CIA station chief in Pakistan called back?

[Spring Onion]

After a case was filed against CIA station chief in killing of unarmed Pakistanis through drones in FATA, there are reports that he has left Pakistan.

Media reports are saying the US media is saying he was faced with threats and legal case thats why he ran away from Pakistan.

 

[GentlemanObserver]

A Session on “Legal Status of U.S. Drone Strikes inside Pakistan”

The international law allows the civilian victims of U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan to take the matter to the court of law. If the drone strikes are proven unlawful by the U.N., international court of justice or the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. will be required to stop such attacks, reassure Pakistan of not repeating them and also provide compensations to the families of the innocent victims. Although, the international laws of war permit the nations to use force in self-defense, but the principles of distinction and proportionality can never be overlooked. These views were expressed by Dr. Niaz A. Shah, an expert on international law and terrorism and Robert P. Barnidge, a lecturer at the University of Reading. Speaking at the informative session titled “Assessing the legality of pilotless drone attacks under international humanitarian law and human rights law,” organized at Pak Institute for Peace Studies (PIPS) on 14 December 2010, Muhammad Amir Rana, Director PIPS remarked ever since Obama administration held office the U.S. drone attacks inside Pakistan have escalated. With such unprecedented increase the issue of the legality of drone strikes has also assumed significant importance. Dr. Shah opined that the U.S. relies on the article 51 of UN charter to justify the use of drones inside Pakistan. “However, this particular article can only be implemented if one state has attacked another state or a state maintains an effective control over the non-state actors, which intend or have attacked the other state.” Ironically in case of Pakistan, the state does not effectively control but is engaged in fighting with the groups (Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan and al-Qaeda), which are being targeted through drones.

Robert P. Barnidge explained the legality of U.S. Drone attacks by looking into the level and the typologies of conflict given under the articles of Geneva Conventions and the United Nations Security Council Charter. He was of the view that “Without determining the nature of conflict in Pakistan in light of international law, legal status of CIA-operated drones strikes can not to be established”. However, even if the Pakistani government has consented or tacitly approved U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan, each attack needs to be assessed separately on the principles of distinction, intensity and proportionality. Despite unconventional nature of the conflict and seemingly invisible nature of the enemy, International Law and International Humanitarian Law are still applicable. He maintained the question of drone strikes’ efficacy becomes irrelevant if proven unlawful, in the light of international law.


The presentations were followed by an interactive discussion. Zafar Jespal, Professor of International Relations at the Quid-e-Azam University, commented that the U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan are illegal from every angle of international law or according to the Just War Theory. Cyril Almeida, a senior reporter of daily Dawn, maintained that due to the lack of access to the strike-zones and opaque nature of drone strikes in Pakistan the efficacy of such attacks and the accurate number of civilian casualties cannot be determined. He said despite the unconventional nature of the conflict a distinction between military and civilian object is necessary. Ms. Chameela, the Asia Team Leader of the Safer World, UK raised the query about the standard definition of terrorism as per given by any of the Conventions in which this War on Terror can be justified. Dr. Robert admitted the conceptual, legal and technical limitations in defining terrorism. While answering her question he clearly mentioned that the understanding of the Armed Conflict must be built according to Martin’s Clause protocol 1, Article 1 and 2 of Geneva Convention 1997.

The participants emphasized the need of a comprehensive and mutually agreed definition of the fundamental issues related to war on terror. The speakers suggested authentic fact finding and mutual assessments of legality of the drone attacks by the Pakistan and U.S. governments to remove ambiguities over this critical issue.

Pak Institute for Peace Studies (PIPS), Independent Think Tank in Pakistan

 

[Leviza]

all is BS ... they will keep doing it no matter what ...... they jsut know one language and our nation (leaders and army) dont want to speak in that language.... so we as general public is facing such attacks...

leaders and army go to USA and take back some $$ and feel good about it...thats all...

so they are thinking to start these attacks in Balochistan too... its just how far you want them to go and our army in leaders dont have any limits defined....

USA dont care for any laws.....
history shows us...

 

[TechLahore]

Pakistani Role Is Suspected in Revealing U.S. Spy’s Name

B.K.Bangash/Associated Press
Pakistani villagers protesting last Thursday against U.S. drone strikes.
By MARK MAZZETTI and SALMAN MASOOD
Published: December 17, 2010

WASHINGTON — The Central Intelligence Agency’s top clandestine officer in Islamabad was pulled from the country on Thursday amid an escalating war of recriminations between American and Pakistani spies, with some American officials convinced that the officer’s cover was deliberately blown by Pakistan’s military intelligence agency.
Enlarge This Image

T. Mughal/European Pressphoto Agency
Kareem Khan, a resident of North Waziristan who claimed that his son and brother were killed in a drone strike, with his lawyer on Nov. 29.

The C.I.A. officer hastily left Pakistan on the same day that an Obama administration review of the Afghanistan war concluded that the war could not be won without greater cooperation from Islamabad in rooting out militants in Pakistan’s western mountains.

On Thursday and Friday, the United States appeared to make good on promises to expand its own efforts to attack the militants, with drone strikes hitting Khyber agency in Pakistan’s lawless tribal areas. Most drone strikes this year have targeted North Waziristan, and attacks on Khyber in recent years have been rare. Pakistani government officials said at least 26 militants were killed in the most recent attacks.

The outing of the C.I.A. station chief is tied to the spy agency’s campaign of drone strikes, which are very unpopular in Pakistan, although the government has given its tacit approval for them.

American officials said that the C.I.A. station chief had received a number of death threats after he was named publicly in a legal complaint sent to Pakistani police this week by the family of victims of an earlier drone strike.

The officials said there is strong suspicion that operatives of Pakistan’s powerful spy service, the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, had a hand in revealing the C.I.A. officer’s identity — possibly in retaliation for a civil lawsuit filed in Brooklyn last month implicating the I.S.I. chief in the Mumbai terror attacks of November 2008.

The American officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, did not immediately provide details to support their suspicions.

A senior Pakistani official, also speaking on condition of anonymity, said that the Pakistani government “believes that the suit in New York does not have a sound legal basis, and is based on conjecture. We did not need to retaliate”

“As far as the Government of Pakistan and the I.S.I. are concerned,” he said, “we look forward to working with the Americans in securing the world from transnational threats, especially the shared threat of terrorism.”

The Associated Press was the first to report Friday that the station chief had left the country.

The intensifying mistrust between the C.I.A. and I.S.I., two uneasy but co-dependent allies, could hardly come at a worse time. The Obama administration relies on Pakistan’s support for the armed drone program, which this year has launched a record number of strikes in North Waziristan against terror suspects.

“We will continue to help strengthen Pakistani capacity to root out terrorists,” President Obama said on Thursday. “Nevertheless, progress has not come fast enough. So we will continue to insist to Pakistani leaders that terrorist safe havens within their borders must be dealt with.”

Michael J. Morell, the C.I.A.’s deputy director, met with Pakistani officials in Islamabad on Thursday, but American officials said his visit was not the result of the station chief’s case.

The relationship between the spy services has often frayed in recent years. American officials believe that I.S.I. officers helped plan the deadly July 2008 bombing of the Indian embassy in Kabul, as well as provided support to Lashkar-e-Taiba militants who carried out the Mumbai attacks later that year.

The lawsuit filed in Brooklyn last month, brought by families of American victims of the Mumbai attacks, names the I.S.I. chief, Lt Gen. Ahmed Shuja Pasha, as being complicit in the terror attacks.

The legal complaint in Pakistan that named the C.I.A. station chief, who was working undercover and whose name is classified, was filed on Monday over an attack late last year that killed at least four Pakistanis. The complaint sought police help in keeping the station chief in the country until a lawsuit could be filed.

The agent’s name had already been revealed in a news conference last month by Mirza Shahzad Akbar, the lawyer who filed the complaint this week, and the name had been reported in local media.

Mr. Akbar said in an interview that he did not believe security was the reason for the C.I.A. agent’s leaving. “Obviously, his name had come out in the open and maybe he feared police action or an action by the Supreme Court,” Mr. Akbar said.

But an American intelligence official who spoke on condition of anonymity said the threats against the station chief “were of such a serious nature that it would be imprudent not to act,”

George Little, a C.I.A. spokesman, would not confirm that the station chief had to leave Pakistan, but did say that “station chiefs routinely encounter major risk as they work to keep America safe,” and that “their security is obviously a top priority for the C.I.A., especially when there’s an imminent threat.”

Mr. Akbar, who said the case would continue despite the station chief’s absence, is representing Kareem Khan, a resident of North Waziristan who claimed that his son and brother were killed in the drone strike last year. The complaint also named Leon Panetta, the C.I.A. director, and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates.

Mr. Khan, a resident of Mir Ali in North Waziristan, is seeking $500 million as compensation for the deaths, accusing the C.I.A. officer of running a clandestine spying operation out of the United States embassy in Islamabad. He also alleged that the C.I.A. officer was in the country on a business passport.

“My brother and son were innocent,” Mr. Khan had said in a recent interview. “There were no Taliban hiding in my house.”

Western and Pakistani intelligence officials said the attack also killed Haji Omer, a top commander allied closely allied with the Haqqani militant network and Al Qaeda.

For several years, drone attacks have been a regular element of American tactics to counter militants in Pakistan’s tribal areas, but the number of such strikes has increased markedly this year.

The attack Thursday struck the remote Terah valley in the Khyber region along the Afghan border where Pakistani militants have been taking refuge. At least some of the fighters appear to have fled to escape recent Pakistani military operations in the Swat, Orakzai, and South Waziristan tribal regions, as well as less remote areas of Khyber. There were three more strikes in the same area on Friday, a government official said.

The area is home to Lashkar-e-Islami, a militant organization that recently allied with the Pakistani Taliban, but which has often clashed with other groups.

As it published its year-end review of its Afghan war strategy on Thursday, the Obama administration indicated that it planned to step up attacks on Al Qaeda and Taliban insurgents in the area.

That would mean using Predator and Reaper drones in Pakistan’s tribal areas, and possibly carrying out Special Forces operations along the border, officials indicated.

Two British converts to Islam appeared to be among those killed in drone attacks in recent days, officials in North Waziristan said on Friday.

Two officials, a senior civilian Pakistani official based in Peshawar and a security official, who both spoke in return for anonymity because they were not authorized to brief reporters, said the Britons were believed to have assumed Islamic names — Abu Bakar, said to be his late 40s, and Mansoor in his mid-20s — after their conversion to Islam in Britain a few years ago.

The British Foreign Office said diplomats were aware of the reports and were trying to confirm them.

The report was the second in recent months suggesting the presence of some foreigners among militants fighting American forces in the border area. In July, American forces in Afghanistan detained a German citizen, Ahmed Sidiqi, 36, said to have ties to the men who helped plot the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Then in October, Pakistani officials said that several German citizens were killed in a drone strike in Pakistan.

Mark Mazzetti reported from Washington and Salman Masood from Islamabad, Pakistan. Ismail Khan contributed reporting from Peshawar, Pakistan, Alan Cowell from Paris, and J. David Goodman from New York.

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: December 17, 2010


An earlier version of this article referred incorrectly to the actions of a lawyer representing a Pakistani man over deaths allegedly connected with a drone attack. The lawyer filed a complaint with police in Islamabad on Monday and had threatened to file a lawsuit last month; he has not yet filed the suit.

 

[somebozo]

One station chief left another will come to replace him..may be some one worst than him..no need to celebrate..we should rather worry about who is replacing him.

 

[silent hill]

shame on US, hit and run, their best policy huh, now we understand, their garbage will all be laid on pakistan and they will run to their snake bill

best manners are to capture that cia guy and make him face justice in pakistan, why islamabad let him run???

bunch of bhagoras

 

[TechLahore]

A slightly more balanced one from the WP:

Top CIA spy in Pakistan pulled amid threats after public accusation over attack
By Karin Brulliard and Greg Miller
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, December 17, 2010; 4:36 PM

ISLAMABAD, PAKISTAN - The CIA's top spy in Pakistan has been pulled from his post after a Pakistani tribesman publicly accused him of responsibility in the deaths of three civilians in a drone-fired missile strike in the militant-heavy northwestern borderlands, a U.S. intelligence official said Friday.

The CIA station chief is returning to the United States, the official said, after "terrorist threats against him in Pakistan . . . of such a serious nature that it would be imprudent not to act."

The Associated Press first reported the development Friday morning, citing current and former U.S. intelligence officials.

CIA drone strikes against militant hideouts in the semiautonomous tribal areas bordering Afghanistan are tacitly approved by Pakistan. But the drone campaign, which the Obama administration has escalated dramatically this year, is unpopular among Pakistanis, many of whom believe that the strikes kill civilians.

Last month, a resident of the North Waziristan tribal agency - the epicenter of Islamist insurgents in Pakistan and the target of nearly all strikes by unmanned U.S. aircraft this year - identified and threatened to sue the CIA station chief if he was not compensated for what he said were the deaths of his brother, his son and a friend in a 2009 drone strike. The station chief's name was then widely published in Pakistani media.

This week, the accuser, Kareem Khan, asked police to file a criminal complaint against the station chief and prevent him from leaving the country. Khan and hundreds of other residents of the tribal areas staged a protest against drone strikes last weekend in Islamabad, the capital.

"Our station chiefs routinely encounter major risk as they work to keep America safe, and they've been targeted by terrorists in the past," George Little, a CIA spokesman, said Friday. "They are courageous in the face of danger, and their security is obviously a top priority for the CIA, especially when there's an imminent threat."

Mirza Shahzad Akbar, Khan's attorney, said Friday that 12 other North Waziristan families who claim to have lost property and relatives to drone strikes have agreed to join Khan in what amounts to a class-action lawsuit. He said the suit would soon be filed in Pakistani courts because U.S. officials had failed to respond to Khan's demand for $500 million in damages.

Akbar said he plans to file yet another suit against the Pakistani government for its tacit support for CIA drone strikes.

"They're not directly participating in it. The planes are operated by the CIA. The spy network is operated by the CIA," he said, explaining why Khan did not initially name the Pakistani government as a plaintiff. "And honestly, we don't think that the Pakistan government is going to pay us any kind of compensation."

Akbar said that as he was preparing the case, he decided to ask journalists in Islamabad for the name of the station chief. Two Pakistani print reporters gave him the same name, he said, so "I assumed that was his name and . . . decided to go on with it." He declined to name the journalists.

Akbar said he thought the station chief was probably removed because of U.S. worries about the potential success of the lawsuit, not because of threats.

"I thought he would be pulled out, but I didn't think he would be pulled out this fast," he said. "There are hundreds of lawsuits against the American government . . . and the CIA. They don't change their positions. Why are they changing their position in Islamabad?"

Although Akbar had asked police to prevent the station chief from leaving the country, he said he considered the departure "a big achievement for me, a big achievement for the case."

The combination of virulent anti-Americanism among the public and a muscular Islamist insurgency has made Pakistan among the most hostile working environments for U.S. government officials.

The U.S. Embassy in Islamabad - often derided in the Pakistani media as a "fortress" - is ensconced along with other embassies inside a highly secured walled enclave. Although U.S. diplomats live in private homes, many travel in armored vehicles.

Because of U.S. security concerns and Pakistani government rules, American diplomats and aid workers face strict restrictions on where they can travel outside Islamabad. Many are unable to see in person the projects they work on during their postings.

Nationalist segments of Pakistan's media have deepened the peril at times, U.S. officials say, by publishing photos of U.S. diplomats' homes. On Tuesday, PakNationalists, a Pakistani Web site, urged readers to submit photos of the CIA station chief.

The threats have been particularly acute for U.S. officials working in the volatile northwest. In April, insurgents attacked the U.S. Consulate in the city of Peshawar with car bombs, rifles and grenades, killing eight people, none of them American. Three U.S. soldiers were killed in a roadside bombing in the tribal areas in February.

An American aid worker, Stephen D. Vance, was fatally shot while driving to work in Peshawar in November 2008, three months after the U.S. consul general there escaped a similar attempt on her life.

Last week, the U.S. consul in Peshawar left her post after reports of threats from the Taliban; State Department officials denied those reports, saying she departed for personal reasons.

In 2006, a suicide bombing outside the U.S. Consulate in the southern port city of Karachi killed four people, including one American diplomat, a day before a visit by President George W. Bush.

Despite those incidents, U.S. officials say they are striving to make their work more public in an effort to improve the way the Pakistani public views the United States.

"One thing that we ought to do at this embassy is try as hard as we can . . . to have closer ties to people, make sure that the symbolism at the embassy is not one of a fortress, and to keep going out," a senior U.S. official recently told foreign journalists in Islamabad. "It's also a gesture to Pakistani people that we're not scared of them."

brulliardk@washpost.com millerg@washpost.com

Miller reported from Washington.