khanz
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2007
- Messages
- 4,508
- Reaction score
- 1
KABUL - Al-Qaida and Taliban leaders operate "outside the country."
The war on terror "should know no borders." The world should address the "root causes of terrorism - wherever they are." Afghan officials weave hints and suggestions but their meaning is becoming increasingly clear: Afghanistan would be more than happy for U.S. forces to attack Taliban and al-Qaida safe havens in Pakistan.
After the bloodiest year since the 2001 U.S.-led invasion, some analysts say the United States and NATO won't make lasting progress in Afghanistan, unless the militants' ability to command and control the insurgency from across the border is tackled.
The prospects of a U.S. military deployment inside Pakistan, a key U.S. ally in its war on terror, remain slim, because of the outrage it would trigger from the government of Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf and the wider public.
Last weekend, Pakistan said it would not let U.S. forces hunt militants on its soil after the New York Times newspaper said President George W. Bush's administration was considering expanding CIA and Special Forces operations into Pakistan's tribal regions.
But that doesn't mean Afghan officials won't lobby for military strikes anyway - a call likely to enflame already touchy relations with Pakistan just two weeks after the countries' presidents met in Pakistan and pledged to share intelligence and tighten border controls to quash militancy.
"Terrorism is like a spring. It is better to go to the main source than to fight the water's flow," said Gen. Mohammad Zahir Azimi, Afghan Defence Ministry spokesman.
The chief of Afghanistan's intelligence service, Amrullah Saleh, said recently terrorism's defeat requires either Afghanistan's borders be sealed or "the strategy of the coalition forces toward Pakistan should change."
"We believe the war on terror should know no borders," Saleh told Afghanistan's Tolo TV.
"This was the first slogan by the Americans and the U.S.-led international coalition forces. But this war has unfortunately been confined to borders."
The 2,400-kilometre Afghan-Pakistan border has long been a complicating factor in U.S. efforts in Afghanistan.
Top al-Qaida and Taliban leaders are suspected of running their operations out of tribal areas in Pakistan, where U.S. forces cannot pursue them and the region is considered a likely hiding place for accused terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden and his top deputy, Ayman al-Zawahri.
Pakistan army and Foreign Ministry spokesmen did not respond to calls seeking comment but the government has repeatedly denied Taliban leaders orchestrate the Afghan insurgency from its soil - and U.S. intelligence reports that al-Qaida leaders have regrouped there.
Taliban militants, in fact, pose a growing threat to Pakistan's own security. Hundreds of people have died, many of them security forces, as Islamist fighters have grabbed control of tracts of Pakistan's northwestern frontier. In the last three months alone there have been 19 suicide attacks, mostly targetting the army or government.
In the highest-profile attack, Pakistan's government said it suspects the top Taliban leader in Pakistan, Baitullah Mehsud, was behind the Dec. 27 assassination of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto.
Bush's top security advisers - including Vice-President Dick Cheney and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice - debated last week whether to expand the authority of the CIA and the military to "conduct far more aggressive covert operations in the tribal areas of Pakistan," the New York Times reported Sunday.
Humayun Hamidzada, spokesman for Afghan President Hamid Karzai, said Tuesday: "Wherever the international community carries out operations against terrorism," it would have a positive effect in Afghanistan.
"I'm not going to comment about the specifics about operations inside Pakistan. All I'm going to say is that we should address the sources, the root causes of terrorism wherever they are," Hamidzada said, hinting heavily Afghanistan believes that to be in Pakistan.
Saleh, the intelligence chief, said political pressure, financial incentives and informational exchanges with Pakistan have been ineffective. The Taliban has leadership councils in the Pakistani cities Quetta, Miranshah and Peshawar, he said.
Karzai has previously alleged Taliban supreme commander Mullah Omar hides in Quetta, which Pakistan denies.
Saleh said although the terrorist organizations are not strong enough to resist Pakistan's army, "the system in Pakistan has no political determination to eliminate these elements and forces."
Yet U.S. commanders in Afghanistan are quick to praise Pakistan's role in fighting militancy, saying Pakistani forces have killed or arrested scores of insurgents while taking heavy casualties. The Pakistan army has also improved border co-ordination and communication with Afghan and NATO officials, U.S. officials said.
But Seth Jones, a Washington-based analyst with the RAND Corp. who follows Afghanistan, said that is not enough.
"If in 2008 the U.S., NATO in general, is unable to make any notable differences in the (Pakistani) tribal areas, the situation in Afghanistan will not get better," he said, suggesting Pakistani government or tribal forces could root out militants.
"That would be a multiyear effort to clear and hold those regions," he said.
"I'm not saying it's going to happen but it's one key factor that will influence the next year."
http://canadianpress.google.com/arti...dN91sRbV7YxMwA
The war on terror "should know no borders." The world should address the "root causes of terrorism - wherever they are." Afghan officials weave hints and suggestions but their meaning is becoming increasingly clear: Afghanistan would be more than happy for U.S. forces to attack Taliban and al-Qaida safe havens in Pakistan.
After the bloodiest year since the 2001 U.S.-led invasion, some analysts say the United States and NATO won't make lasting progress in Afghanistan, unless the militants' ability to command and control the insurgency from across the border is tackled.
The prospects of a U.S. military deployment inside Pakistan, a key U.S. ally in its war on terror, remain slim, because of the outrage it would trigger from the government of Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf and the wider public.
Last weekend, Pakistan said it would not let U.S. forces hunt militants on its soil after the New York Times newspaper said President George W. Bush's administration was considering expanding CIA and Special Forces operations into Pakistan's tribal regions.
But that doesn't mean Afghan officials won't lobby for military strikes anyway - a call likely to enflame already touchy relations with Pakistan just two weeks after the countries' presidents met in Pakistan and pledged to share intelligence and tighten border controls to quash militancy.
"Terrorism is like a spring. It is better to go to the main source than to fight the water's flow," said Gen. Mohammad Zahir Azimi, Afghan Defence Ministry spokesman.
The chief of Afghanistan's intelligence service, Amrullah Saleh, said recently terrorism's defeat requires either Afghanistan's borders be sealed or "the strategy of the coalition forces toward Pakistan should change."
"We believe the war on terror should know no borders," Saleh told Afghanistan's Tolo TV.
"This was the first slogan by the Americans and the U.S.-led international coalition forces. But this war has unfortunately been confined to borders."
The 2,400-kilometre Afghan-Pakistan border has long been a complicating factor in U.S. efforts in Afghanistan.
Top al-Qaida and Taliban leaders are suspected of running their operations out of tribal areas in Pakistan, where U.S. forces cannot pursue them and the region is considered a likely hiding place for accused terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden and his top deputy, Ayman al-Zawahri.
Pakistan army and Foreign Ministry spokesmen did not respond to calls seeking comment but the government has repeatedly denied Taliban leaders orchestrate the Afghan insurgency from its soil - and U.S. intelligence reports that al-Qaida leaders have regrouped there.
Taliban militants, in fact, pose a growing threat to Pakistan's own security. Hundreds of people have died, many of them security forces, as Islamist fighters have grabbed control of tracts of Pakistan's northwestern frontier. In the last three months alone there have been 19 suicide attacks, mostly targetting the army or government.
In the highest-profile attack, Pakistan's government said it suspects the top Taliban leader in Pakistan, Baitullah Mehsud, was behind the Dec. 27 assassination of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto.
Bush's top security advisers - including Vice-President Dick Cheney and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice - debated last week whether to expand the authority of the CIA and the military to "conduct far more aggressive covert operations in the tribal areas of Pakistan," the New York Times reported Sunday.
Humayun Hamidzada, spokesman for Afghan President Hamid Karzai, said Tuesday: "Wherever the international community carries out operations against terrorism," it would have a positive effect in Afghanistan.
"I'm not going to comment about the specifics about operations inside Pakistan. All I'm going to say is that we should address the sources, the root causes of terrorism wherever they are," Hamidzada said, hinting heavily Afghanistan believes that to be in Pakistan.
Saleh, the intelligence chief, said political pressure, financial incentives and informational exchanges with Pakistan have been ineffective. The Taliban has leadership councils in the Pakistani cities Quetta, Miranshah and Peshawar, he said.
Karzai has previously alleged Taliban supreme commander Mullah Omar hides in Quetta, which Pakistan denies.
Saleh said although the terrorist organizations are not strong enough to resist Pakistan's army, "the system in Pakistan has no political determination to eliminate these elements and forces."
Yet U.S. commanders in Afghanistan are quick to praise Pakistan's role in fighting militancy, saying Pakistani forces have killed or arrested scores of insurgents while taking heavy casualties. The Pakistan army has also improved border co-ordination and communication with Afghan and NATO officials, U.S. officials said.
But Seth Jones, a Washington-based analyst with the RAND Corp. who follows Afghanistan, said that is not enough.
"If in 2008 the U.S., NATO in general, is unable to make any notable differences in the (Pakistani) tribal areas, the situation in Afghanistan will not get better," he said, suggesting Pakistani government or tribal forces could root out militants.
"That would be a multiyear effort to clear and hold those regions," he said.
"I'm not saying it's going to happen but it's one key factor that will influence the next year."
http://canadianpress.google.com/arti...dN91sRbV7YxMwA
