Pentagon criticizes Mullen to have "overstated the case" (somewhat)

[VelocuR]

Pentagon to work with Pakistani military on differences

English.news.cn 2011-09-28 05:12:50 FeedbackPrintRSS

WASHINGTON, Sept. 27 (Xinhua) -- Despite the troubled U.S.- Pakistani relationship, the Pentagon said Tuesday that it will continue to work with its Pakistani counterpart to resolve the differences.

"We want to maintain a relationship with Pakistan that's grounded in common interests, to include going after terrorists that threaten both countries," Pentagon Press Secretary George Little told reporters.

"There are differences from time to time in the relationship with Pakistan, as there are in any partnership," he said. "Those differences have been made public, and we continue to discuss ( them) in private."

The remarks came as ties between the U.S. and Pakistan was strained after top U.S. defense officials accused Pakistan's intelligence agency of supporting the Haqqani network blamed for recent attacks on the U.S. embassy and a military base in Afghanistan.

The harsh criticism was met with outright denial and outrageous reaction from Pakistan which warned that Washington may lose an ally of the war on terror.

Despite the bickering, Little said the Pentagon looks forward to working with the Pakistanis to try to resolve such differences.

"It's important that both sides continue the dialogue," he added, "and that's happening."

 

[VelocuR]

U.S. says Pakistan ties face "clear challenges"
English.news.cn 2011-09-27 09:35:00 FeedbackPrintRSS

WASHINGTON, Sept. 26 (Xinhua) -- U.S. State Department Spokesman Mark Toner said Monday that relations with Pakistan have some "very clear challenges" due to Islamabad's suspected ties with a militant group.

The remarks came at a time when the two countries' already fragile ties sunk to a new low after senior U.S. officials, including Chairman of U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Mike Mullen, explicitly accused Pakistan of backing the Haqqani network which was blamed for the recent attacks on the U.S. embassy in Afghanistan.

"I think it's clear that terrorism is a threat to both Pakistan and to the United States, and we're committed to working with the Pakistani Government to address it," Toner told reporters at a regular briefing, suggesting that Washington is considering designating the Haqqani network as a foreign terrorist organization.

"As far as our concerns about the Haqqani Network, that's been raised at the highest levels," he said, citing the recent remarks by U.S. State Secretary Hillary Clinton, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Mullen.

He said the status of the bilateral ties is "certainly a matter of concern," but he emphasized that Washington is addressing these concerns by "working constructively with the Pakistani government."

Toner said the U.S. government has slapped sanctions on the "kingpins" of the Haqqani network, including its financiers, leadership and dangerous operatives, suggesting that Washington is considering the designation of the group as the foreign terrorist organization.

"The idea that we haven't gone after the Haqqani Network at all, I think, is a mischaracterization," he added.

The recent U.S. harsh criticism has been met with outright denial and outrageous reaction from Pakistan which has warned that Washington may lose an ally of the war on terror.

U.S.-Pakistani relations have already deteriorated this year after tensions rose over a secret U.S. commando mission to kill al Qaida leader Osama bin Laden in Pakistan without the permission from Islamabad.

 

[Awesome]

The targets will most likely be low level lackeys. There are always plenty of such to be sacrificed. Pakistan's ISI may not be in direct operational controls of the Haqani Network but often their leaderships shared similar goals. Different methods are often because of differences in institutional freedoms to act towards those goals. The ISI, like the Pakistani Army or Air Force or Navy, is an official branch of the Pakistani government. The Haqqani Network is not. Paksitan's ISI has certain institutional and political restraints, as all governmental institutions do. The Haqqani Network does not. The latter has more freedoms to act but the lack of corporate controls by the ISI over the Haqqani Network means that Pakistan will occasionally pay the price of excesses when the Haqqani Network does act from either ignorance of accepted boundaries or contempt of those same boundaries.

Your assumption is that Karan's personal opinion would become Pakistan's anti-terrorism policy - which itself I doubt it.

There is no mood in Pakistan to open another front. Things are calm-ish right now, Mehsuds have been beaten and now mainly operate in US controlled areas. Given the whole Bulawi incident where US tried to foment ties with the TTP, who is to say that the US giving TTP some form of leeway or sanctuary in Afghanistan?

Pakistan is not going after the Haqqanis because there is no need to. When you guys leave Afghanistan, they will go back there. Not your headache, not mine. The only deal that can happen is that till the time you're around we can pressure the Haqqanis not to go around taking such an overt anti-US stance so that your President can do the whole King Kong style chest thumping and go out of Afghanistan with some face-saving.

Which is what I think has happened when the Saudis came here and the two meetings Salman Bashir had one before the Saudis and one after them with Cameron Munter.

Noticed your President is kinda mum on the whole thing, we all knows how much he likes to grand stand run his mouth on every little thing. If there was an anti-Pakistan initiative being planned your President would have set things in motion. Instead Hillary running around and I believe coming to Pakistan too to calm things a bit.

Nothing was going to happen, the Haqqanis went too far in making Americans look bad due to the Truck Bombing and the US embassy. If there are like 100 American casualties in one week, and Americans are saying Afghanistan is under their control, they'll come off as liars. So throw a massive tantrum and blame someone else, was their only other move.

 

[53fd]

The US wants Pakistan to sour its relationship with the Haqqanis & attack them, whereas on their end, they don't want to have the same 'cordial' relations with the Haqqanis which Pakistan has with them right now, which is why they are not ready to declare them as a terrorist group. Do they think Pakistan is mad, & can't see through their little ploy?

 

[RazPaK]

I knew it! I knew they were playing a game of political chicken with Pakistan. You can coax Pakistan into being friends,but you can never threaten them.

 

[OrionHunter]

I was also surprised by this fast development.
According to my estimates the war should break between 2012 - 2013 but not this year.

So, how have you arrived at this conclusion? According to my estimates, there is NEVER going to be a war between the US of A and Pakistan! Period! Because:

Firstly, the US of A cannot afford another war.

Secondly, the PA is not the Iraqi Army.

Thirdly, the PA is not the Afghani Army.

Fourthly it would be a tactical blunder to even think of an offensive inside Pakistan due to logistic constraints and inability of getting their supporting weapons due to the mountainous terrain and lack of lines of communications.

In other words, the Americans will get screwed and they know it. Otherwise they would have done this long ago!

Cheers!

 

[Awesome]

So you do believe that ISI is directing Haqqanis for making an offensive in Afghanistan. Even If I agree what makes you sure that the other Talibans who are not connected with Pakistan will stop their offensive just because of ISI . The USA in any case whether Haqqanis act against them or not will blame Pakistan.So this assumption is flawed from the very start.First thing!

They will but the blame will again be more like Pakistan incompetent not complicit. What Mullen said was that Pakistan's complicit.

Oh and I don't agree that we control the Haqqanis just that we have given them space to live and they acknowledge that as a favor we did to them.

Haqqanis want the US to leave
We want the US to leave
The US wants the US to leave.

The only thing is how good each side looks when they do leave. The US has the biggest trouble of perceptions. That the US has failed in this war is already an established fact in Pakistan and Afghanistan. So now we are all like okay throw them a bone and get on with it.

No one can give USA a face saving chance.It is us who thinks that is important, for them they don't care.The only thing matters to them is their interest in the region and they will do what ever it takes to achieve them. They have already pre positioned people in Paksitan and have set up a huge network of intelligence which is working, probably one of the largest in the world. Why I think that way is because the facts are completely in support of this thought.In time they will become more and more less reliant on Pakistan.For example they now openly say that in their new US-Afghan policy they don't require Pakistan and so are the other cases.

VPR News: U.S. Now Relies On Alternate Afghan Supply Routes


Thomas Schelling in one of his book "The Strategy of Conflict" has pioneered the study of bargaining and strategic behavior in what Schelling refers to, in the book, as "conflict behavior".

"[Y]ou're standing at the edge of a cliff, chained by the ankle to someone else. You'll be released, and one of you will get a large prize, as soon as the other gives in. How do you persuade the other guy to give in, when the only method at your disposal -- threatening to push him off the cliff -- would doom you both?"

"Answer: You start dancing, closer and closer to the edge. That way, you don't have to convince him that you would do something totally irrational: plunge him and yourself off the cliff. You just have to convince him that you are prepared to take a higher risk than he is of accidentally falling off the cliff. If you can do that, you win."

I loved that! Been doing a lot of negotiations recently and that definitely gives me some ideas.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Nothing was going to happen, the Haqqanis went too far in making Americans look bad due to the Truck Bombing and the US embassy. If there are like 100 American casualties in one week, and Americans are saying Afghanistan is under their control, they'll come off as liars. So throw a massive tantrum and blame someone else, was their only other move.

Why did Americans decide that it were Haqqanis and not other Taliban factions? Talking about factions, Haqqani is the member of the Taliban Shura/ council and taken oath under Mullah Omar then why the insistence on differentiating them from the rest of the Taliban body?

So Haqqanis and ISI agents managed to move from North Waziristan, then went through Pakistia, Khost and Kandahar right under the nose of American forces going through three provinces without detection and then launched an attack on Kabul?

Wow well done Haqqanis… if indeed it were you, although the thousands of American forces and their space tech gizmos failed to spot you and stop you but they some how know that it was YOU, not Hitmatyar, not Mullah Omar, not Mullah Salam aka Mullah Rocketi, BUT Haqqanis ..

Why? Because Fox news says so
Because the ever so truthful CIA says so
Because the always honest US state department says so

And the truth is, they don’t know jack and their attempt to divide Taliban is amateur at best because Pashtons are extremely nationalists, and all this crying and complaining about Haqqanis is actually making them a bigger hero. Whatever the Taliban have managed for the past ten years to the Americans with or without ISI help puts a big dent to the American pride .

Boo hoo and , shame on the surge and shame on the surveillance, get your heads out of your awesomeness and prevent and stop the movements of these guys within Afghanistan & Stop them from crossing borders and stop complaining, its war, if you don’t like it then pack up and go. Afghans don’t want you here anymore.

the frustration and clueless behaviour is clear for everyone to see. I know how that Americans will follow up with drone strikes and attacks that will be indiscriminate and without regard for the civilian population. A similar pattern they exhibited in every place they have invaded for the past decades.

 

[Awesome]

Let's not also forget that the US left Afghanistan in a state of massive civil war - I think that was by chance but until that was happening the US was safe. I think the Indian doctrine entices the US where they like to keep Pakistan on the boil and busy fighting these groups while it packs up and leaves.

 

[Roybot]

Partnership between Pakistan-US difficult to revive: Mullen | Pakistan | DAWN.COM

WASHINGTON: US Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen on Wednesday told the Wall Street Journal that attacks against US soldiers in Afghanistan will not be tolerated, DawnNews reported.

He stated that the partnership approach between the US and Pakistan would be hard to revive now.

Mullen told the WSJ that the US will be very firm in its approach with Pakistan and its battle against terrorism. He said that he believed that Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) had supported the Haqqani network, which is the militant group the US blames for the Kabul attack. Mullen blamed the ISI for providing “logistic support” to the Haqqani network.

He said the US wanted a strong relationship with Pakistan, however, given the current situation, it will take time to restore those relations and trust.

 

[newdelhinsa]

@Asim

You are assuming too much and betting on tactical gains.

The only common sense prevailing here with USA is that they are great minds and great minds think about logistics.
If you think USA et al will left Afghanistan abandoned like they did before then you are reading it wrong.

For Pakistan its an end game and now the time has come to be more upfront. Your PM even demanded deal like Indo-US nuclear deal two days back after foreseeing USA blinking (as you said).

The only thing we can see here is Pakistan bargaining on USA's logistical constrains, rest of your leverages have been exhausted this is where India has gained.

 

[CENTCOM]

There is no question of “saving face” or making any other country our "scapegoat" in the War on Terror, especially since we have pledged a long term commitment to the people of Afghanistan extending far after the draw-down of our troops. It is a known fact that terrorists are using safe havens in both Pakistan and Afghanistan from where they plan and execute their terrorist actions. In the past decade, Pakistan has realized that terrorism is not only a threat to the United States but also to itself and the rest of the world. Therefore, since then Pakistan has been a partner in fighting against terrorism. We fully acknowledge the sacrifices and the contributions made by the Pakistani people and military. We have both coordinated and shared information with each other regarding numerous targets that have been captured by the Pakistani military.

As part of this continued cooperation and coordination, we have frequent dialogues with our Pakistani counterparts regarding the Haqqani Network, and we are working on coming to an agreement in respect to denying them a safe haven on the Pakistani soil. Eradication of all these terrorist groups, regardless of whether they are a threat to Pakistan or only to other countries, is still in the long term interest of Pakistan. Time after time, we have stated that the number of terrorists that have been captured or killed on Pakistani soil has happened due to the cooperation and partnership of Pakistan.

It is true that Pakistan has not taken steps against all terrorist networks, but even as we continue to work with them to resolve this issue, we must recognize that Pakistan has lost more than tens of thousands of lives to terrorism since 2003. We hope that people would refrain from hyper speculating and creating a false notion that we are going to start a war with Pakistan. Provoking this paranoia is not beneficial, as both sides are determined to work together against a common threat.

MAJ Taylor,
DET – U.S. Central Command
U.S. Central Command

 

[forcetrip]

When evidence is not in sight and gut instincts take effect .. The "good cop bad cop" routine comes out to play.

 

[TARIQ BN ZIYAAD]

Assalam alaikum

common u pakistanies a retiring adm. was frustrated just forget everything ( agr hum pakistani chup ker jatay to yeh or da ba tay )

TARIQ

 

[Awesome]

One needs to be careful about the conclusions drawn from this piece. People inside the beltway will see importance in the statements highlighted:

I'm more cautious about the fact that Americans don't fail at their strategic offenses so easily as they seemed to have here. They will come back harder next time.