What's new

FO rejects expansion of US drone strike campaign in Pakistan

H2O3C4Nitrogen

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Dec 3, 2007
Messages
4,386
Reaction score
0
FO rejects expansion of US drone strike campaign in Pakistan

Pakistan said Saturday it would never allow any expansion in the campaign of drone strikes by the United States on its territory.
The Washington Post reported Friday that the US was seeking to expand the areas inside Pakistan where Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) unmanned aircraft — used for surveillance and to launch missile strikes — could operate.
“As for the reported suggestion by the US to carry out drone attacks beyond our tribal areas, Pakistan’s position is very clear — we would never allow this to happen,” foreign ministry spokesman Abdul Basit told media.
“We already have issues with American drone strikes, which are known to Washington,” Basit said.
“These strikes violate our sovereignty, cause collateral damage and above all are producing (a) drone-hardened generation.”
Pakistan has repeatedly said there is no justification for the drone strikes, describing them as “counter-productive” and a violation of the country’s sovereignty.
More than 240 people have been killed in 45 strikes since September 3, angering the government, which is facing criticism for acquiescing to the attacks and reprisals from militant groups based in the area.
The US considers Pakistan’s tribal belt an al Qaeda headquarters, and has reportedly criticised Pakistan’s failure so far to launch a major ground offensive in the tribal region of North Waziristan.

FO rejects expansion of US drone strike campaign in Pakistan | Pakistan | News | Newspaper | Daily | English | Online
 
Drone operations expansion will not be allowed: FO

basit111-640x480.jpg

FO spokesperson rejects reports of expansion of US CIA drone activity to other areas in Pakistan.

ISLAMABAD:
Under no circumstances will the expansion of drone attacks be allowed, the Foreign Office said on Saturday in response to reports that the US is looking to expand drone operations up to Quetta.

It has been clearly conveyed to the US that action against militants in Pakistani territory will be carried out by Pakistan, said Foreign Office spokesman Abdul Basit.

He said that Pakistan strongly rejects the idea of expanding drone attacks and that there is a clear policy in this regard.

“We are allies of the United States in the war against terror, however, Pakistan will not compromise on sovereignty,” Basit said.

He said that the US knows the repercussions of expansion of drone operations, pointing out an increased need for intelligence cooperation between the two countries.

Basit said that raising the spectre of the so-called Quetta shura was preposterous.

The United States is seeking to expand the areas inside Pakistan where Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) drones can operate, The Washington Post reported late Friday.

Drone operations expansion will not be allowed: FO – The Express Tribune
 
Pakistan denies US bid to widen drone-strike zones



ISLAMABAD (AP) — Pakistan has rejected a U.S. request to expand the areas where American missiles can target Taliban and al-Qaida operatives, a senior Pakistani intelligence official said Saturday.

The U.S. has sharply increased the attacks by remote-controlled drones in Pakistani territory, launching more than 100 this year. Most have hit North Waziristan, believed to be a hide-out of senior militants who plot attacks against NATO and U.S. troops in Afghanistan.

Pakistan privately tolerates the strikes in militant strongholds near the Afghan border as a "necessary evil" but cannot sanction widening them into more-populated areas, said the official with the Pakistani military Inter Service Intelligence agency, or ISI. He spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the press.

The missile attacks are rarely officially acknowledged by Washington, and Pakistan officially condemns them as a violation of its sovereignty that threatens to further turn the population against the army and central authorities. The program, which U.S. officials say has killed hundreds of insurgents, has been condemned by critics who say it may constitute illegal assassinations.

The American drones now operate in designated "boxes" inside Pakistan's Federally Administrated Tribal Areas located along the lawless, mountainous border with Afghanistan, the ISI official said. He confirmed that U.S. officials had sought both to enlarge the current boxes and establish new ones outside the tribal zone where senior Taliban and al-Qaida operatives are suspected to be operating.

He would not specify which new areas the American side hoped to target, but an article in the Washington Post identified one as the area around Quetta city in southwestern Pakistan, which is believed to be where Afghan Taliban chief Mullah Mohammad Omar operates.

The official said the Pakistani side denied the request because the risk of civilian casualties was too great. The missile strikes already inspire deep outrage among much of the Pakistani populace, he said, and the government cannot afford to inflame more resentment by expanding them into more populated areas.

The Associated Press: Pakistan denies US bid to widen drone-strike zones
 
U.S. seeks more drone strikes to slow insurgents

By Greg Miller
Saturday, November 20, 2010


ISLAMABAD, PAKISTAN - The United States has renewed pressure on Pakistan to expand the areas where CIA drones can operate inside the country, reflecting concern that the U.S. war effort in Afghanistan is being undermined by insurgents' continued ability to take sanctuary across the border, U.S. and Pakistani officials said.

The U.S. appeal has focused on the area surrounding the Pakistani city of Quetta, where the Afghan Taliban leadership is thought to be based. But the request also seeks to expand the boundaries for drone strikes in the tribal areas, which have been targeted in 101 attacks this year, the officials said.

Pakistan has rejected the request, officials said. Instead, the country has agreed to more modest measures, including an expanded CIA presence in Quetta, where the agency and Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) directorate have established teams seeking to locate and capture senior members of the Taliban.

The disagreement over the scope of the drone program underscores broader tensions between the United States and Pakistan, wary allies that are increasingly pointing fingers at one another over the rising levels of insurgent violence on both sides of the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.

Senior Pakistani officials expressed resentment over what they described as misplaced U.S. pressure to do more, saying the United States has not controlled the Afghan side of the border, is preoccupied by arbitrary military deadlines and has little regard for Pakistan's internal security problems.

"You expect us to open the skies for anything that you can fly," said a high-ranking Pakistani intelligence official, who described the Quetta request as an affront to Pakistani sovereignty. "In which country can you do that?"

U.S. officials confirmed the request for expanded drone flights. They cited concern that Quetta functions not only as a sanctuary for Taliban leaders but also as a base for sending money, recruits and explosives to Taliban forces inside Afghanistan.

"If they understand our side, they know the patience is running out," a senior NATO military official said.

The CIA's drone campaign in Pakistan has accelerated dramatically in recent months, with 47 attacks recorded since the beginning of September, according to the Long War Journal, a Web site that tracks the strikes. By contrast, there were 45 strikes in the first five years of the drone program.

But Pakistan places strict boundaries on where CIA drones can fly. The unmanned aircraft may patrol designated flight "boxes" over the country's tribal belt but not other provinces, including Baluchistan, which encompasses Quetta.

"They want to increase the size of the boxes, they want to relocate the boxes," a second Pakistani intelligence official said of the latest U.S. requests. "I don't think we are going to go any further."

He and others spoke on the condition of anonymity, citing the clandestine nature of a program that neither government will publicly acknowledge.

Pakistani officials stressed that Quetta is a densely populated city where an errant strike is more likely to kill innocent civilians, potentially provoking a backlash. Unlike the semiautonomous tribal territories, Baluchistan is considered a core part of Pakistan.

U.S. officials have long suspected there are other reasons for Islamabad's aversion, including concern that the drones might be used to conduct surveillance of Pakistani nuclear weapons facilities in Baluchistan.

In interviews in Islamabad, senior Pakistani officials voiced a mix of appreciation and apprehension over the U.S. role in the region.

The high-ranking Pakistani intelligence official said that the CIA-ISI relationship is stronger than at any time since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and that the two spy services carry out joint operations "almost on a daily basis."

"I wish [our] countries understood each other the way the CIA and ISI understand each other," the official said. But he also traced Pakistan's most acute problems, including an epidemic of militant violence, to two decisions by the government to collaborate with the United States.

Using the ISI to funnel CIA money and arms to mujaheddin fighters in the 1980s helped oust the Soviets from Afghanistan, the official said, but also made Pakistan a breeding ground for militant groups.

Similarly, Pakistan's cooperation since the Sept. 11 attacks has been key to the capture of al-Qaeda operatives and the success of the drone campaign. But it has inflamed radical elements in the country and made Islamabad a target of terrorist attacks.

"We'd not have been here if we had not supported the Afghan jihad, if we had not supported [the response to] 9/11," the official said, adding that it was "our fault. We should have stood up."

Barring the CIA from flying drones over Quetta, the official said, is one area in which Pakistan is now taking a stand.

In other areas, CIA-ISI cooperation has deepened. The agencies have carried out more than 100 joint operations in the past 18 months, including raids that have led to the capture of high-ranking figures including Abdul Ghani Baradar, the Taliban's former military chief. Baradar was seized in the southern port city of Karachi.

The Pakistani intelligence official said the operations have been "mainly focused on Quetta." Teams based there rely on sophisticated surveillance technology and eavesdropping equipment provided by the CIA. When a raid or capture is attempted, the ISI is in the lead.

The aim is "to capture or arrest people based on intel primarily provided by Americans," the Pakistani intelligence official said. The effort has been underway for a year, the official said, but "now the intensity is much higher."

Nevertheless, U.S. and Pakistani officials acknowledged that they have no high-profile arrests or other successes to show for their efforts. The NATO military official said there had been "intelligence-led" operations against Taliban targets in Quetta in recent months but described them as "small scale" in nature.

The two sides disagree sharply over the importance of the Quetta Shura, the leadership council led by Mohammad Omar that presides over the Afghan Taliban. Some senior Pakistani officials refuse to use the term "Quetta Shura," calling it a U.S. construct designed to embarrass Pakistan.

"I'm not denying the individual presence of members" of the Taliban in or near Quetta, a senior Pakistani military official said. "But to create the impression there is a body micromanaging the affairs of the Afghan Taliban . . . is very far-fetched."

The push to expand the drone strikes has come up repeatedly in recent months, Pakistani officials said. The United States has also urged Pakistan to launch a military offensive in North Waziristan, a redoubt for militant groups including al-Qaeda, the Pakistani Taliban and the Haqqani network, considered the most lethal foe of U.S. forces in Afghanistan.

Pakistani officials ruled out a sweep anytime soon, saying the country's military is still consolidating its hold on territory in the Swat Valley and South Waziristan, where tens of thousands of residents were displaced during operations to oust militants last year.

The senior Pakistani military official said U.S. expectations have little to do with Islamabad's own national security calculations.

"You have timelines of November elections and July 2011 drawdowns - you're looking for short-term gains," the official said, referring to President Obama's pledge to begin withdrawing U.S. troops from Afghanistan in July. "Your short-term gains should not be our long-term pain."

Correspondents Karin Brulliard in Islamabad and Joshua Partlow in Kabul contributed to this report.

U.S. seeks more drone strikes to slow insurgents
 
This is only going to further the rift and trust deficit between US and Pakistan. Pakistan will neither itself take action nor let US take action.:rolleyes:

Drone Strikes have been allowed upto certin Areas but they cant be allowed into the Urban areas like Quetta.
 
Drone Strikes have been allowed upto certin Areas but they cant be allowed into the Urban areas like Quetta.
^^
This, i think the fallout from such a decision will be very, very detrimental for a government already at odds with the public and with little support from other political parties or the military.

I don't think the PPP can afford this to go live, it will probably end up like some covert cloak and dagger nonsense like the centre in Khosar Market back in 2009.
 
http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakistans-war/81250-gunmen-torch-10-nato-oil-tankers-peshawar.html

After scores of such attacks, I doubt US will be asking any official permission to Pakistan for drone strikes. Most of this stuff is just an eyewash to keep local people content. PPP knows that people don't like them but because of internal trouble right now something is needed which is why your military is not taking over (possibly).

Drone strikes will increase but with secret yes from your government. The more economic assistance flows in, the lesser GoP influence will have. Things have become worse with more and more attacks against NATO supplies.
 
http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakistans-war/81250-gunmen-torch-10-nato-oil-tankers-peshawar.html

After scores of such attacks, I doubt US will be asking any official permission to Pakistan for drone strikes. Most of this stuff is just an eyewash to keep local people content. PPP knows that people don't like them but because of internal trouble right now something is needed which is why your military is not taking over (possibly).

Drone strikes will increase but with secret yes from your government. The more economic assistance flows in, the lesser GoP influence will have. Things have become worse with more and more attacks against NATO supplies.

After scores of such attacks, I doubt US will be asking any official permission to Pakistan for drone strikes.

:disagree:

Things have become worse with more and more attacks against NATO supplies.

Nope, it is the CONTRACTOR's job to secure the terminal HUB, not the Governments. NATO should pay for proper convoy and HUB security and stop fishing for excuses.

BTW the US cannot afford to antagonise an already worsening situation.
 
Nope, it is the CONTRACTOR's job to secure the terminal HUB, not the Governments. NATO should pay for proper convoy and HUB security and stop fishing for excuses.

Contractors are appointed by the government to use a specific route of your territory isn't it? Surely you are not telling me that these transport contractors deal with a foreign military directly without Pakistani government's involvement at all?

BTW the US cannot afford to antagonise an already worsening situation.

Actually both US and Pakistan cannot afford to tick each other off. For example, the last time you shut the route, there was a scramble in NATO to speed up the Russia-NATO meet. Though there were public apologies but one more shut down means they would change the route which also means drying up of military and economic assistance.

This is your only key card and by opening it too frequently, you will make your strategy too predictable for them. GoP knows this and hence will not be so reckless.
 
Only upto a certain limit. You can't just leave the contractor on his own in a war zone. It's like asking Ratan Tata to pay for a naval security force to prevent people from attacking the Taj Hotel.

Here you go again, look unless you know what exactly im talking about please stop quoting me...

Here let me enlighten you:

CAGE Welcome

Read the guidelines on contractor "convoy security"

Nato's malpractices when it comes to hiring contractors for convey security is widely criticised and well known:
FoxNews.com - Reckless behavior of private companies protecting NATO convoys angers Afghans


Furthermore the official process to get "government security escort" is by submitting a "Request for Assistance" or "Official Escort" Request to the Ministry of Interior in Islamabad.

The convey contractors "private companies" hired by Nato have never ever made any such requests when the leave Karachi Sea Port to the various dry ports in and around Pakistan until reaching NWFP:

Security remained an unresolved issue between the authorities and those transporting consignments for Nato forces in Afghanistan which leave the city ports and pass through the roads of the metropolis in large numbers everyday.

“They (convoys carrying Nato consignments) move in a regular way like other trade goods,” Sindh Home Secretary Arif Ahmed Khan told Dawn in his brief response. “The stakeholders, who transport the goods, have never asked for security neither we provided that. So there is no security cover for these particular consignments.”
DAWN.COM | Local | Little security for Nato supply convoys

In addition to this list of gross failing, these contractors use open space to hub these containers and tankers containing goods and raw materials worth 100'000's of $, yet there are contractors in pakistan that have specifically designed high security hubs in Karachi, Islamabad, Peshawar and Quetta. Why does NATO not use them?

The Answer: Cheap tendering and what people call in the business "Sub Contracting", the onus of security rests on the shipper not the nation the shipping is going through.

If Indian mail loses your letter, you had it insured, who do you sue? Indian mail or the city the letter was going to?


Furthermore it is also largely NATO's fault for not conducting due diligence on these contractors to see if they have the facilities and ability to store, and safeguard their cargo to and from Pakistan.

Just blaming everything on Pakistan is bad practice and is now getting tiresome.

---------- Post added at 05:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:19 PM ----------

Contractors are appointed by the government to use a specific route of your territory isn't it? Surely you are not telling me that these transport contractors deal with a foreign military directly without Pakistani government's involvement at all?



Actually both US and Pakistan cannot afford to tick each other off. For example, the last time you shut the route, there was a scramble in NATO to speed up the Russia-NATO meet. Though there were public apologies but one more shut down means they would change the route which also means drying up of military and economic assistance.

This is your only key card and by opening it too frequently, you will make your strategy too predictable for them. GoP knows this and hence will not be so reckless.

Read my post please!
 
Pakistan will neither itself take action nor let US take action.:rolleyes:
That is incorrect - Pakistan has offered repeatedly to conduct the drone strikes itself with the US either leasing or selling it the necessary equipment.

The problem here is with US hubris, where they do not want to bolster Pakistan's capabilities to conduct these operations, and then insist on being allowed to conduct military operations on Pakistani soil themselves.
 
That is incorrect - Pakistan has offered repeatedly to conduct the drone strikes itself with the US either leasing or selling it the necessary equipment.

The problem here is with US hubris, where they do not want to bolster Pakistan's capabilities to conduct these operations, and then insist on being allowed to conduct military operations on Pakistani soil themselves.

How much does it matter as to who controls the drone? All that matters is the target which the drone is going to hit and that target is decided in collaboration with Pakistan's intelligence and security agencies.
 
How much does it matter as to who controls the drone? All that matters is the target which the drone is going to hit and that target is decided in collaboration with Pakistan's intelligence and security agencies.

People like you and me it does not matter, the general mass... it does very much, national pride and and you know..
 

Latest posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom