US goes public with hot pursuit in Pak

[Contrarian]

US goes public with hot pursuit in Pak

WASHINGTON: US forces have been conducting hot pursuit of terrorists into Pakistani territory and will continue to do so if circumstances demand it, the Bush administration said on Thursday.

Dropping all concern for Pakistani sensitivities and any pretence of shielding General Musharraf from a domestic backlash on the issue, a high-ranking US military official told a Senate committee that American forces on Afghanistan’s eastern border routinely fire upon and pursue Taliban enemies into Pakistan.

“'We have all the authorities we need to pursue, either with artillery fire or on the ground, across the border,”' Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute told the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Pakistan had insisted to date that no foreign forces would be allowed to violate its territory.

Although it was no secret in military and intelligence circles, the public disclosure came after Senators grilled the administration on what the US can do if Pakistan won‘t or cannot do more in the war on terror.

Lawmakers went as far as to ask if international law would allow US forces to strike at terrorist targets inside Pakistan.

While the military dispensation bluntly said that a US-Pakistani agreement allows American forces to attack militants across the border in Pakistan if they have just carried out an attack in Afghanistan or pose an imminent threat, the civilian side feebly tried to cover up for Pakistan.

''I don't think that the situation we face right now has risen to the level that you just described,'' Undersecretary for Defense Policy Eric Edelman told Republican Senator Jeff Sessions, who suggested that US could attack terror camps in Pakistan under the same legal argument used to justify the post 9/11 invasion of Afghanistan that toppled Taliban.

Both Lt. Gen Lute and Undersecretary Edelman agreed that militant attacks in Afghanistan would not end without eliminating terror sanctuaries in Pakistan.

To questions about whether Pakistan’s ISI was protecting Mullah Omar and Musharraf’s failed deal with the Taliban in North Waziristan, they sought to provide answers in a closed or classified session.

Not for the first time this week, a Senate hearing revealed a stunning turnaround in the military and Congressional mood on Pakistan’s role in the war on terror.

Lawmakers zeroed in on Islamabad even as administration officials sought to bat for Washington’s puppet military regime.

“You either are supporting these people (the terrorists) or you're not assuming control over your country. Either way, we cannot wait,” Sessions said, referring to Pakistan’s dodgy policy on terror.

“'What Pakistani leaders need to contemplate is which is harder for them – acting to do something about this, or us acting to do something about this,” warned Indiana Democrat Evan Bayh. Senior lawmakers Carl Levin and Ted Kennedy also weighed in on Pakistan's role.

The increasingly hostile mood in Washington brought the Pakistani ambassador to Washington scurrying to the wire services to caution that any US pressure, including congressional threats to cut or put conditions on billions of dollars in aid, could destabilize Pakistan and bring down Musharraf.

Musharraf and his military cohorts have long argued that only they stand between a nuclear armed Pakistan and crazy mullahs.

But the increasing heat from Washington appeared to produce some immediate result in Pakistan. The military regime produced a senior Taliban commander and former Defense Minister Mullah Obaidullah Akhund described as a No.2 to Mullah Omar, saying he had been arrested during a raid in Quetta.

US, Nato and Afghan officials had repeatedly said senior Taliban figures are hiding in Quetta, a charge that Pakistan had dismissed as ‘absurd.’ But evidently, the riot act read out to Musharraf by US vice-president Dick Cheney has had an immediate effect.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...t_in_Pak/articleshow/msid-1712591,curpg-2.cms

 

[Contrarian]

US reads Mush the riot act

WASHINGTON: Pakistan's military ruler Pervez Musharraf has fallen from Washington's good grace.

President Bush, who called Musharraf his "tight buddy" couple of years ago, has decided to send him an "unusually tough message" over his failure to deliver results in the war on terrorism, the New York Times reported on Monday, quoting unnamed senior administration officials.

The development marks a significant turn in the war on terror centered around Pakistan as a breeding ground of militant and radical Islam, as opposed to the almost universally-criticised war against Iraq, and the NYT found it important enough to make it the top story.

The gravity of the situation was underscored by the sudden, unannounced visit to Islamabad on Monday of US vice-President Dick Cheney, ostensibly to read the riot act for General Musharraf.

While there was the usual pabulum about seeking Pakistan's cooperation, Washington seems to have gone past that stage and is now laying down the line for Pakistan. Cheney, considered the hardliner in the administration most capable of delivering tough messages, is evidently the hatchet man in this case.

US officials suggested that the Bush will use a new law passed recently by the Democratic Congress, making aid to Pakistan contingent on its action against terrorism, to turn the screws on Musharraf.

The Bush administration seems particularly distressed that a Musharraf-underwritten "peace deal" with Taliban on Pakistan's border with Afghanistan has given Al Qaeda space to regroup and attack western and Afghan forces even more vigorously.

Many analysts had warned of that from the very moment the agreement was struck, but the Bush administration swallowed Musharraf's argument and accepted it.

There now seems to be a change of heart in Washington, partly as a result of intelligence reports and also ground reports from US and Nato commanders who have borne the brunt of the Taliban and Al Qaeda resurgence.

"He's made a number of assurances over the past few months, but the bottom line is that what they are doing now is not working," a senior administration official told the paper. "The message we're sending to him now is that the only thing that matters is results."

In a surprising revelation, the paper said relations between General Musharraf and President Bush "have always been tense," and cited officials involved in the current debate as saying it was "especially fraught" at the moment.

While there has been withering criticism of Pakistan and its role as the fount of international terrorism in private, US officials, from President Bush down, have in public repeatedly praised Musharraf as a frontline allies, ostensibly to win his support.
The tactic, lubricated with large infusions of military and economic aid, was aimed at persuading a militarized Pakistan to turn against the same terrorists it had previously cultivated as a policy.

But evidently, the persuasion has not worked very well. The administration now wants to ratchet up the pressure using the threat of aid cuts.

Pakistan is hopelessly dependant on foreign aid and will go bust if U.S pulls the plug on it. Its recent economic growth is fuelled largely by billions in aid, concessions, and debt write-off from developed countries and its allies in the Gulf.

According to Selig Harrison, a South Asia scholar at the Center for International Policy, the total cost of Musharraf's cooperation in the war on terror has reached a staggering $27.5 billion since 9/11.

Harrison estimates that economic and military aid has totaled $4.5 billion. In addition, the U.S is providing $5 billion in credit guarantees for the purchase of 62 nuclear capable F-16 fighter planes and has orchestrated the postponement of debt repayments to aid donor countries totaling another $13.5 billion.

"The subsidies to the armed forces -- $4.5 billion so far and set to reach $7.5 billion in 2008 -- are papered over in Pentagon statistics and have received little congressional scrutiny," Harrison wrote recently. "The payments continue to flow whether or not Pakistani forces come out of their barracks in Afghan border areas during a given month."

On record though, White House officials danced around the sudden tough posture on Pakistan, refusing to answer directly if President Bush was dissatisfied or unhappy over Pakistan's role.

"I going to talk about the tone, tenor or precise content of what the vice president had to say to President Musharraf," White House spokesman Tony Snow said, faced with a barrage of questions on Pakistan at his daily briefing.

"When you engage in conversations with sovereign heads of state in situations like that, you do it on a confidential basis, knowing that you're going to be able to have the benefit of full honesty, and at same time you're going to be more constructive in working together," he added.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...iot_act_/articleshow/msid-1690240,curpg-2.cms

 

[Contrarian]

US can pursue militants across Pakistan

WASHINGTON: US forces have the authority to pursue Taliban and Al Qaida militants fleeing into Pakistan from Afghanistan, a top American commander has said.

At hearing on Afghanistan at the Senate Armed Services Committee, Gen Douglas Lute, Director of Operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, however, indicated that a similar action cannot be taken if the militants are operating deep inside Pakistan.

Asked whether Islamabad has given permission on hot pursuit of militants acrosss the border, the General replied "No, actually the answer is no, Senator."

"Each commander under US authority has a responsibility and an obligation to protect his forces and is free to strike against those demonstrating either a hostile act, sort of caught in the act, or demonstrating hostile intent. And the judgement here is on behalf of the on-scene commander" the top Pentagon official said.

"So, if those conditions are met in Afghanistan -- hostile act or a hostile intent -- and the enemy in the course of this action attempts to flee across the border, and if this action is continuous, so it's not two or three days later, but it's the same action, then we have all the authorities we need to pursue, either with fires or on the ground, across the border," Gen Lute said.

"If they demonstrate hostile intent -- so, for example, if just across the border.... we do not have to wait for the rockets to be fired. They have demonstrated hostile intent and we can engage them," responded Gen Lute.

The Bush administration is coming under a lot of pressure from Capitol Hill to precisely spell out the nature of engagement rules on the Pak-Afghan border, especially on the issue of hot pursuit of militants into Pakistan.

Senior law makers are making a forceful argument that President Pervez Musharraf cannot have it both ways--insisting the concept of sovereignty and at the same time unable to exercise sovereign control, over certain areas of the country.

The Defence Department is trying to make the point that a distinction of sorts would have to be made between what is taking place on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border and in the "depths" of Pakistan.

"And what if we find not the setting up of the launching of rockets but the manufacturer of rockets over into Pakistan?" persisted Senator Bill Nelson

Gen Lute indicated that if the US wanted to strike in this type of situation it would have to get permission from Pakistan.

"The hostile act, hostile intent provision has a degree of imminence of the threat attached to it. So in this instance, first of all, these activities aren't typically done right along the border but rather more in the depths of Pakistan. And our recourse there would probably first be to turn to Pakistani authorities and share, as we say, target folders giving them the evidence of this activity and then making the bid that they should do something against it."

The General would not answer in an open session if Islamabad has turned down such requests.

"On this line of questioning, we probably need to go to a smaller session," Gen Lute remarked presenting the same answer when asked if Washington would have to seek authority from Islamabad for going after Osama bin Laden in Pakistan.

Earlier, Committe chairman Carl Levin demanded a clear answer from the State Department and the Defence Department, whether or not the US had the "authority under international law to go to an ungoverned area next door to go after the source of attacks against forces which are authorized to be in Afghanistan and to protect Afghanistan.

"Does the Defense Department and has the president- do we have a clear policy that if bases are reconstituted in any way, sum or even a fraction, as significant as the ones in Afghanistan that were used as a base to attack the US, that we will take some action to eliminate that? " asked Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama in a rather pointed fashion.

Under Secretary of Defence for Policy Eric Edelman replied: "I don't think that the situation we face right now in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas and the Northwest Frontier province have risen to the level that you just described" Edelman replied.

However, he added "I think the president's made it clear, both by his words and his actions, that we're prepared to do that, if we have to do it to defend the people of the United States of America."

General Lute said the relative sanctuary for, especially, Taliban senior leadership in Pakistan, today, in the border regions of Pakistan, was a major factor in the ability of the Taliban to be resurgent and probably quite active military this spring in Afghanistan.

"There's no question that that sanctuary exists and that it's a major asset for the Taliban," Gen Lute said.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...Pakistan/articleshow/msid-1720010,curpg-4.cms

 

[Contrarian]

CIA presents Mush evidence on Al-Qaida

WASHINGTON: In what is being described as a "highly unusual move," the Bush administration had sent the CIA Deputy Director to personally present evidence of Al Qaida regrouping in Pakistan's northern areas to President Pervez Musharraf.

Stephen Kappes is said to have flown in specially for the meeting between US Vice President Dick Cheney and the Pakistani leader on Monday and presented the latter with "evidence" that included satellite pictures that the agency has put together of the goings on in the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. The top CIA official is said to have presented Musharraf "compelling" evidence of Al Qaida's resurgence in Pakistan, US officials were quoted as saying by ABC News.

The CIA evidence is said to have included electronic intercepts of Al Qaida leaders operating inside Pakistan.

"We are now seeing the recreation of al Qaeda central," Richard Clarke, the former White House counter-terrorism chief has said.

According to US officials, Musharraf has been in a state of denial about the resurgence and comeback of the Al Qaida in Pakistan and has "ignored" evidence presented by NATO commanders in Afghanistan. Although Musharraf pledged in a September 2006 meeting with President George W Bush to get tough with the Al Qaida and the Taliban operating in Northern Waziristan, the attacks on the NATO and American troops have more than tripled since then.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/..._evidence_on_Al-Qaida/articleshow/1695159.cms

 

[Cheetah786]

LOL times of India writing against Pakistan.hmmmmmmmmmm i wonder if there is any political motive behind this.
first of all pakistan government has decided a while ago its a captins mess let captin clean it up.publicly we will keep denying it.

 

[waz]

LOL times of India writing against Pakistan.hmmmmmmmmmm i wonder if there is any political motive behind this.

No they just get off on it.

 

[Contrarian]

This news has been reported in dawn too i take it. And the report mentions that the input is from washington post.

 

[kidwaibhai]

This is most stunning news ever what great reporting. i really dont think there is any bias there at all.
P.S i watched the hearing my self on C-Span it isnt that bad most of the senators still were sympathetic to pakistans position

 

[Neo]

Sunday, March 4, 2007

Pakistan says forces cannot cross into country
By MUNIR AHMAD

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Pakistan vehemently denied Saturday the U.S. military's claim that coalition forces in Afghanistan have the authority to pursue Taliban fleeing across the border into Pakistani territory.

"There is no authorization for hot pursuit of terrorists into our territory," Maj. Gen. Waheed Arshad, spokesman for the Pakistan Army, said Saturday.

"Whatever actions are needed to fight terrorism, we are taking them."

Pakistan's Foreign Ministry rejected an assertion by Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute, chief operations officer for the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, that U.S. forces routinely fire on and pursue Taliban into Pakistan.

"No foreign forces are allowed to cross into our territorial border," said Ministry spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam.

Aslam's and Arshad's comments came two days after Lute told the Senate Armed Services Committee in Washington that "we have all the authorities we need to pursue, either with [artillery] fire or on the ground, across the border."

Lute provided a detailed description of when U.S. forces can fire on and pursue insurgents across the border into the Islamic nation of Pakistan, an important ally of the U.S. in its campaign against terrorism.

However, Lute did not elaborate on whether there were restrictions on how deep into Pakistan his soldiers could go. He said the decision is based not on distance, but on the immediacy of the threat involved.

Pakistan used to be a main supporter of Afghanistan's former Taliban regime, but it switched sides after the Sept. 11 attacks. Its forces have since arrested at least 700 al-Qaida and Taliban.

But there is growing international pressure on Pakistan to crack down further on Taliban militants on its side of the border, a message delivered on Monday by Vice President Dick Cheney during a visit to Islamabad.

In Kabul on Saturday, Afghan Foreign Minister Rangeen Dadfar Spanta told members of Parliament that Pakistan uses terror as its foreign policy and that the international community should not reward Pakistan with aid.

"Pakistan shouldn't use terror as its foreign policy," he said. "I wish that the international community wouldn't give rewards to countries that are supporting the Taliban."

Afghan officials frequently accuse Pakistani leaders of harboring Taliban fighters and commanders, though Pakistan insists it does all it can to fight terrorism.

Pakistan has deployed about 80,000 troops near Afghanistan, where al-Qaida and Taliban remnants are believed to be hiding.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003600015_pakistan04.html?syndication=rss