitivies at military and civilian level which simply leave no room for military operations by US forces inside of Pakistan.

Pakistan has already been engaged with the US and ISAF on some of the COIN related efforts in the form of Counter IED working group exchanges. The way I have seen the US support for Pakistan involving personnel in the past, (60s and 80s in particular), Pakistan has always worked through "Train the trainer" concept. Americans can give us training suggestions, equipment etc., but we do the training for operators ourselves with them providing technical or logistical support. So the idea of US operators leading Pakistani units or being attached to Pakistani combat units is a pipe dream. Pakistan Army will not let these guys get close to the operations for as long as they have a say (and I'd say they have a lot of say in this matter).

 

[mujahideen]

I am all for this stepped up COIN training. However this increased role in training should not be confused with US forces being allowed to operate in Pakistan against the elements in the tribal areas. All fighting, agreements, deals should be done by the PA and the political agents in the area.

Well said.

 

[EagleEyes]

But then, are they really coming as trainers?

That is the question!

They are. I think Blain has clarified it already in the above post.

 

[blain2]

Pakistan has already been engaged with the US and ISAF on some of the COIN related efforts in the form of Counter IED working group exchanges. The way I have seen the US support for Pakistan involving personnel in the past, (60s and 80s in particular), Pakistan has always worked through "Train the trainer" concept. Americans can give us training suggestions, equipment etc., but we do the training for operators ourselves with them providing technical or logistical support. So the idea of US operators leading Pakistani units or being attached to Pakistani combat units is a pipe dream. Pakistan Army will not let these guys get close to the operations for as long as they have a say (and I'd say they have a lot of say in this matter).

As I mentioned above, the role of US troops in Pakistan, even this time around will be no different than it has been in the past. Pakistan Army will rely on the "train the trainer" concept with our officers imparting training to our own troops after the officers have gone through exchanges on COIN operations with the USSF.


U.S. makes plans to train security forces in Pakistan

American troops would have a limited role in the South Asian nation, where public anger is expected.
By Julian E. Barnes, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
January 24, 2008
WASHINGTON -- The Pentagon is making plans to send military personnel to Pakistan to train its security forces, taking advantage of promising ties with the country's new top general, Defense officials say.

The Bush administration has avoided using American troops in Pakistan because it would be deeply unpopular with many Pakistanis.

The plans would limit the U.S. mission to instructing Pakistani trainers, officials said recently, speaking on condition of anonymity because the proposals are not final. Those Pakistanis then would train their country's forces.

"The U.S. has to be careful of what it is doing inside Pakistan," said a Defense official who studies Pakistan and was one of those who spoke on condition of anonymity. "If it becomes obvious, that's one of the things that could undermine the stability of the Pakistan government. It could provoke a response that could easily get out of hand."

If the training efforts go forward, it will be in part because of the influence of Gen. Ashfaq Kiani, Pakistan's new army chief of staff. Kiani, who took over as military chief in November when President Pervez Musharraf relinquished the post under growing political pressure, already has taken steps to move the Pakistani military away from its focus on preparedness against rival India and toward fighting Islamic extremists.

"Kiani wants to get the military where it needs to be, improve morale but with a focus of going after the militants," said the Defense official.

Kiani has established a training facility with U.S. support that would help prepare Pakistani forces to take on militants, Pentagon officials said.

The general also has moved to improve the paramilitary force known as the Frontier Corps, which patrols the tribal region along the border with Afghanistan, an area believed to be a haven for militants.

The army said it attacked suspected militant hide-outs Wednesday and early today near the border in South Waziristan, killing 40 rebels and arresting 30, the Associated Press reported. At least eight soldiers also died.

U.S. Defense officials said they believed Kiani could initiate a more intensive series of operations against Al Qaeda, something that Musharraf has avoided.

The Frontier Corps, drawn from local recruits but led by army officers, has been plagued by a lack of funding, poor training, ancient equipment and terrible leadership.

Despite improvements, other U.S. Defense officials said, the Pakistani military's counterinsurgency and counter-terrorism abilities are still poor, especially in the autonomous tribal areas.

"The Pakistani military has a ways to go," said a Pentagon official who has studied Al Qaeda's operations in the area. "Can they deal Al Qaeda any sort of decisive blow that in past years they haven't been able to do?"

The new Pentagon plans come as Islamic militants have refocused on a Pakistan that has grown politically less stable in recent months and as American lawmakers have complained that billions of dollars in military aid to the Musharraf government have been misdirected.

U.S. Defense officials have signaled that they would like to take a more active role in the training of Pakistan's military forces. But they say they are keenly aware of the danger of provoking a backlash in Pakistani public opinion.

The Pentagon has ruled out any use of combat forces in Pakistan to go after top Al Qaeda figures directly. For years, Musharraf has warned emphatically against such U.S. action.

The plan to "train the trainers," using U.S. special operations forces or other military experts, would address those concerns, officials believe.
Sign Up

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Blain,

The US Army has now acquired COIN experience.

But that does not mean that it is suited to the environment prevailing.

The US personnel have trained in India's CIJW school and their problem is that they "shoot first and talk later".

That won't work.

One has to accept casualties and not go shooting around at everything that "looks" suspicious!

A good example is the massacre the Private security chaps did in Iraq and the Iraqi govt went into a spat with the US on the same!

You can't go shooting up anything that appears "suspicious".

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Salim,

I highly doubt the Pakistani military is going to adopt the US approach without any change whatsoever. That Pakistan understands the need to customize the "US experience" is illustrated quite well in how it adapted the PRS knowledge from the US to tailor its own culture and requirements.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Salim,

I highly doubt the Pakistani military is going to adopt the US approach without any change whatsoever. That Pakistan understands the need to customize the "US experience" is illustrated quite well in how it adapted the PRS knowledge from the US to tailor its own culture and requirements.

Agnostic,

I would like to share with you my experience in COIN.

The first principle, is that you cannot alienate the common man.

The second, there is a whole lot of imagined and real feeling that one is not getting his due.

The third is that religion play a great role in the Moslem's daily life that non Moslem cannot fathom!

Therefore, the terrorist just churns up all these three to suit his flavour and produces a potent explosive mixture.

If one uses gunships and artillery, there will be huge unintended collateral damage! It will alienate the fence sitters and they will veer towards the fundamentalists since the fundamentalists are always projecting that the govt is against them and their views and is repressive and cruel! The fundamentalists thus get more recruits and they win on this count!

If one goes gung ho, and in ground operations, shoot first and then asks questions just to keep their own casualties down, then it is a sure way to ensure there is not dearth of recruits for the fundamentalists.

The fundamentalist are great in PR and psyops. Don't underestimate them! No govt on earth can please all the population, Hence, the fundamentalists will ensure that it weans away the people from the Nation. Since the govt cannot address all the greivances of the people, the fundamentalists win without doing a damn!

Religion for devout Moslems is the last word. The ground realities is of no concern (enough of examples are here where Islamic tenets are used as the be all and end all of all discussions). Therefore, for such people who are full of religious zeal, everything else becomes secondary and immaterial!

Thus the terrorist fundamentalists wins on every count!

The US does not understands this or so it appears.

Thus, they are up a gum tree.

And if one follows the US way, they will also climb the gum tree!

There is a change however in the US Army attitudes as is displayed in Anbar.

It will take time.

 

[S-2]

"...their problem is that they "shoot first and talk later".

Horsecrap, Brigadier. We are about as far from that mind-set in our infantry units as to laughably reveal your dated perceptions of our forces!

"The US does not have the expertise to train in COIN.

If Iraq is the example, then things can get difficult."

Iraq IS the example. Things DO get difficult. Ask the British in Basra. TOO difficult for them. In extreme and starkly contrasting terms, the U.S. forces have made huge strides in realistically integrating local communities despite an absence of nat'l reconciliation.

NOBODY is doing it better these days, Brigadier. Our advisors would be in Pakistan learning as much as they teach. The Pakistani Army and U.S. Army share an intimate understanding of the inter-border region and our common opponent. Far better than anybody else on this planet, I'd comfortably contend.

Your soooo dissembling and different here. It's increasingly clear that you've an agenda to create impedimentia to firm Pakistani-U.S. relations. As such, your meddling is an unwelcome and unattractive aspect of your virtual persona.

I'm dismayed, Brigadier.

 

[S-2]

"There is a change however in the US Army attitudes as is displayed in Anbar."

Even here you get it wrong, Brigadier. H.R. McMaster is emphatic in his emphasis that kinetic operations played a decisive role in establishing the bedrock of security throughout Anbar, beginning in Ramadi and Tal Afar. Avoidance of these operations are NOT antithetical to COIN ops. Nothing is, in fact. All elements of military operations are present in the conduct of COIN operations-if necessary and advantageous.

Maybe you should stick to commenting upon Indian Army operations, sir.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

"...their problem is that they "shoot first and talk later".

Horsecrap, Brigadier. We are about as far from that mind-set in our infantry units as to laughably reveal your dated perceptions of our forces!

"The US does not have the expertise to train in COIN.

If Iraq is the example, then things can get difficult."

Iraq IS the example. Things DO get difficult. Ask the British in Basra. TOO difficult for them. In extreme and starkly contrasting terms, the U.S. forces have made huge strides in realistically integrating local communities despite an absence of nat'l reconciliation.

NOBODY is doing it better these days, Brigadier. Our advisors would be in Pakistan learning as much as they teach. The Pakistani Army and U.S. Army share an intimate understanding of the inter-border region and our common opponent. Far better than anybody else on this planet, I'd comfortably contend.

Your soooo dissembling and different here. It's increasingly clear that you've an agenda to create impedimentia to firm Pakistani-U.S. relations. As such, your meddling is an unwelcome and unattractive aspect of your virtual persona.

I'm dismayed, Brigadier.

Of course it is horse crap, but then I interacted. You must ask those units from Hawaii who came to our CIJW School.

With all due regards, the British became a prey to the quick fix solutions.

The US troops did learn a lot here with India when their people utilised our CIJW training.

Maybe it is what is changing the US perspective, apart from practical experience in Iraq.

My views on the US COIN is the same here as it is at WAB.

As far as COIN is concerned, nowhere have I, be it here or WAB or anywhere, differed in my view. I have first hand experience of COIN and I have seen the pitfalls of gung ho attitudes. They just don't work in the long term, even if there is temporary relief!

As far the US in the Afghanistan - Pakistan etc environment, you will notice that I have stated that it is a fallacy to imagine that the US is aiming to dismember Pakistan and such wild thoughts.

Kinetics operations are the sure way to lose the people!

It does not matter what your experts have to theorise, the practical experience of the Indian Army proves otherwise.

Believe me, if you will, I think we should know more than you, given our experience and patience. While you can chuck the Human Rights brouhahas and flick it off you shoulder as would an annoying fly, we can't. In fact, the US itself, will come down with a heavy hand on us, for similar faults that you commit. Read the US Congressional Reports in this aspect.

There is no quick fixes in CI. It is a long haul!


Therefore, you surprise me with your post!