US & Pakistan Dispute and Tensions over Haqqani group

[VCheng]

What 'goals'?

Economic sanctions? How does destabilizing Pakistan even more, and potentially making it easier for religious extremists to take over, assist any 'long term US goals'?
..................

Destabilizing Pakistan is not a goal, rather the prevention thereof is an important goal.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Definitely it does.

But the magnitude of security forces deployed in Afghanistan and their level of sophistication also has to be seen. You have NATO/US/CIA/ANA/ANP in much larger numbers deployed in Afghanistan, even then these militants travel from supposedly across the border into Afghanistan and attack its heart.

As for Pakistan, the majority of the attacks by militants is within land, they are locals and coming from within the country. There is a difference. They have local support, thus local support with local militants. And our security forces and intel agencies are not as sophisticated as across the border has. And then you have Afghanistan which as per western forces don't like Taliban and are against them, then who is giving them local support on such a massive scale. On our side the attacks have gone down with militants cells being targeted before they carry out the attacks or after the attack. Their home bases are being attacked and if you see the level of attacks and the amount of devastation they cause, it has gone down. Most of the recent high casualty attacks have been in the tribal areas themselves, where they have local support.

So, since i have little bit knowledge of military related stuff, looking at the level of sophistication & numbers which the US/NATO/ANA/ANP/RAMA/CIA enjoy in Afghanistan, i fail to see why such attacks happen and why 70% of Afghanistan being under Taliban rule still gives us the blame. Recent attacks on Pak security forces on the Afghan-Pak border were launched from the 2 provinces which are in complete Taliban control. Where are the NATO/US/ANA forces and why don't they capture those two very important provinces. Compared to NWA, they are controlling 2 big provinces. Why don't they try to have more troops and border posts with more surveillance of the border area on the NWA-Afghan border, so that whoever is infiltrating, should be taken down. After 10 years of war, they must know which routes are being used and where to ambush them and attack with drones. They are good at attacking with drones in NWA, but they can't take them down when they are crossing the border. We have 800+ posts on the border, while ANA/NATO/US total number is around 200, doesn't that speaks something.

ANA/ANP/US/NATO should first take down the militants on its sides, local support and infrastructure should be dismantled, after that something can be done, otherwise, if we attack them here, they will cross the border and stay there, which is exactly what is happening.

How on earth can the 'Haqqani network', attack US forces in Afghanistan and 'run back and hide in safe havens in NW' when the attacks are being carried out this deep in Afghanistan?

That argument, of running back to hide in safe havens across the border, applies better to the attacks on Pakistani check-posts and villages along the Afghan-Pakistan border in the North (along Kunar and Nuristan provinces).

Given the number of cross-border attacks Pakistan has experienced and the casualties (civilian and military) that it has taken from these attacks, the Yanks sound like a bunch of whiny sissies and schoolyard bullies, who can't take either the heat or responsibility, and resort to the same old blame deflection and double standards when they take fire themselves.

Sorry arse bunch of whiny sissies - a far cry from their heroic predecessors circa WWII.

---------- Post added at 08:16 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:14 AM ----------

More than wiki i'd rely on American Intelligence declassified reports , they are more credible.

Pakistan: "The Taliban's Godfather"?

They reference 'consistent reporting' ...

Now, is there actually any evidence, because 'consistent reporting' is .... what exactly?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Destabilizing Pakistan is not a goal, rather the prevention thereof is an important goal.

Sure, so if not 'invasion, stand-off weapons, international economic sanctions', what is left to use as leverage that will not destabilize Pakistan?

 

[VCheng]

Sure, so if not 'invasion, stand-off weapons, international economic sanctions', what is left to use as leverage that will not destabilize Pakistan?

The best leverage lies in continued positive engagement with the military, the bureaucracy, the media and the judiciary to ensure improved governance, which is the best way to ensure long-term stability of the country.

 

[Bhairava]

They reference 'consistent reporting' ...

Now, is there actually any evidence, because 'consistent reporting' is .... what exactly?

Consistent reporting of the Intel sources.

 

[DV RULES]

WASHINGTON: The United States on Tuesday renewed blunt demands that Pakistan crack down on Haqqani militants allegedly based in the country, saying the network posed a serious threat to US forces in Afghanistan.

Defence Secretary Leon Panetta told reporters that Washington would “put as much pressure as possible on the Pakistanis to exercise control from their side of the border.”

“We’ve continued to state that this cannot happen, we cannot have the Haqqanis coming across the border, attacking our forces, attacking Afghanistan…and then disappearing back into a safe haven. That is not tolerable,” Panetta said.

He added: “I think they’ve heard the message, but we’ll see.”

Panetta’s comments reflect a tougher public US line in recent days amid growing frustration in President Barack Obama’s administration over the role of the Haqqani network.

The stern warnings also coincide with increasingly strained relations with Pakistan.

The Americans blame the Haqqani network for a recent bombing attack that wounded 77 US troops at a base in Wardak province and for an elaborate assault on September 13 on the US embassy and Nato headquarters in Kabul.

Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said at an earlier event Tuesday the presence of the Haqqani sanctuaries potentially jeopardised the outcome of the war.

“Without that (Pakistani action), we can’t succeed in the overall effort,” he said.

Mullen said Pakistan’s ISI intelligence agency had to sever all ties with the Haqqani militants, who allegedly operate out of sanctuaries in the country’s northwest.

“I think that the ISI has to make the decision to strategically disengage. The ISI has been doing this, supporting proxies for an extended period of time,” he told an audience at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Mullen met with his Pakistani counterpart over the weekend in Spain, General Ashfaq Kayani, and repeated Washington’s impatience on the Haqqani militants.

At the Pentagon press conference, Mullen — who has held numerous talks with Kayani during his four year tenure — said there was no doubt about “the clarity with which I addressed this issue” in the meeting with the Pakistani general.

Panetta, Mullen hammer Pakistan over Haqqani network | World | DAWN.COM


They forgot CIA-TTP, CIA-ALQ links. A country which is hosting terrorists camps in Afghanistan speaks about Pakistan having no relations with Haqqani network.

 

[DV RULES]

NEW YORK: Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar has rejected an impression that US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave an ultimatum to Islamabad to attack Haqqani group militants.

“There are some misperceptions about the meeting I had with Secretary Clinton… There were no ultimatums from either side,” she told reporters on Monday.

The relationship between the United States and Pakistan was an important one and no one is a hostage in it, said Khar, who is leading Pakistan’s delegation to the 66th session of the UN General Assembly. “Pakistan is in it by choice,” she added.

US officials said after Sunday’s talks that the issues of counterterrorism in general and the Haqqani network in particular were the first and last topics discussed by Clinton and the Pakistani foreign minister.

But Khar said the meeting was not unidimensional, it covered all the issues of interest to Pakistan and the United States.

Both the US and Pakistan, Khar said, understand the need to cooperate and build a partnership.

Pakistan had made “big” sacrifices in combating terrorism and lost some 30,000 citizens, and 5,000 security officials, the foreign minister said.

“We need to be assisted, not recriminated,” she said. “There should be no public recrimination. This must stop.”

She pointed out that Pakistan even paid a heavy price for arresting a militant in Quetta recently—al Qaeda leader Younis al-Mauritania—when 30 people lost their lives in a revenge attack.

Pakistan was committed to rooting out terrorism and was fulfilling its obligations in this regard, Khar said.

Pakistan acted in its own national interest, not at the behest of some one, she added.


No US ultimatum on Haqqani network, says Khar | Pakistan | DAWN.COM


Seem like tension has created in between USSD and Pentagon too over this issue. Pentagon working to take action against Pakistan through its pet TTP and USSD has different point of view. Khar's justifications quite unsatisfactory and reflects different scenario of meeting.

 

[karan.1970]

WASHINGTON: The United States on Tuesday renewed blunt demands that Pakistan crack down on Haqqani militants allegedly based in the country, saying the network posed a serious threat to US forces in Afghanistan.

Defence Secretary Leon Panetta told reporters that Washington would “put as much pressure as possible on the Pakistanis to exercise control from their side of the border.”

“We’ve continued to state that this cannot happen, we cannot have the Haqqanis coming across the border, attacking our forces, attacking Afghanistan…and then disappearing back into a safe haven. That is not tolerable,” Panetta said.

He added: “I think they’ve heard the message, but we’ll see.”

Panetta’s comments reflect a tougher public US line in recent days amid growing frustration in President Barack Obama’s administration over the role of the Haqqani network.

The stern warnings also coincide with increasingly strained relations with Pakistan.

The Americans blame the Haqqani network for a recent bombing attack that wounded 77 US troops at a base in Wardak province and for an elaborate assault on September 13 on the US embassy and Nato headquarters in Kabul.

Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said at an earlier event Tuesday the presence of the Haqqani sanctuaries potentially jeopardised the outcome of the war.

“Without that (Pakistani action), we can’t succeed in the overall effort,” he said.

Mullen said Pakistan’s ISI intelligence agency had to sever all ties with the Haqqani militants, who allegedly operate out of sanctuaries in the country’s northwest.

“I think that the ISI has to make the decision to strategically disengage. The ISI has been doing this, supporting proxies for an extended period of time,” he told an audience at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Mullen met with his Pakistani counterpart over the weekend in Spain, General Ashfaq Kayani, and repeated Washington’s impatience on the Haqqani militants.

At the Pentagon press conference, Mullen — who has held numerous talks with Kayani during his four year tenure — said there was no doubt about “the clarity with which I addressed this issue” in the meeting with the Pakistani general.

Panetta, Mullen hammer Pakistan over Haqqani network | World | DAWN.COM


They forgot CIA-TTP, CIA-ALQ links. A country which is hosting terrorists camps in Afghanistan speaks about Pakistan having no relations with Haqqani network.

This is funny coming right after Pakistan's Foreign affairs minister said that there was no ultimatum to Pakistan from USA.. Looks like Mullen and Panetta are no longer bothering with niceties..

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

They reference 'consistent reporting' ...

Now, is there actually any evidence, because 'consistent reporting' is .... what exactly?

From my experience of reading such reports , its mostly what Gounder says, However these reports always blacken the source part.

 

[hembo]

September 21, 2011 2:55 AM
U.S. to Pakistan: Get Haqqani, or we will




WASHINGTON | Wed Sep 21, 2011 3:23am EDT
U.S. says Pakistan's ISI using group for "proxy war"

 

[Prometheus]

Once again same old thing.........."do more Pakistan"
US needs to come up with something new

 

[Devil Soul]

Pasha meets Petraeus in Washington to discuss Haqqani network
By Huma Imtiaz
Published: September 21, 2011
WASHINGTON: Amidst growing pressure on Pakistan to act against the Haqqani Network, Pakistan ISI chief General Ahmed Shuja Pasha visited Washington DC quietly on Tuesday for a one day visit to meet with his CIA counterpart General David Petraeus.
As first reported by Washington Post, the CIA officially declined to comment on whether the meeting had taken place. However, sources said that General Pasha had met with David Petraeus, CIA officials at the CIA headquarters in Langley and separately with senior White House officials at Ambassador Husain Haqqani’s residence in Washington before leaving for Islamabad. The Post reported that the Haqqani Network was the focus of their discussions.
The meeting between the intelligence chiefs was the third high level meeting in a week to discuss the Haqqani Network and its presence in Pakistan. With US officials urging Pakistan to take action. On Sunday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met with Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar in New York, where the first and last thing discussed was the Haqqani Network.
On Friday, US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen met COAS General Kayani in Seville, Spain for four hours, where he reiterated his desire for Pakistan to take action against the group.
On Tuesday, Admiral Mullen had said that he had no doubt that the Haqqani Network was responsible for the attacks on the US Embassy and NATO HQ in Kabul on September 13, and the attack on US soldiers in Wardak on September 11 in Afghanistan. Admiral Mullen also said that the ISI, supporting proxies, must disengage from this part of their strategy.
US military trainings in Pakistan suspended
With calls of ‘do more’ coming from both sides among plummeting bi-lateral relations, US military, which had been training Pakistani troops, has suspended their programs upon request from the Pakistani government.
The US Department of Defence spokesperson Lieutenant Colonel Elizabeth Robbins told The Express Tribune that “The number of US military personnel has been reduced and training has been suspended at the request of the Government of Pakistan.”
The spokesperson further said that while personnel had been reduced, the US military will continue deployment of a small contingent to provide support and help coordinate attacks with NATO.
“We will maintain a small presence of US military to conduct security cooperation, respond to future requests for support and to preserve military-to-military ties. We will also continue to work with the Pakistan military to improve coordination with NATO forces in Afghanistan,” the statement read.
Pasha meets Petraeus in Washington to discuss Haqqani network – The Express Tribune

 

[karan.1970]

Despite all the hoo-hah about declining power of USA, the stark reality is pretty visible. A couple of days of hardline comments from Clinton and Mullen, and there goes Gen. Pasha rushing off to the District

 

[lem34]

Despite all the hoo-hah about declining power of USA, the stark reality is pretty visible. A couple of days of hardline comments from Clinton and Mullen, and there goes Gen. Pasha scooting off to the District

How do you know who requested the meeting? and whats this "scooting" this is just your way of deriding pakistan and building up americans. Its your interpretation doesnt mean that you are correct. pak and america have ongoing matters that need discussing

 

[karan.1970]

How do you know who requested the meeting? and whats this "scooting" this is just your way of deriding pakistan and building up americans. Its your interpretation doesnt mean that you are correct. pak and america have ongoing matters that need discussing

No disrespect intended.. Scooting off was to show speed and not desperation.. I have changed the post so that it doesnt come across as deriding...

And it was more intended towards the armchair warriors on this forum who keep asking Pakistani govt to kick USA out of Pakistan and how end of USA is near..