What's new

American attack aftermath: Pakistan declares attack a 'plot'

Murky border war won’t rupture Pakistan-US alliance: analysts


ISLAMABAD: The deaths of 24 Pakistani troops spotlights the explosive 10-year war on the Afghan border, but is unlikely to rupture the unhappy marriage of convenience between Islamabad and Washington, analysts say.

Forced into partnership by 9/11 and the war on al Qaeda, the two governments are totally reliant on one another, yet lurch from crisis to crisis given a prevailing climate of distrust.

It is typical that just as relations began to recover from the covert American raid that killed Osama bin Laden, the NATO attack has put the alliance back on the brink.

Islamabad sealed the Afghan border to NATO supplies again, gave Americans notice to leave a shadowy air base believed to be used in the CIA drone war, and ordered a review of the alliance.

“I think we’re one step short of a strategic crisis,” retired US general turned NBC News military analyst Barry McCaffrey told the TV network.

Estimating that up to 50 percent of supplies for Afghanistan are routed through Pakistan he said, “We’ve got to talk to them, we’ve got to pay them, we’ve got to apologise for this strike. We have no option, literally.”

Afghan and US officers routinely complain that Pakistani soldiers do nothing to prevent Taliban opening fire from Pakistani soil or infiltrating the border - including in Mohmand, the district where the soldiers were killed.

“Insurgents repeatedly use the border area in their favour to hide, to operate across it and to fire on both sides,” said Brigadier General Carsten Jacobson, spokesman for NATO’s International Security Assistance Force. US and Afghan commandos have reportedly strayed across the border in hot pursuit of Taliban.

Although the working relationship between Pakistan’s army chief Ashfaq Kayani and American top brass is considered to be relatively good, Pakistani analysts say there is a lack of coordination at operational levels.

Resolving the latest crisis will likely hinge on the outcome of a NATO investigation and to what extent Washington is willing to pacify a government in Islamabad answerable to a largely anti-American electorate.

“Pakistan will surely want to know the exact motive of the attack. Was it the result of intelligence failure or a mistake by a group or an individual?” retired lieutenant general Talat Masood told AFP.

So will there be any lasting damage? To what extent can Pakistan force any change in its terms of engagement with the United States?

“Long-term severing of ties is out of the question. Short-term retaliation is underway,” said author Imtiaz Gul.

John Bolton, a former US ambassador to the United Nations, laid bare the dilemma for Washington in handling nuclear-armed Pakistan, which has received up to $20 billion in US aid over the last 10 years.

“As long as that country has nuclear weapons that could fall into the hands of radicals and be a threat worldwide, they have incredible leverage,” he said. afp
 
.
Pakistan and US wage a war of words over Afghan border post deaths. Islamabad and Washington trade claim and counter-claim over deaths of 24 Pakistani soldiers in Nato air strike on border

Nato operations in Afghanistan have been thrown into disarray following Saturday's deaths. The US and allied commanders say they are investigating how the tragedy occurred. Both sides are making claims and counter-claims.


Claim 1:*US and Afghan commandos say they came under fire from inside Pakistan. The resulting air strikes killed 24 soldiers, and injured 13. Nato says they were a regrettable mistake.

Counter-claim:*Pakistan says the attack was unprovoked. The air and helicopter strikes were a catastrophic blunder, both military and diplomatic

.Claim 2:*Nato says the incident happened when a mainly Afghan force was conducting an operation in the southern Kunar province. Someone fired on them, it says.

Counter-claim:*The Pakistani military says this is rubbish. The assault was premeditated, "irresponsible" and deliberate against two mountain outposts known to Nato and US forces. The soldiers were 300 metres inside Pakistan, in the Mohmand tribal areas, recently cleared of militants.

Claim 3: Nato regrets the deaths and says they were "tragic and unintended".

Counter-claim:*Pakistan says the attacks went on for almost two hours and continued even after Pakistani commanders asked coalition forces to stop. A spokesman said that if the Afghan-US patrol came under attack, where are its casualties?

Claim 4:*Underlying US policy is the assumption that Pakistani forces are complicit in allowing Taliban militants to use Pakistan's tribal areas as a base.

Counter-claim:*Pakistan's soldiers are doing an impossible job. They patrol a huge, porous, mountainous border, and frequently come under attack from Taliban sympathisers and from trigger-happy Nato-Afghan forces

Claim 5:*US officials believe elements inside Pakistan's army and intelligence services give clandestine support to a resurgent Taliban. This support – in the form of weapons, know-how, safe havens – facilitates lethal attacks inside Afghanistan on US troops, and perpetuates a war that has already dragged on for over a decade.

Counter-claim:*Pakistan is fighting its own desperate internal battle against Islamist extremism. The US, meanwhile, isn't helping. It flagrantly violates Pakistan's sovereignty. The latest deadly air-strikes are simply the most recent example; the raid which killed Osama bin Laden in May the most egregious.

Pakistan should realize that latoon k bhoot bathoon se nhi mantey before its too late.
 
. .
Nothing except time can heal this 'insult' Pakistan suffered. Not at all a enviable position to be in.

ISAF/US leaving Afghanistan is mooted by many as solution to the problems that Pakistan faces, which is not correct. Dilution of Afghani importance would lead to militants/extremists diverting there attention to Xinjiang/Kashmir so the problem simply moves from west to east, and will continue to exist.

I would rather say sacrifices due to US presence in Afghan should be accepted, because an angry China due to Xinjiang would be simply be the END.

Pakistan does not support terrorism, be it against any country including China and will do whatever she can to prevent attacks planned within Pakistan or by Pakistani elements. Infact Pakistan does not even support any terrorism in India and a resolution to Kashmir conflict would ensure elimination of suspicion on each other.

Consider how easy it would be for, lets say a third party, to pay elements, non-Agency & non-Government, on either side of the border to cause havoc and to repeat Bombay type terrorist activities.....how much restraint would each country be able to practice? On the other hand if there is mutual trust and respect, both countries would reach the conclusion that external forces are to be blamed.
 
.
Everybody listen. Pakistan now has some leverage. Let's assume that Pakistan permanently blocks Nato supplies and Nato uses
other routes for the rest of it's occupation. Let's also assume that Pakistan gets out of this WOT and becomes neutral.

What if a similar incidence happens again and Pak Fauj / Check Post or any base is attacked again within Pakistan and lets say
50 members of Pak Fauj die, what leverage would Pakistan have then? Hmm Let me guess, None!
 
.
Pakistan should fire a missile on a NATO Base and than call it a mistake and easily say SORRY

I am sure many would even be willing to take individual responsibility for that and face charges in US/NATO countries.
 
.
Pakistan should fire a missile on a NATO Base and than call it a mistake and easily say SORRY

No matter what we write and what the public does, the GOP and army will do what they think is $uitable. The public will cool down after a few days and business will be as usual between the two governments.

Since decades Pakistan is playing this Tom and Jerry with US nothing happened in favor of Pakistan, and every time we say next time and next time.

Other countries that are playing their part in the War on Terror have developed their military personal experience + hardware capabilities. But overall Pakistan has gained very little, almost nothing but it has surely lost almost everything.
 
.
Everybody listen. Pakistan now has some leverage. Let's assume that Pakistan permanently blocks Nato supplies and Nato uses
other routes for the rest of it's occupation. Let's also assume that Pakistan gets out of this WOT and becomes neutral.

What if a similar incidence happens again and Pak Fauj / Check Post or any base is attacked again within Pakistan and lets say
50 members of Pak Fauj die, what leverage would Pakistan have then? Hmm Let me guess, None!

Or....Pakistan openly declare that any violation of its airspace would be taken up at UN and that all posts are equipped with MANPADS with clear instructions to engage if attacked. Our indigenous Anza's can easily take down any US helicopter. Any air strike from a bomber would be considered an act of war and the air base, where it takes off from, would be taken out.
 
.
Or....Pakistan openly declare that any violation of its airspace would be taken up at UN and that all posts are equipped with MANPADS with clear instructions to engage if attacked. Our indigenous Anza's can easily take down any US helicopter. Any air strike from a bomber would be considered an act of war and the air base, where it takes off from, would be taken out.

Well that could be a second step but I don't think the supply routes would be blocked for ever and i also don't think that Pakistan is getting out of this WOT anytime soon. Unfortunately, Pakistan has more to suffer
 
.
Or....Pakistan openly declare that any violation of its airspace would be taken up at UN and that all posts are equipped with MANPADS with clear instructions to engage if attacked. Our indigenous Anza's can easily take down any US helicopter. Any air strike from a bomber would be considered an act of war and the air base, where it takes off from, would be taken out.

If we cannot have the planes/flying machines visible on radar as there are no radars in that area how will we know from where it took off.
 
.
Pakistani would always have levrage as far as the threater of war is confined within Afghan borders. That country cannot be stablized with keep Pakistan out of loop.

Everybody listen. Pakistan now has some leverage. Let's assume that Pakistan permanently blocks Nato supplies and Nato uses
other routes for the rest of it's occupation. Let's also assume that Pakistan gets out of this WOT and becomes neutral.

What if a similar incidence happens again and Pak Fauj / Check Post or any base is attacked again within Pakistan and lets say
50 members of Pak Fauj die, what leverage would Pakistan have then? Hmm Let me guess, None!
 
.
No matter what we write and what the public does, the GOP and army will do what they think is $uitable. The public will cool down after a few days and business will be as usual between the two governments.

Since decades Pakistan is playing this Tom and Jerry with US nothing happened in favor of Pakistan, and every time we say next time and next time.

Other countries that are playing their part in the War on Terror have developed their military personal experience + hardware capabilities. But overall Pakistan has gained very little, almost nothing but it has surely lost almost everything.
Sir this cooling down has almost reached its limit and it can now turn into anger which will be leashed on Army first and than those who attack us
 
. .
my freind we indians dont consider pakistanies as owr enemies , yes we do get aggittated when we see in news your love towards anty-indian tanzeems but nothing like mortal enemy , in pakistan its a fact & most of your tv anchors have confiremed about the hate preached against hindu indians in schools but in india we preach hindu - muslim ekta(unity)&all humans are born equal+ relegion is your personal choice & thats the main reason that a ordinarry indian dosent care much about relegion .

Now about millitarry buildup , just keep yourself for a movement in our place that how would you orepare yourself against a nation which since its very inception created unnessecary trouble 1947 afreedi attacking kashmeer,1965 operation gibralter,1999Kargill attempt.
now as in some TV show as marvee simrad said about creation of hindu demon by your elite(though sikhs were mainly responsible but for your love of misadvanture)

MERE DOST PEHLE APNE HUKUMRAANOO KA RAVIYAA DEKHO BAAD ME HUM INDIANS KO KOASNAA

Oh, Yes ... and here is a divine demostration of peace preaching in India regarding Pakistan
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
pata nahe probleum kia hai is forum ka moderators ka sath koi thread kholo tu band kar deta han as being pakistani we should ask our armed forces what they did in last 10 years nothing US operatives are walking in pakistani streets killing in our own country our people govt and army did nothing drones did nothing our bases in US control we cannot do anything abotabad airforce and army was sleeping infact 2 meters from army base this was happening and now this and still airforce is sleeping i think it is for sure we should now that blood of pakistani people are nothing infront of armed forces whos duty is to save any type of attack on pakistani soil
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom