US Drone strikes in Pakistan are illegal under international law.

[BaburCM]

Innocent children and women are dying in such attacks. No one cares though. Let's rejoice the American might! How brave of a superpower to kill innocent children and women. War has it's casualties, right? Okay, we feel a little sorry for the victims, but that's just about it.

 

[s90]

-- Do you think anti-American feelings in the area increased due to drone attacks recently? (Yes 42%, No 58%)

-- Should Pakistan military carry out targeted strikes at the militant organisations? (Yes 70%, No 30%)

-- Do the militant organisations get damaged due to drone attacks? (Yes 60%, No 40%)

I can confirm this....met a boy who came from FATA and he told me same thing which is quoted,he said its blessing for us because it kills those who have made our life a hell.

 

[JK!]

No sir. Not if it's JDW story. Sorry. You pay, you play. Not I but appreciate the offer and I'm just glad you posted it here.

No worries, stud!

Its from last months Air Forces Monthly magazine worth a look theres alot more than what Fatman has posted here : )

 

[Metallic]

U.S. drone kills 3 militants in Pakistan's South Waziristan
8 April 2009

A pilotless U.S. drone aircraft fired a missile in Pakistan's South Waziristan region on the Afghan border on Wednesday, killing three militants, a Pakistani intelligence official and residents said.

"The drone was flying very low and as soon as militants in a truck opened fire at it, a missile was fired that hit the vehicle and killed three militants," a resident told Reuters.

Source: Reuters

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Are U.S. drones bolstering Pakistani extremists?​

By JONATHAN S. LANDAY
McClatchy Newspapers

Even as the Obama administration launches new drone attacks into Pakistan's remote tribal areas, concerns are growing among U.S. intelligence and military officials that the strikes are bolstering the Islamic insurgency by prompting Islamist radicals to disperse into the country's heartland.

Al-Qaida, Taliban and other militants who've been relocating to Pakistan's overcrowded and impoverished cities may be harder to find and stop from staging terrorist attacks, the officials said.

Moreover, they said, the strikes by the missile-firing drones are a recruiting boon for extremists because of the unintended civilian casualties that have prompted widespread anger against the U.S.

"Putting these guys on the run forces a lot of good things to happen," said a senior U.S. defense official who requested anonymity because the drone operations, run by the CIA and the Air Force, are top-secret. "It gives you more targeting opportunities. The downside is that you get a much more dispersed target set and they go to places where we are not operating."

U.S. drone attacks "may have hurt more than they have helped," said a U.S. military official who's been deeply involved in counterterrorism operations. The official, who requested anonymity because he wasn't authorized to speak publicly, called the drone operations a "recruiting windfall for the Pakistani Taliban."

"A significant number of bad actors aren't where they used to be," but have moved to "places where we can't get at them the way we could," he added.

As a result of the drone attacks, insurgent activities are "more dispersed in Pakistan and focusing on Pakistani targets," said Christine Fair of the RAND Corp., a policy institute that advises the Pentagon. "So we have shifted the costs."

President Barack Obama for now has embraced the drone strikes, which U.S. officials said have killed up to one dozen important al-Qaida operatives.

"If we have a high-value target within our sights, after consulting with Pakistan, we're going after them," Obama said in a March 29 interview with CBS News.

Several U.S. intelligence, military officials and independent experts, however, said that they're especially worried by an influx of extremists from the tribal areas into the slums of Karachi. The capital of southern Sindh Province, with a population of at least 12 million, is Pakistan's financial center and main port as well as the entry point for most of the supplies bound for U.S.-led NATO forces in Afghanistan.

Many militants are thought to have taken refuge among Karachi's estimated 3.5 million Pashtuns, the ethnic group comprising the Taliban in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Their presence is stoking tensions with other groups in the southern city, which has a long history of communal bloodshed and terrorism, including against Western targets.

"The who's who of extremism is present in Karachi," said Faisal Ali Subzwari, a Sindh government minister. "There are many areas where police and (paramilitary) Rangers cannot even dare to enter. It is a safe haven for those who want a hiding place."

Subzwari, whose Mohajir Quami Movement represents immigrants from India and has repeatedly warned of the "Talibanization" of Karachi, said that part of his own constituency is one of these "no-go" areas.

U.S. officials have long identified Karachi as the headquarters of the Afghan Taliban's fundraising committee, and many top militants were educated at the Binori Mosque, a key center of radical Islamic ideology. A "feeder" network of militant seminaries in Karachi supplies young suicide bombers, they said.

An upheaval in Karachi, home to Pakistan's stock exchange and other financial institutions, would be catastrophic for a country that has only avoided bankruptcy with a $7.6 billion International Monetary Fund emergency credit line. Financial activities, as well as imports and exports for both Pakistan and landlocked Afghanistan, could be paralyzed, as could supplies for U.S.-led NATO forces in the region.

(END OPTIONIAL TRIM)

Concerns over "blowback" from the drone strikes is fueling a debate in the Obama administration over whether they should be extended from the Federally Administered Tribal Area, the region bordering eastern Afghanistan where Osama bin Laden is thought to be hiding, to Baluchistan Province, the alleged refuge of the Afghan Taliban leadership, U.S. officials said.

Proponents of the drone strikes cite the killing of key al-Qaida operatives and the disruption of the terrorist network's ability to plot new attacks; opponents, said to include some senior administration officials, fear that the operations are too destabilizing for nuclear-armed Pakistan and are doing nothing to halt the insurgencies tearing through the country and Afghanistan.

"There is no uniform opinion on this," the senior defense official said. "You have some concerns that they are causing a ripple effect, that the consequences are too large for Pakistan to absorb."

Several U.S. officials argued that it would be easier for U.S. and Pakistani authorities, including the Directorate of Inter-Services Intelligence, to track down militants who leave the remote border region for the cities. They pointed out that senior al-Qaida operatives in U.S. custody were found in Pakistani urban areas.

Critics, however, noted that the ISI and the Pakistani military can't be relied on to cooperate, because while they've turned over foreign militants, some former and current ISI and army officers are believed to support Afghan and Pakistani groups.

There have been dozens of drone strikes in the past year, the most recent killing 13 people in the tribal region of North Waziristan on Saturday. The next day, a top Pakistani Taliban leader threatened to launch two suicide attacks every week unless the strikes stop. His threat followed a series of suicide bombings in the heartland province of Punjab.

A senior Pakistani official reiterated the government's opposition to the drone operations after talks Tuesday in Islamabad with Richard Holbrooke, the special U.S. representative to Pakistan and Afghanistan, and Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

"They (drone strikes) are counterproductive," said Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi. "My view is they are causing collateral damage, my view is that they are alienating people, my view is that they are working to the advantage of the extremists. We (Pakistan and the U.S.) have agreed to disagree on this."

Are U.S. drones bolstering Pakistani extremists? - Politics AP - MiamiHerald.com

 

[ajpirzada]

Do drones kill extremists or recruit them, asks Washington Post




Thursday, April 09, 2009

Monitoring Desk

WASHINGTON: Even as the Obama administration launches new drone attacks in the tribal areas, concerns are growing among US intelligence and military officials that the strikes are bolstering the insurgency by prompting radicals to disperse into the country’s heartland, The Washington Post reported.

Al Qaida, Taliban and other militants who’ve been relocating to Pakistan’s overcrowded and impoverished cities may be harder to find and stop from staging terrorist attacks, the officials were quoted on Wednesday by Jonathan S Landay in The Washington Post.

Moreover, they said, the strikes by the missile-firing drones are a recruiting boon for extremists because of the unintended civilian casualties that have prompted widespread anger against the US.

“Putting these guys on the run forces a lot of good things to happen,” said a senior US defence official who requested anonymity because the drone operations, run by the CIA and the Air Force, are top secret. “It gives you more targeting opportunities. The downside is that you get a much more dispersed target set and they go to places where we are not operating.”

US drone attacks “may have hurt more than they have helped,” said a US military official who’s been deeply involved in counterterrorism operations. The official, who requested anonymity because he wasn’t authorised to speak publicly, called the drone operations a “recruiting windfall for the Pakistani Taliban.”

“A significant number of bad actors aren’t where they used to be,” but have moved to “places where we can’t get at them the way we could,” he added. As a result of the drone attacks, insurgent activities are “more dispersed in Pakistan and focusing on Pakistani targets,” said Christine Fair of the RAND Corp, a policy institute that advises the Pentagon. “So we have shifted the costs.”

Several US intelligence, military officials and independent experts, however, said that they’re especially worried by an influx of extremists from the tribal areas into the slums of Karachi, the paper said, adding many militants are thought to have taken refuge among Karachi’s estimated 3.5 million Pashtuns. Their presence is stoking tensions with other groups in the southern city, which has a long history of communal bloodshed and terrorism, including against Western targets.

“The who’s who of extremism is present in Karachi,” said Faisal Ali Subzwari, a Sindh government minister. “There are many areas where police and Rangers cannot even dare to enter. It is a safe haven for those who want a hiding place.” Subzwari said that part of his own constituency is one of these “no-go” areas.

US officials have long identified Karachi as the headquarters of the Afghan Taliban’s fundraising committee, and many top militants were educated at the Binori Mosque, the paper said. A “feeder” network of militant seminaries in Karachi supplies young suicide bombers, they said.

The Washington Post said an upheaval in Karachi would be catastrophic for a country that has only avoided bankruptcy with a $7.6 billion International Monetary Fund emergency credit line. Financial activities, as well as imports and exports for both Pakistan and landlocked Afghanistan, could be paralysed, as could supplies for US-led Nato forces in the region.

Concerns over “blowback” from the drone strikes is fuelling a debate in the Obama administration over whether they should be extended from the tribal areas to Balochistan, the alleged refuge of the Afghan Taliban leadership, US officials said.

Proponents of the drone strikes cite the killing of key al Qaida operatives and the disruption of the terrorist network’s ability to plot new attacks; opponents, said to include some senior administration officials, fear that the operations are too destabilising for nuclear-armed Pakistan and are doing nothing to halt the insurgencies tearing through the country and Afghanistan.

“There is no uniform opinion on this,” the senior defence official said. “You have some concerns that they are causing a ripple effect, that the consequences are too large for Pakistan to absorb.”

Several US officials argued that it would be easier for the US and Pakistani authorities, including the Directorate of Inter-Services Intelligence, to track down militants who leave the remote border region for the cities. They pointed out that senior al Qaida operatives in US custody were found in Pakistani urban areas.

Critics, however, noted that the ISI and the military can’t be relied on to cooperate, because while they’ve turned over foreign militants, some former and current ISI and Army officers are believed support Afghan and Pakistani groups, the paper said.

CIA and the Air Force operators remotely pilot the missile-firing Predator and Reaper drones, known as Unmanned Aerial Vehicles or UAVs, from the US. But the aircraft fly from an airbase in Balochistan, according to some experts, with the permission of Pakistani military officials who privately back the operations and want US approval to buy drones of their own.

“Obviously, this enjoys high-level (Pakistani) approval,” Fair said. US military and intelligence officials said that the US drone strikes are only one factor behind the outflow of extremists into other parts of Pakistan.

News reports that the Obama administration is considering extending the attacks to Taliban refuges in Pashtun-dominated northern Balochistan, including around the provincial capital of Quetta, have also contributed to the movement, they said.

Moreover, they said, some militants have moved into Pakistan’s heartland because of tensions between the groups in the tribal region. A US intelligence official who’s been deeply involved in the counter-terrorism campaigns in Afghanistan and Pakistan, however, called the drone operations “a major catalyst” for the movement.

“The UAV strikes have had two unintended consequences,” said the US intelligence official, who requested anonymity because he isn’t authorised to speak publicly and because much of the information is classified.

“First, al Qaida and the Taliban have used our use of unmanned aircraft in their propaganda to portray Americans as cowards who are afraid to face their enemies and risk death. In their culture, and in the context of what they portray as a war between Western religions and Islam, that can be a powerful argument,” he said.

“Second and not surprisingly,” he continued, “rather than sit around in the (tribal region) waiting for the next strike, some of the Jihadi have moved into Pakistan proper, into Karachi and even into Punjab, where we can’t target them and where they’re in a better position to attack the Pakistani government.”

Do drones kill extremists or recruit them, asks Washington Post

 

[roadrunner]

Do drones kill extremists or recruit them, asks Washington Post




Thursday, April 09, 2009

Monitoring Desk

WASHINGTON: Even as the Obama administration launches new drone attacks in the tribal areas, concerns are growing among US intelligence and military officials that the strikes are bolstering the insurgency by prompting radicals to disperse into the country’s heartland, The Washington Post reported.

Al Qaida, Taliban and other militants who’ve been relocating to Pakistan’s overcrowded and impoverished cities may be harder to find and stop from staging terrorist attacks, the officials were quoted on Wednesday by Jonathan S Landay in The Washington Post.

Moreover, they said, the strikes by the missile-firing drones are a recruiting boon for extremists because of the unintended civilian casualties that have prompted widespread anger against the US.

“Putting these guys on the run forces a lot of good things to happen,” said a senior US defence official who requested anonymity because the drone operations, run by the CIA and the Air Force, are top secret. “It gives you more targeting opportunities. The downside is that you get a much more dispersed target set and they go to places where we are not operating.”

US drone attacks “may have hurt more than they have helped,” said a US military official who’s been deeply involved in counterterrorism operations. The official, who requested anonymity because he wasn’t authorised to speak publicly, called the drone operations a “recruiting windfall for the Pakistani Taliban.”

“A significant number of bad actors aren’t where they used to be,” but have moved to “places where we can’t get at them the way we could,” he added. As a result of the drone attacks, insurgent activities are “more dispersed in Pakistan and focusing on Pakistani targets,” said Christine Fair of the RAND Corp, a policy institute that advises the Pentagon. “So we have shifted the costs.”

Several US intelligence, military officials and independent experts, however, said that they’re especially worried by an influx of extremists from the tribal areas into the slums of Karachi, the paper said, adding many militants are thought to have taken refuge among Karachi’s estimated 3.5 million Pashtuns. Their presence is stoking tensions with other groups in the southern city, which has a long history of communal bloodshed and terrorism, including against Western targets.

“The who’s who of extremism is present in Karachi,” said Faisal Ali Subzwari, a Sindh government minister. “There are many areas where police and Rangers cannot even dare to enter. It is a safe haven for those who want a hiding place.” Subzwari said that part of his own constituency is one of these “no-go” areas.

US officials have long identified Karachi as the headquarters of the Afghan Taliban’s fundraising committee, and many top militants were educated at the Binori Mosque, the paper said. A “feeder” network of militant seminaries in Karachi supplies young suicide bombers, they said.

The Washington Post said an upheaval in Karachi would be catastrophic for a country that has only avoided bankruptcy with a $7.6 billion International Monetary Fund emergency credit line. Financial activities, as well as imports and exports for both Pakistan and landlocked Afghanistan, could be paralysed, as could supplies for US-led Nato forces in the region.

Concerns over “blowback” from the drone strikes is fuelling a debate in the Obama administration over whether they should be extended from the tribal areas to Balochistan, the alleged refuge of the Afghan Taliban leadership, US officials said.

Proponents of the drone strikes cite the killing of key al Qaida operatives and the disruption of the terrorist network’s ability to plot new attacks; opponents, said to include some senior administration officials, fear that the operations are too destabilising for nuclear-armed Pakistan and are doing nothing to halt the insurgencies tearing through the country and Afghanistan.

“There is no uniform opinion on this,” the senior defence official said. “You have some concerns that they are causing a ripple effect, that the consequences are too large for Pakistan to absorb.”

Several US officials argued that it would be easier for the US and Pakistani authorities, including the Directorate of Inter-Services Intelligence, to track down militants who leave the remote border region for the cities. They pointed out that senior al Qaida operatives in US custody were found in Pakistani urban areas.

Critics, however, noted that the ISI and the military can’t be relied on to cooperate, because while they’ve turned over foreign militants, some former and current ISI and Army officers are believed support Afghan and Pakistani groups, the paper said.

CIA and the Air Force operators remotely pilot the missile-firing Predator and Reaper drones, known as Unmanned Aerial Vehicles or UAVs, from the US. But the aircraft fly from an airbase in Balochistan, according to some experts, with the permission of Pakistani military officials who privately back the operations and want US approval to buy drones of their own.

“Obviously, this enjoys high-level (Pakistani) approval,” Fair said. US military and intelligence officials said that the US drone strikes are only one factor behind the outflow of extremists into other parts of Pakistan.

News reports that the Obama administration is considering extending the attacks to Taliban refuges in Pashtun-dominated northern Balochistan, including around the provincial capital of Quetta, have also contributed to the movement, they said.

Moreover, they said, some militants have moved into Pakistan’s heartland because of tensions between the groups in the tribal region. A US intelligence official who’s been deeply involved in the counter-terrorism campaigns in Afghanistan and Pakistan, however, called the drone operations “a major catalyst” for the movement.

“The UAV strikes have had two unintended consequences,” said the US intelligence official, who requested anonymity because he isn’t authorised to speak publicly and because much of the information is classified.

“First, al Qaida and the Taliban have used our use of unmanned aircraft in their propaganda to portray Americans as cowards who are afraid to face their enemies and risk death. In their culture, and in the context of what they portray as a war between Western religions and Islam, that can be a powerful argument,” he said.

“Second and not surprisingly,” he continued, “rather than sit around in the (tribal region) waiting for the next strike, some of the Jihadi have moved into Pakistan proper, into Karachi and even into Punjab, where we can’t target them and where they’re in a better position to attack the Pakistani government.”

Do drones kill extremists or recruit them, asks Washington Post

This is one of the reasons it's annoying having Americans in charge of anything. They're so slow, almost to the point of stupid.

I could have told you this 5 months ago. Now they're asking these questions.

duhhhhhhhhh

 

[ajpirzada]

This is one of the reasons it's annoying having Americans in charge of anything. They're so slow, almost to the point of stupid.

I could have told you this 5 months ago. Now they're asking these questions.

duhhhhhhhhh

and they will still not understand.... their arrogance will bring them down one day which doesnt look quite far

 

[shukla_swapnil]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/apr/12/foreign-affairs-pakistan-drone-raids

The UK must distance itself from American foreign policy if Pakistani youths are to be prevented from growing up hating Britain, according to the government's social cohesion minister.

The comments by Sadiq Khan, who has just returned from a fact-finding trip to Pakistan, follow the arrests of 12 men - 10 of whom were Pakistani nationals - in the north-west of England last week on suspicion of planning a terror attack. They are likely to be given short shrift from Number 10, which has been keen to ally itself to the Obama administration. Earlier this month Gordon Brown stressed the two allies were united in their fight against terrorism in Pakistan.

But Khan, London's first Muslim MP, said the UK must differentiate itself from the US after attending meetings at universities in Pakistan. "I listened to the anger and pain over the challenges that young people growing up in Pakistan face, including the anger and frustration over US drone attacks," he said.

The attacks by unmanned US drones have provoked fury in Pakistan, where scores of militants have been killed in the country's remote border regions, along with innocent civilians.

"The anger and frustration at the drone attacks was huge," Khan said. "The view they [the students] had was that the UK was somehow responsible for this. They haven't understood this was purely a US matter. They lumped us together with the US, which to me is a poison. It demonstrates to me we have a big problem."

Khan, whose parents are from Pakistan, suggested the UK should look to reach out to disaffected Muslim youths by emphasising the close links between the two countries. "Much of the Pakistani population doesn't realise the good we are doing," Khan said: the UK is to double aid to Pakistan to £180m by 2011.

Crucial to winning hearts and minds, Khan said, was dismantling the perception that the US and the UK were one and the same over foreign policy. Acknowledging the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq had mobilised Muslim opinion against the UK, Khan said: "Because of things that happened in 2003, there is an uphill battle. We need better to explain that there has been a distinct change in UK foreign policy.

"For example, this month the last troops will come home from Iraq: that's very different from the US. The drone attacks are US, not UK; our development policy doesn't have the strings that come with US aid."

Khan's comments come as ministers seek to increase the numbers of security officials in Pakistan to help in vetting those applying for visas to Britain. At present there are fewer than 10 security service officers assessing the backgrounds of more than 20,000 applications a year. "At present, we are reliant on a small number of officials who do the ground work; that is reliant on the Pakistani government giving us what it knows. That should improve in the near future, and can be done with the co-operation of Pakistan," a Home Office source said.

Government figures show that 42,292 student visas were issued to Pakistanis between April 2004 and April 2008.

 

[A1Kaid]

This is true, if the UK pursues directly or indirectly Anti-Pakistani policies (policies that hurt or are against Pakistan's interest) then this will result in growing unrest in the Pakistani community in the UK.

The British police and MI-5/6 will have there hands full to say the least...Whether you like it or not.

 

[Omar1984]

U.K. has a very high population of Pakistanis most have been living there for generations, the younger generation even call themselves British Muslims instead of Pakistanis because their parents were born in Britian. Many Pakistanis feel more comfortable living in Britian than U.S. because Britian has a very large Pakistani population. You dont even have to know English in Britian because you'll always find someone who speaks Urdu or Punjabi in every town/city in Britian.

Even the father of the nation, Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, spent most of his lifetime in Britian.

 

[sohailbutt]

NEW YORK: Some experts in the US are adding their opinion to the debate on the drone attacks – an opinion that might find some resonance with the people in Pakistan.

Barnett R. Rubin is one such expert. He is a Senior Fellow at the Center on International Cooperation of New York University, where he directs the program on the Reconstruction of Afghanistan. He recently chaired the Asia Society Task Force and believes that the US should address Pakistan’s concerns over drone attacks.

Talking to SAMAA, Dr. Rubin concedes that exerting undue pressure on Pakistan can be counter-productive and the international community, “should address Pakistan’s concerns in Afghanistan, India and Kashmir”. This doesn’t mean, as some in India have interpret it to mean that the US is supporting Pakistan’s position. “We are not advocating any particular position on these issues,” he told SAMAA. “We are simply saying that it is unreasonable to expect changes in Pakistan’s security policies unless these concerns were addressed.”

The recently released Asia Society Task Force report recommends a strategy for the new U.S. administration to pursue a dramatically different course in Afghanistan-Pakistan.

SAMAA: What do you think is the key issue in the region?

RUBIN: A lot of the problems we are facing in the region result from the fact that the Pakistani military and intelligence establishments have felt that they have to maintain a reserve force of jihadists or unconventional fighters to use them in Kashmir or Afghanistan or in other places. And, this operation has created the infrastructure that is used by al Qaeeda and the Taliban and many other groups that may not be directly supported by Pakistan.

SAMAA: What can the new US administration do differently to change this situation?

RUBIN: One of the main goals should be enabling Pakistan, convincing Pakistan to finally pursue a security policy that does not include these jihadist groups. Simply pressuring Pakistan is not enough- though we advocate some level of pressure - we think Pakistan has engaged in these activities because it has certain concerns about its security - which has nothing to do with terrorism but has to do with India and Afghanistan. We think insofar as those concerns are legitimate, the international community should help Pakistan address them. That includes its concerns in Afghanistan, Kashmir. It doesn’t mean, as some in India have interpret it to mean that we are supporting Pakistan’s position. We are not advocating in any particular position on these issues. We are simply saying that it is unreasonable to expect changes in Pakistan’s security policies unless these concerns were addressed.

SAMAA: What pressures can the US exert on Pakistan?

RUBIN: I understand that speaking to the Pakistani audience may not have been the most diplomatic thing to say. US policy in Pakistan has been focused on the military. We think that has been very damaging for Pakistan and US-Pakistan relations, and one thing that the US administration is determined to do is change the relationship. The US administration wants to engage with legitimate civil government and support institutions of governance in Pakistan. It also means supporting security institutions in way that brings them under civilian control and makes them part of the government...[…]

So when I talk about pressure I don’t mean it in ways that was used in the previous administration - that the US exerts pressure on the Pakistan army to do certain things regardless of Pakistan’s interest or the wishes of the people - I believe that is counter-productive.

SAMAA: Pakistan’s civilian government has some concerns and it has been very vocal about them as well. How can these issues be addressed?

RUBIN: We should address Pakistan’s concern - I know that the drone attacks are a very big issue for Pakistan. The US military claims they are successful. I think the main problem is that neither the US nor Pakistan has a comprehensive strategy for the future of the tribal agencies - we are just reacting to a crisis. It is important to work together to figure out how to integrate these agencies with the rest of Pakistan so that any action that has to be taken in those agencies are in the national interest of Pakistan and not just the US objectives.

There have been number of countries that have been involved with Pakistan’s military that are now concerned about the escalation of conflict - the way that militant forces have been used to achieve foreign policy purposes and have now gotten out of control. I have been in touch with people in China and Saudi Arabia and they are now concerned. It doesn’t mean we are advocating weakening Pakistan in order to dismember it. And, I must add any intelligent Indian would not want a weak or dismembered Pakistan either because that is one of the most dangerous things for India. India needs a stable Pakistan that is at peace with it.

SAMAA: What is your Task Force’s recommendation for Pakistan’s nuclear deterrents?

RUBIN: We don’t make any specific recommendations. We note that in the sense that India has been brought into a non-proliferation regime because of the US-India nuclear agreement which provides for an inspection regime on Indian civilian plants. With Pakistan there is a different type of problem because Pakistan has a very poor history of proliferation to other countries and we still don’t know all of the truth about that. We should make it clear to Pakistan that we are concerned about the nuclearization of South Asia - in my opinion that is now a fact that cannot be undone.

President Obama has made a very welcome step by saying non-proliferation and de-nuclearization have to start with the major nuclear powers, including the United States and Russia. With respect to Pakistan - this is my personnel view and not everyone on the Task Force is in agreement here - if Pakistan has been supporting the Taliban in Afghanistan and militants in Kashmir only because it has an existential fear that perhaps some of its neighbors don’t accept its right to exist, have a long-term objective of dismembering it and taking away it’s nuclear weapons, we should find some way to re-assure Pakistan that all of its neighbors and the international community very much want a strong and stable Pakistan. One possible way of doing that at some point is if you can address the proliferation issues we [the US] could have better dialogue about nuclear deterrents.

.:: SAMAA - SAMAA EXCLUSIVE: Drone attacks and ******

 

[MZUBAIR]

60 drone hits kill 14 al-Qaeda men, 687 civilians

Friday, April 10, 2009

By Amir Mir

LAHORE: Of the 60 cross-border predator strikes carried out by the Afghanistan-based American drones in Pakistan between January 14, 2006 and April 8, 2009, only 10 were able to hit their actual targets, killing 14 wanted al-Qaeda leaders, besides perishing 687 innocent Pakistani civilians. The success percentage of the US predator strikes thus comes to not more than six per cent.

Figures compiled by the Pakistani authorities show that a total of 701 people, including 14 al-Qaeda leaders, have been killed since January 2006 in 60 American predator attacks targeting the tribal areas of Pakistan. Two strikes carried out in 2006 had killed 98 civilians while three



attacks conducted in 2007 had slain 66 Pakistanis, yet none of the wanted al-Qaeda or Taliban leaders could be hit by the Americans right on target. However, of the 50 drone attacks carried out between January 29, 2008 and April 8, 2009, 10 hit their targets and killed 14 wanted al-Qaeda operatives. Most of these attacks were carried out on the basis of intelligence believed to have been provided by the Pakistani and Afghan tribesmen who had been spying for the US-led allied forces stationed in Afghanistan.

The remaining 50 drone attacks went wrong due to faulty intelligence information, killing hundreds of innocent civilians, including women and children. The number of the Pakistani civilians killed in those 50 attacks stood at 537, in which 385 people lost their lives in 2008 and 152 people were slain in the first 99 days of 2009 (between January 1 and April 8).

Of the 50 drone attacks, targeting the Pakistani tribal areas since January 2008, 36 were carried out in 2008 and 14 were conducted in the first 99 days of 2009. Of the 14 attacks targeting Pakistan in 2009, three were carried out in January, killing 30 people, two in February killing 55 people, five in March killing 36 people and four were conducted in the first nine days of April, killing 31 people.

Of the 14 strikes carried out in the first 99 days of April 2009, only one proved successful, killing two most wanted senior al-Qaeda leaders - Osama al Kini and Sheikh Ahmed Salim Swedan. Both had lost their lives in a New Year’s Day drone strike carried out in the South Waziristan region on January 1, 2009.

Kini was believed to be the chief operational commander of al-Qaeda in Pakistan and had replaced Abu Faraj Al Libi after his arrest from Bannu in 2004. Both men were behind the 1998 bombings of the US embassies in Dares Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya, which killed 224 civilians and wounded more than 5,000 others.

There were 36 recorded cross-border US predator strikes inside Pakistan during 2008, of which 29 took place after August 31, 2008, killing 385 people. However, only nine of the 36 strikes hit their actual targets, killing 12 wanted al-Qaeda leaders. The first successful predator strike had killed Abu Laith al Libi, a senior military commander of al-Qaeda who was targeted in North Waziristan on January 29, 2008. The second successful attack in Bajaur had killed Abu Sulayman Jazairi, al-Qaeda’s external operations chief, on March 14, 2008. The third attack in South Waziristan on July 28, 2008, had killed Abu Khabab al Masri, al-Qaeda’s weapons of mass destruction chief. The fourth successful attack in South Waziristan on August 13, 2008, had killed al-Qaeda leader Abdur Rehman.

The fifth predator strike carried out in North Waziristan near Miranshah on Sept 8, 2008 had killed three al-Qaeda leaders, Abu Haris, Abu Hamza, and Zain Ul Abu Qasim. The sixth successful predator hit in the South Waziristan region on October 2008 had killed Khalid Habib, a key leader of al-Qaeda’s paramilitary Shadow Army.

The seventh such attack conducted in North Waziristan on October 31, 2008 had killed Abu Jihad al Masri, a top leader of the Egyptian Islamic group. The eighth successful predator strike had killed al-Qaeda leader Abdullah Azzam al Saudi in east of North Waziristan on November 19, 2008.

The ninth and the last successful drone attack of 2008, carried out in the Ali Khel region just outside Miramshah in North Waziristan on November 22, 2008, had killed al-Qaeda leader Abu Zubair al Masri and his Pakistani fugitive accomplice Rashid Rauf.

According to the figures compiled by the Pakistani authorities, a total of 537 people have been killed in 50 incidents of cross-border US predator strikes since January 1, 2008 to April 8, 2009, averaging 34 killings per month and 11 killings per attack. The average per month killings in predator strikes during 12 months of 2008 stood at 32 while the average per attack killings in the 36 drone strikes for the same year stood at 11.

Similarly, 152 people have been killed in 14 incidents of cross-border predator attacks in the tribal areas in the first 99 days of 2009, averaging 38 killings per month and 11 killings per attack.

Since September 3, 2008, it appears that the Americans have upped their attacks in Pakistani tribal areas in a bid to disrupt the al-Qaeda and the Taliban network, which they allege is being used to launch cross border ambushes against the Nato forces in Afghanistan.

The American forces stationed in Afghanistan carried out nine aerial strikes between September 3 and September 25, 2008, killing 57 people and injuring 38 others. The attacks were launched on September 3, 4, 5, 8, 12, 15, 17, 22 and September 27. However, the September 3, 2008 American action was unique in the sense that two CH-47 Chinook transport helicopters landed in the village of Zawlolai in the South Waziristan Agency with ground troops from the US Special Operation Forces, fired at three houses and killed 17, including five women and four sleeping children.

Besides the two helicopters carrying the US Special Forces Commandos, two jet fighters and two gun-ship helicopters provided the air cover for the half-an-hour American operation, more than a kilometre inside the Pakistani border.

The last predator strike on [April 8, 2009] was carried out hardly a few hours after the Pakistani authorities had rejected an American proposal for joint operations in the tribal areas against terrorism and militancy, as differences of opinion between the two countries over various aspects of the war on terror came out into the open for the first time.

The proposal came from two top US visiting officials, presidential envoy for the South Asia Richard Holbrooke and Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen. However, the Pakistani military and political leadership reportedly rejected the proposal and adopted a tough posture against a barrage of increasing US predator strikes and criticism emanating from Washington, targeting the Pakistan Army and the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) and creating doubts about their sincerity in the war on terror and the fight against al-Qaeda and Taliban.

 

[Metallic]

At least 3 Militants Killed in U.S. Drone Strike In Pakistan
19 April 2009

PESHAWAR, Pakistan (AFP) – At least three suspected militants were killed on Sunday in Pakistan's tribal area, thought to have been by a US missile aimed at Taliban and Al-Qaeda rebels, officials said.

"It was a drone attack," local administration official Shahab Ali Shah told AFP, suggesting it was the latest in a series of strikes by pilotless US aircraft in the restive northwest region.

The official said two missiles hit a house in Gangi Khel town in South Waziristan district along the Afghan border.

Another official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the attack targeted a militant hideout, killing three suspected rebels.

But a security official said seven militants had died.

"Seven militants were killed in the twin strike," the security official said, adding that there was no immediate report of any high-value targets.

Another security official said that five others were wounded.

Residents said the attack flattened the compound, while a vehicle parked nearby was also destroyed.

The semi-autonomous South Waziristan tribal area is a stronghold of Pakistan's top Taliban commander, Baitullah Mehsud, who recently threatened attacks across the country and in the United States to avenge missile strikes.

Three suspected militants were killed in a similar attack in the area earlier this month.

Sunday's was the fourth suspected US strike this month and follows the unveiling of a strategy by US President Barack Obama to defeat extremists in South Asia that puts Pakistan at the heart of the fight against Al-Qaeda.

Like the militants, the Pakistan government is also deeply opposed to the attacks by the aircraft.

Around 370 people and suspected militants have died in some 38 such attacks since August 2008. Pakistan says the missile strikes violate its territorial sovereignty and deepen resentment among Pakistanis.

Pakistan has paid dearly for its alliance with the US in its "war on terror", with militant attacks killing more than 1,700 people since July 2007.

Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi after talks with US military commander Admiral Mike Mullen and diplomatic envoy Richard Holbrooke last week said there were stark differences of opinion on the attacks.

"We did talk about drones, and let me be very frank, there's a gap," he said.

"We can only work together if we respect each other and we trust each other. There is no other way. Nothing else will work," he added.

The US military does not, as a rule, confirm drone attacks, but its armed forces and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) operating in neighbouring Afghanistan are the only forces that deploy drones in the region.

Source: AFP

 

[Trooper]

ok Sir.....