What's new

Pakistani Military Still Cultivates Militant Groups - More US Propaganda

sreekimpact

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
471
Reaction score
0
Country
India
Location
India
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — The Pakistani military continues to nurture a broad range of militant groups as part of a three-decade strategy of using proxies against its neighbors and American forces in Afghanistan, but now some of the fighters it trained are questioning that strategy, a prominent former militant commander says.

The former commander said that he was supported by the Pakistani military for 15 years as a fighter, leader and trainer of insurgents until he quit a few years ago. Well known in militant circles but accustomed to a covert existence, he gave an interview to The New York Times on the condition that his name, location and other personal details not be revealed.

Militant groups, like Lashkar-e-Taiba, Harakat-ul-Mujahedeen and Hizbul Mujahedeen, are run by religious leaders, with the Pakistani military providing training, strategic planning and protection. That system was still functioning, he said.

The former commander’s account belies years of assurances by Pakistan to American officials since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks that it has ceased supporting militant groups in its territory. The United States has given Pakistan more than $20 billion in aid over the past decade for its help with counterterrorism operations. Still, the former commander said, Pakistan’s military and intelligence establishment has not abandoned its policy of supporting the militant groups as tools in Pakistan’s dispute with India over the border territory of Kashmir and in Afghanistan to drive out American and NATO forces.

“There are two bodies running these affairs: mullahs and retired generals,” he said. He named a number of former military officials involved in the program, including former chiefs of the intelligence service and other former generals. “These people have a very big role still,” he said.

Maj. Gen. Zaheer ul-Islam Abbasi, a former intelligence officer who was convicted of attempting a coup against the government of Benazir Bhutto in 1995 and who is now dead, was one of the most active supporters of the militant groups in the years after Sept. 11, the former commander said.

He said he saw General Abbasi several times: once at a meeting of Taliban and Pakistani militant leaders in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Province as they planned how to confront the American military in Afghanistan; and twice in Mir Ali, which became the center for foreign militants in Pakistan’s tribal areas, including members of Al Qaeda.

There were about 60 people at the Taliban meeting in late 2001, soon after the Taliban government fell, the former commander said. Pakistani militant leaders were present, as were the Taliban ambassador to Pakistan, Abdul Salam Zaeef, and Muhammad Haqqani, a member of the Haqqani network.

Several retired officials of Pakistan’s premier spy agency, the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI, were also there, he said, including a man known as Colonel Imam but who was actually Brig. Sultan Amir, a well-known trainer and mentor of militants, and General Abbasi. The militant groups divided Afghanistan into separate areas of operations and discussed how to “trip up America,” he said.

The Pakistani military still supports the Afghan Taliban in their fight to force out American and NATO forces from Afghanistan, he said, adding that he thought they would be successful.

The ISI also still supports other Pakistani militant groups, even some of those that have turned against the government, because the military still wants to keep them as tools for use against its archrival, India, he said. The military used a strategy of divide and rule, encouraging splits in the militant groups to weaken and control them, he said.

Although the military has lost control of many of the firebrand fighters, and has little influence over the foreign fighters in the tribal areas who belong to Al Qaeda — some of whom openly oppose the Pakistani government — it was reluctant to move against them, he said. Pakistan could easily kill the notoriously vicious militant leader of the Pakistani Taliban, Hakimullah Mehsud, but chose not to, he said. “If someone gave me 20,000 rupees, I would do it,” he said, citing a price of about $235.

“The government is not interested in eliminating them permanently,” he said. “The Pakistani military establishment has become habituated to using proxies.” He added that there were many sympathizers in the military who still supported the use of militants.

Pakistan has 12,000 to 14,000 fully trained Kashmiri fighters, scattered throughout various camps in Pakistan, and is holding them in reserve to use if needed in a war against India, he said.

Yet Pakistan has been losing the fight for Kashmir, and most Kashmiris now want independence and not to be part of Pakistan or India, he said. Since Sept. 11, Pakistan has redirected much of its attention away from Kashmir to Afghanistan, and many Kashmiri fighters are not interested in that fight and have taken up India’s offer of an amnesty to go home.


Others, like the former commander, have gotten out because of their disillusionment over the way they were being used to fight Osama bin Laden’s war, or used for the aims of a few top generals who had allied Pakistan with the United States to gain access to its military and financial aid. “There are a lot of people who do not think they are doing the right thing,” he said of the military.

“This is extremely wrong to sacrifice 16,000 people for a single person,” he said, referring to Bin Laden. “A person should sacrifice himself for 16,000 people.” He said he was using the figure of 16,000 just as an example.

“The Taliban lost a whole government for one person,” he said, again referring to Bin Laden. “And Pakistan went to war just for a few generals and now for President Zardari,” he said, referring to Asif Ali Zardari. “A real war is for a country.”

Many of the thousands of trained Pakistani fighters turned against the military because it treated them so carelessly, he said. “Pakistan used them and then, like a paper tissue, threw them away,” he said. “Look at me, I am a very well-trained fighter and I have no other option in life, except to fight and take revenge.”

Indeed, he was first trained for a year by the Pakistani militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba at a camp in Kunar Province, in Afghanistan, in the early 1990s. The war against Soviet troops in Afghanistan was over, and Pakistan turned to training fighters for an insurgency in the Indian-controlled part of Kashmir.

He became skilled at firing Russian-made rocket-propelled grenades, and he was sent to fight, and train others, in Kashmir, Bosnia, Chechnya and Afghanistan. Over the years he worked with different militant groups, and he estimated that he personally trained up to 4,000 fighters.

The entire enterprise was supported by the Pakistani military and executed by Pakistani militant groups, he said. He was paid by a wing of the ISI, which is an integral part of the army.

Fighters were paid about $50 a month, he said, and commanders about $500.

But now, he said, Pakistan and the United States would be much better able to counter terrorism if they could redirect the legions of militants toward the correct path of Islam to rebuild and educate communities, he said.

“Pakistan, and especially America, needs to understand the true spirit of Islam, and they need to project the true spirit of Islam,” he said. “That would be a good strategy to stop them.”


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/04/world/asia/04pakistan.html?_r=1&hp
 
"he gave an interview to The New York Times on the condition that his name, location and other personal details not be revealed."

This says it all.

Plus nothing new, same old BS from unnamed sources and the same talk to please the ears of some and propagate for whatever reasons.

Again i ask, what is holding the US from going to the UN and presenting all these evidences and unnamed sources and sanctioning Pakistan or bombing it ?? What is stopping them ??

Why can't McCain goes to the UN and says hey Pakistan is doing this and that, here is the evidence, so lets bomb Pakistan, what is stopping the US ???

Pathetic hypocrites.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here, this is how much its easy to make up new.

An Ex-TTP Commander says, CIA has been giving them money to attack Pakistani Targets

Ex-BLA Commander says, CIA and other foreign Agencies working from inside Afghanistan are providing them with money and weapons to spread insurgency in Baluchistan

The identifies of both the Ex-Commanders has been kept secret for security reasons.
 
"he gave an interview to The New York Times on the condition that his name, location and other personal details not be revealed."

This says it all.

Plus nothing new, same old BS from unnamed sources and the same talk to please the ears of some and propagate for whatever reasons.

Again i ask, what is holding the US from going to the UN and presenting all these evidences and unnamed sources and sanctioning Pakistan or bombing it ?? What is stopping them ??

Why can't McCain goes to the UN and says hey Pakistan is doing this and that, here is the evidence, so lets bomb Pakistan, what is stopping the US ???

Pathetic hypocrites.


then what are Drones doing in your country??
 
Most likely truth. After the Muji had such success, Pakistan felt they would be foolish not to use this new tool of policy. As it turns out, like poison gas, a hard weapon to control. And considering the US abandoned the area last time, they hedge thier bets. We need a truly coherent policy that reassures those in the area we have "long-term" interest not only in stability, but prosperity in the region.
 
then what are Drones doing in your country??

Are you seriously being sarcastic or what ?? If being sarcastic, then sorry to say you are failing at that miserably.

Am talking about how US lied to the UN about the Iraqi WMD and attacked it with full might.

Drones are being used on a small area with the consent of the Pakistani military and Pakistani govt approval.

So, if Pakistan is collaborating with the Talibans and in result Americans are being killed and US has so much evidence, then its better to go to the UN and use much more rather then just drones.


Got the point this time ??? Or more sarcasm is on hold ???
 
i could have wrote much more descriptively for you.

Of course the drones are used with the consent of Pakistan.
DO you know only 3 % percent of pakistanis support this drone attack .( correct me if im wrong)

still your govt is allowing it , do you know why........ elementary..... There is no other choice them.
and think about a situation if your govt didn't allow drone strikes from the beginning of the war...

They may not come in full might like what they did in iRaq, bocz there is no need for that.

here they are using (leasing ) pakistan army to fight their war against talibans. and if there is some thing they wanted to do directly... they do it from skies, so that there is no loss of US personals.

wars are won not only by arms there are also other ways ...
 
i could have wrote much more descriptively for you.

Of course the drones are used with the consent of Pakistan.
DO you know only 3 % percent of pakistanis support this drone attack .( correct me if im wrong)

still your govt is allowing it , do you know why........ elementary..... There is no other choice them.
and think about a situation if your govt didn't allow drone strikes from the beginning of the war...

They may not come in full might like what they did in iRaq, bocz there is no need for that.

here they are using (leasing ) pakistan army to fight their war against talibans. and if there is some thing they wanted to do directly... they do it from skies, so that there is no loss of US personals.

wars are won not only by arms there are also other ways ...

Problem is people use their emotions when judging something, had it been the drones under PA control, you would have seen 97% approval rating, while 3% would have been opposed to it. The 97% who dislike it right now is just because the US is doing it, and its common thing that no one likes that other country interferes in their affairs. Had these 97% been thinking from their minds, then they might have changed their verdict, but since they think from their hearts and based on emotions, thus we have so much dislike for these drone attacks.

And by the way, PA has not been leased to do their work, PA did attacked the Talibans US wants to, but it was years agoo, since then PA has been fighting the Talibans which are creation of the US itself. Had PA been leased out, we won't be hearing the US crying for attacking the Haqqanis or the Talibans in the NWA area. We have been attacking those who are being used by people from across the border with money and weapons being provided from across the border.
 
Most likely truth. After the Muji had such success, Pakistan felt they would be foolish not to use this new tool of policy. As it turns out, like poison gas, a hard weapon to control. And considering the US abandoned the area last time, they hedge thier bets. We need a truly coherent policy that reassures those in the area we have "long-term" interest not only in stability, but prosperity in the region.

What the hel.l are you spewing out of your keyboard???
 
self delete. promised not to feed the mentaly challenged trolls, harder than it sounds.
 
Back
Top Bottom