What's new

CIA chief in Delhi to meet Indian intelligence officials

US sleuths in India to discuss 'dangerous' Pak



WASHINGTON: You know something big and spooky is cooking when the three top intelligence honchos in the United States visit India much before any cabinet official in the new administration.

The visit this week to New Delhi of Leon Panetta, the Obama administration’s new CIA Director, marks a significant uptick in cooperation between US and India aimed at containing a collapsing Pakistan, with its dangerous mix of exporting terrorism and nuclear proliferation, according to sources.

The two sides are also discussing India’s role in Afghanistan, where the Obama administration is struggling to find the right balance between a military surge and a civilian swell to be detailed in the Af-Pak policy review due shortly.

Panetta’s visit to New Delhi was his first to a foreign country, and it followed trips to the region by the FBI Director Robert Mueller earlier this month and National Intelligence Director John Michel McConnell in December.

In each case, the interlocutors have also visited Islamabad, amid a growing concern in Washington about what officials and analysts now regard as the ''most dangerous country in the world.'' Some experts have suggested US should be looking at Pak-Af policy rather than Af-Pak, since Pakistan is seen to be more dangerous to the US and the rest of the world.

The Mumbai attacks, the Pakistani agencies’ role in it, the failure of the military establishment in Pakistan to cap terrorism, and fears similar attacks in the west, has driven US agencies to engage intensely with its Indian counterparts RAW and IB. The Indian experience in Afghanistan is also of great interest to Washington.

So great is the worry in Washington about Pakistan, and so intent is the Obama administration in seeking India’s help to contain the fallout from what one analyst called its ''toxic asset,'' that it has called up from retirement a senior diplomat and a former intelligence analyst familiar with the region to serve in New Delhi as a stand-in envoy till the formal appointment of an ambassador.

Peter Burleigh accompanied Leon Panetta to New Delhi with good reason. As a young officer posted in New Delhi in 1973-1975, he was widely seen in the Indian establishment at that time (particularly by the Left) as a CIA agent, at a time when Indian fears about the infamous ''foreign hand'' was at its peak.

He subsequently returned to the region to Sri Lanka as an ambassador and later served as the US representative at U.N before his retirement in late 1990s. Most recently, he has served as a distinguished professor in residence at the University of Miami. Sources in Washington confirmed Burleigh’s intelligence background.

Burleigh, who is now 67, has been tipped for ambassadorial postings since his retirement (once to the Philippines) but he has powerful opponents in the Senate who are said to block his nomination.

Consequently, the Obama administration has now sent him to New Delhi to head the US mission there as a stop-gap measure pending the selection of a new ambassador to India, following the return of David Mulford. The process of selecting a new envoy could take several months because of the exhaustive vetting process.

Appointing Burleigh as the Charge d’Affairs through executive orders circumvents the nomination process. “I don’t think the administration wants to rush through anything on the India envoy front considering the number of recent screw-ups,” a former administration official who discussed the Burleigh appointment on background said.

Other sources in Washington said Burleigh was a ''known entity'' who was required in New Delhi at a very critical time in the region. He is said to speak Hindi/Urdu, Bengali, Sinhalese, and Nepali and coordinate with other US missions in a region full of unstable countries surrounding India. They did not think his intelligence background in the 1970s was a problem now when the two sides are essentially ''on the same side.''

India evidently lost much of its suspicion and distaste for the CIA in the early 1990s with the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of Soviet Union. The US too sees India now as a stabilizing power in a very troubled neighborhood where not just Pakistan, but also Bangladesh, Nepal, and Sri Lanka are all unstable.

In 1993, the Clinton administration appointed as ambassador to India Frank Wisner, whose father Frank Wisner Sr was one of the founding members of the OSS, which evolved into the CIA.

Since then, several former CIA analysts have served on the political and diplomatic side of the India beat, both in Washington and New Delhi, reclaiming some of the agency’s lost credibility in Indian eyes. Most famously, Bruce Riedel a former CIA analyst who is now entrusted with the Af-Pak review, made a call that held Pakistan responsible for the Kargil episode.

In January 2002, then home minister L.K.Advani visited the CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, a milestone that resulted in more open and intense cooperation between the two sides and the formal burial of the dreaded ''foreign hand,'' notwithstanding the residual fears among the Indian Left.


US sleuths in India to discuss 'dangerous' Pak - India - The Times of India
 
.
Since summer is approaching and the snow is melting in the himalayas, it is the right time for the cross-border terrorism related events to happen and that too especially at the time of National elections. So GoI cannot take this risk of having more terrorist attacks so there is a possibility of increased troops at the borders as a result.
 
.
US did not ask India to pull back troops from border
Fri, Mar 20 08:08 AM

Washington, March 19 (IANS) The US has denied it asked or advised India to pull back its troops from the India-Pakistan border recently.

'I'm not aware that there have been any conversations recently about that,' State Department spokesman Robert Wood told reporters Thursday.

Asked if this issue was brought up at meetings with Indian Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon during his recent visit, he said: 'I was in the meeting. I don't recall that issue being raised.'

Asked if there had been any such request from the Pakistani side, Wood said:

'Not that I'm aware of.'
 
.
Friday, March 20, 2009
Pak mobilised troops on border, not us: India to US
New Delhi: Amid reports that the United States has asked India to pull back troops from the Pakistan border, New Delhi has said that Washington has already been told that it has not mobilised troops along the border.

Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon during his recent visit to the US made it clear to officials there that it was not India but Pakistan, which had mobilised troops along the border in the aftermath of Mumbai attacks, sources in New Delhi said on Thursday night.

The sources outlined India's position in the context of reports in TV channels claiming that the US has put pressure on India asking it to pull back troops from the Pakistan border. The reports claimed that Menon, during his talks with US officials, was told that it is India and not Pakistan that should make the first move towards restoring peace.

The US Embassy in New Delhi dismissed the media reports with sources saying they were not accurate.

In Washington, the State Department said the US has not made any such request as suggested in the media reports. This issue did not come up during the meeting between Secretary of State Hillary Clinton [Images] and Menon, State Department Spokesperson Robert Wood told PTI.

Source: PTI
 
. .
mobilisation of assests did take place to a certain extent on indian side too, with troops being shifted in batches and at intervals while GoI was trying to rewach a "consensus" on whether they wanted to blame the real culprits LeT (?)/Distorted "Islamists" or to fix it on "Hindu" terrorists with a view to gain votes from"minority" in India!!!! its foolish to accept that IA/IN/IAF didnt mobilise, IN was "conducting fleet exercises" in Arabian Sea, IAF "homing their doctrine" and IA slowly moving to winter exercises which were "extended". Assets and logistics have been built up since 2001 itself as part of cold start but there is no cold start, IA still needs 4-6 weeks to mobilise fully as transport in form of air/rail assets are not exactly numerous!!!
 
. .

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom