Pak rebuffs US on Haqqani network crackdown

[pkd]

Pak rebuffs US on Haqqani network crackdown

ISLAMABAD: The Pakistani military has rejected US demands that Islamabad crack down on the strongest Taliban warrior in Afghanistan, Siraj Haqqani, whose fighters pose the biggest threat to American forces, Pakistani military officials and diplomats told the New York Times.

In a report published on Monday, the paper said the “demands, first made by senior American officials before President Obama’s Afghanistan speech and repeated many times since, were renewed in a written demarche delivered in recent days by the US embassy to the Pakistan Army chief Ashfaq Kayani”. Gen David Petraeus followed up on Monday during a visit to Islamabad, the paper said.

“The demands have been accompanied by strong suggestions that if the Pakistanis cannot take care of the problem, including dismantling the Taliban leadership based in Quetta, the Americans will by resorting to broader and more frequent drone strikes in Pakistan,” the NYT said.

But the demands have been greeted with official public silence and private anger in Pakistan, illustrating the widening gulf between the allies. Several former Pakistani military officers voice irritation with the American insistence.

“It is really beginning to irk and anger us,” a security official familiar with the deliberations at the senior levels of the Pakistani leadership told the paper.

An analyst said Pakistan was reluctant to act against Haqqani, as it considered “Haqqani and his control of broad swaths of Afghan territory vital to Pakistan in the jostling for influence that will pit Pakistan, India, Russia, China and Iran in the post-American Afghan arena”.

“If America walks away, Pakistan is very worried that it will have India on its eastern border and India on its western border in Afghanistan,” said Tariq Fatemi, a former Pakistani ambassador to the US who is pro-American in his views.

For that reason, Fatemi told NYT that the Pakistan Army was “very reluctant” to jettison Haqqani. In his reply to the US, Gen Ashfaq Kayani had urged a short-term argument, according to two Pakistani officials familiar with the response.

Pak rebuffs US on Haqqani network crackdown

 

[Awesome]

Can't we prop up a new ally in Afghanistan? I hate the idea of Pakistan consorting with Mullahs, although I completely understand that not doing anything is also not an option as we don't want India on our east and west.

A new ally in Afghanistan will be necessary. Also have we received any guarantees that the Haqqani network would vacate Pakistan once the Americans have left?

 

[ajpirzada]

Because Mr. Haqqani now spends so much time in Afghanistan — about three weeks of every month, according to a Pakistani security official — if the Americans want to eliminate him, their troops should have ample opportunity to capture him, Pakistani security officials argue.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/15/world/asia/15haqqani.html

 

[ajpirzada]

instead of tellin pakistan to target haqqani, y doesnt US do it itself and destroy his network in quite many provinces in afghanistan.
we are not stoppin americans from doin that or are we?

all america wants is somehow turn the guns of afghan talibans towards pakistan and then leave with their heads high.
and pakistan will be on the wrong side of history if we target afghan taliban who hold their shura meetings in afghanistan.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Can't we prop up a new ally in Afghanistan? I hate the idea of Pakistan consorting with Mullahs, although I completely understand that not doing anything is also not an option as we don't want India on our east and west.

A new ally in Afghanistan will be necessary. Also have we received any guarantees that the Haqqani network would vacate Pakistan once the Americans have left?

The NYT article also points this out:

"Moreover, the Pakistanis do not want to alienate Mr. Haqqani because they consider him an important player in reconciliation efforts that they would like to see get under way in Afghanistan immediately, the officials said.

Because Mr. Haqqani shelters Qaeda leaders and operatives in North Waziristan, Washington is opposed to including Mr. Haqqani among the possible reconcilable Taliban, at least for the moment, a Western diplomat said."

This might be the major cause of tension right now.

 

[zombie]

instead of tellin pakistan to target haqqani, y doesnt US do it itself and destroy his network in quite many provinces in afghanistan.
we are not stoppin americans from doin that or are we?

Have to agree to the opinion here.

The US doesn't need permission a hundred times. It is well within its rights and has the means to go after those who it thinks has harmed it directly or supported those who have harmed it directly earlier and killing its troops now.

I think pakistan would be in its right to not go after the Haqqani network but at the same time cannot stop or ask the americans to do so.

Here pakistani army would be well advised to not be found out sheltering or providing any information to the haqqani group or even raising public opinion towards it. Doing so would clearly be supporting the enemy. It can either go after haqqani(which is dangerous in my opinion), stand aside and let the mess clear out(which is the smartest thing to do) or support haqqani directly or indirectly(which is again dangerous in my opinion). Ofcourse pakistanis and pak army will choose the wisest of the three right?

 

[Awesome]

The Haqqani network is in North Waziristan and we're already on board with conducting Drone strikes over there. What is the logic of threatening to expand the drone strikes in Balochistan to get Haqqani?

The US is trying to push a package deal, Kill one Haqqani and get a Balochistan free?

As far as our own benefit from Haqqani is concerned, put yourself in Taliban's shoes. They will definitely hate us by now for supporting the US and causing its downfall.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Have to agree to the opinion here.

The US doesn't need permission a hundred times. It is well within its rights and has the means to go after those who it thinks has harmed it directly or supported those who have harmed it directly earlier and killing its troops now.

I think pakistan would be in its right to not go after the Haqqani network but at the same time cannot stop or ask the americans to do so.

Here pakistani army would be well advised to not be found out sheltering or providing any information to the haqqani group or even raising public opinion towards it. Doing so would clearly be supporting the enemy. It can either go after haqqani(which is dangerous in my opinion), stand aside and let the mess clear out(which is the smartest thing to do) or support haqqani directly or indirectly(which is again dangerous in my opinion). Ofcourse pakistanis and pak army will choose the wisest of the three right?

One analyst in the NYT article points out that Pakistan is not supporting the Haqqani network in terms of training or equipment, and if we have not done that so far we are not likely to start it up again while the US is engaged in Afghanistan.

But as Pakistan points out, the US has plenty of opportunity to go after the Haqqani network in Afghanistan, plus it can better coordinate patrols along the NW (between the ANA, US Army and PA border to control cross border movement) - all of which would impact the Haqqani network and not force Pakistan into creating another enemy in FATA and open another front.

 

[Awesome]

If the US had not allowed the Indians to gain control of Afghanistan this would not have been an issue today.

 

[mr42O]

What about TTP leader from swat who escaped to Afghanistan when will USA take action against them ? USA should take control of 70% area which taliban are king of.

 

[Slides]

Taliban is ruling over Kunar once again. Maybe Haqqani is on vacation there.

 

[deckingraj]

If the US had not allowed the Indians to gain control of Afghanistan this would not have been an issue today.

I think i know what you are talking about but wanted to double check...Control of Afghanistan?? Don't you think its too much credit to India???

 

[mr42O]

When ever USA fail they complain for some ting to Pakistan. They are afraid what Pakistan and Afghans did against USSR will happen to them also ?

 

[TruthSeeker]

If Pakistan will not help in the ISAF to close down Haqqani's safe havens in Pakistan, then the US should attack these foreigner safe havens with an accelerated drone strike program. While this may upset the Pakistani Islamic radical parties, that is better than allowing Haqqani to operate with impunity in FATA. After all, Haqqani and his forces are foreigners aren't they? They aren't Pakistani citizens or legal immigrants are they? They are violating Pakistan's sovereignty. The US will help Pakistan to regain its sovereignty over all of FATA. You are welcome!!

 

[deckingraj]

If Pakistan will not help in the ISAF to close down Haqqani's safe havens in Pakistan, then the US should attack these foreigner safe havens with an accelerated drone strike program.

To be quite honest i would be a happy man if US choose to do so...However the bigger question is will it help them in winning war against Taliban???

While this may upset the Pakistani Islamic radical parties, that is better than allowing Haqqani to operate with impunity in FATA.

Why do you think so??? Are we saying that taliban will not have leaders to replace Haqqani?? I know this will weaken the movement but at the cost of alienating Pak..outcry in pubic and free flow of recruits...Though much of the situation is same even now however this will just add to the fuel...

They aren't Pakistani citizens or legal immigrants are they? They are violating Pakistan's sovereignty. The US will help Pakistan to regain its sovereignty over all of FATA. You are welcome!!

Well again i agree with your point but then i am looking at it with my obvious bias towards Pakistan...May be an average Pakistani don't see it that way...


On a side note do you think there is more potent way than actually using drones???