What's new

US & Pakistan Dispute and Tensions over Haqqani group

as it is in QURRAN PAK "Kia ALLAH apnay bandon ko kafi nahi" Surah AL-IMRAN

well Pakistan just started to play and i am praying that it should be long enough innings to kick USA outta Afghanistan and Pakistan gonna win INSHALLAH ......... well well ...... it's been only 2 months and american started to yell and we are holding back since 2001.............well done Gen Kiyani and Pasha
 
In view of the fact that Haqqani Network may not be the sole reason of humiliating defeat of the mightiest armies, it is beyond comprehension that USA is pressuring Pakistan into launching an attack on the so-called sanctuaries of the Network in NWA. This is particularly disturbing in view of the circumstantial evidence (ability of the Network to operate deep into Afghan capital) that the sanctuaries may have been relocated to somewhere in Afghanistan. Is this pressure a sincere effort to salvage Afghanistan situation for the US? For the sake of argument, if we concede that the Network is indeed hiding in NWA and Pakistan Army’s operation will weaken their ability to attack US interests in Afghanistan, will this give some sort of face saving to the retreating NATO forces? What should be the priority of Pakistan’s security establishment? To attack and eliminate the elements of TTP and al Qaeda attacking Pakistan or further thin out its resources to fight those who are a threat to NATO forces? This is where interests of Pakistan and USA do not converge and they will have to find a middle ground to come to an understanding. The circumstances point to the fact that the problem exists within Afghanistan and should be sorted out by NATO and Afghan National Army. The only way-forward to peace in Afghanistan is purely home-grown initiative keeping in view the demographic realities. Any proposal based on any other consideration will complicate the matters further and push Afghanistan into a never-ending chaos and anarchy.
 
No names of these officials given to get this verified? "Some officials", "another official". What fantastic yellow journalism.
Not yellow journalism. This is how "official" leaks to the press happen in D.C. If it was the yellow stuff somebody in the Administration would have denied it. I didn't find such a denial. (Though I suppose there could be one in the next twelve hours or so.)

Look its silly. ISI is not stupid enough to attack US targets.
The ISI is run by the military and the last time a general was sacked for incompetence was, what, forty years ago? Don't you think Pakistanis have a problem when they seek to honor shahids and ignore booting ineffective and wrong-headed generals?
 
then take action against haqani......according to washington post..ur links are shown to pasha.:whistle:


They say Afghanistan is the " Graveyard for Superpowers ", in the past like the Great Britain and Russia, and now the good ole US of A.

This should be a lesson for the aspiring " MIDGET STATUS " future Super power wanna bees like India.
 
Pakistan ISI urged attacks on U.S. targets: officials

By Mark Hosenball | Reuters – 1 hr 6 mins ago

- U.S. officials say there is mounting evidence that Pakistan's chief intelligence agency has been encouraging a Pakistan-based militant network to attack U.S. targets.

The allegations, if fully confirmed, heighten a painful dilemma for President Barack Obama's administration. Washington is under growing political pressure to take action against the Haqqani network after a spate of deadly attacks U.S. officials have attributed to it. These include last week's strike against the American Embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan.

Some U.S. intelligence reporting alleges that Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence directorate (ISI) specifically directed, or urged, the Haqqani network to carry out the September 13 attack on the embassy and a NATO headquarters in Kabul, according two U.S. officials and a source familiar with recent U.S.-Pakistan official contacts. However, officials cautioned that this information is uncorroborated.

Another U.S. official familiar with internal government assessments said that at the very least, the available intelligence strongly suggests the ISI has been egging on elements of the Haqqani network to launch attacks at American targets in the region.

While American officials have aired allegations of ties between the ISI and the Haqqani network in recent days, they have not publicly cited evidence that the Pakistani agency, or elements of it, urged its proxy to attack U.S. targets.

While the ISI's motives in any such attacks are not clear, Pakistan has long wanted to play a major role in Afghanistan's future after the departure of NATO troops, and to counter what it sees as the growing influence there of arch-rival India.

This week, top U.S. officials, including Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Admiral Mike Mullen, demanded that Pakistan's leaders take action against the Haqqanis, who are based in that country's tribal areas and are considered among the most dangerous insurgent groups in the Afghanistan-Pakistan region.

Still, despite the threats and an intensified campaign of violence that threatens U.S. efforts to stabilize Afghanistan, the Obama administration has few options for increasing pressure on Pakistan and none of them are good.

After years of efforts to cajole, coax and threaten Pakistan into cracking down on a host of militants operating from within its borders failed to bear fruit, U.S. officials are exasperated.
One alternative -- another cross-border raid, like the U.S. special forces mission that killed al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in May -- may be tempting in some quarters of the U.S. government. But the risks are high and the backlash from Pakistan would be fierce, almost certainly harming what counter-terrorism cooperation exists.

"LITTLE LEVERAGE"

"The administration has thrown everything at this -- high-level meetings, tons of money, all of these overtures, and it hasn't gotten us anywhere," said Caroline Wadhams, a security analyst in Washington.

"This can't go on forever," she said, "but the problem is that we have so little leverage."

The long-simmering tension between the sometime allies, sometime adversaries came to a head last week after the brazen attack on the U.S. Embassy in Kabul. It was a major blow as Obama hopes to nudge Afghanistan toward stability and gradually bring home U.S. forces after a decade of war.

Since then, American officials, including Obama's ambassador in Islamabad and Mullen, his top military officer, have issued unusually blunt criticisms of Pakistan's failure to curb the Haqqani group -- and made frank statements accusing Islamabad of links to the group.

Mullen, in a speech to the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said Tuesday he had pressed Pakistan's army chief in a four-hour conversation on Friday to break the country's links with the Haqqanis.

"We covered ... the need for the Haqqani Network to disengage, specifically the need for the ISI to disconnect from Haqqani and from this proxy war that they're fighting," Mullen said.

The Haqqanis, just one of a host of militant groups that have used western Pakistan as a base for attacks in Afghanistan, are seen as allied to both al Qaeda and the Afghan Taliban. Supported at times in the past by the CIA, they have had long-standing ties to the ISI.

On Tuesday, regional tensions soared even higher when a suicide bomber killed Burhanuddin Rabbani, the former Afghan president who had headed efforts to secure a peace deal with the Taliban.
While responsibility for the attack remains unclear, the shocking assassination threatened to do even more to reverse a tentative thaw in perpetually dismal U.S.-Pakistani ties a few months after Osama bin Laden was killed near Islamabad. The initial conclusion of U.S. government experts is that Rabbani's assassination was carried out by Afghan Taliban and had no connection to the Haqqani network.

Vali Nasr, who until this spring was a senior official in the U.S. State Department's Afghanistan-Pakistan office, said efforts to prompt Pakistani action against militants with increased public pressure had fallen short.

"They are not blinking," he said.

(Editing by Warren Strobel and Christopher Wilson)

Then what is the UN for ?? UN Security council for ??

Why not go to them, show the evidence and then attack Pakistan or sanction it ?? What is stopping the US from going on such course of action and show to the world the hypocrisy of Pakistan and banish Pakistan from the world community ?? Why not voice for regime change in Pakistan on the UN platform, just how they lied to the world on Iraqi WMD and then subsequently attacking Iraq.

AQ supposedly / allegedly killed US people on 9/11 and US then attacked Afghanistan, so now again allegedly / supposedly ISI is asking others to kill US people in shape of US military personnel, then who the hell is stopping them from going to UN and asking for strict permission.

Why these unnamed sourced articles and no evidence, why not go to UN ??

Seriously, can anyone answer, Solomon or any other American, what is stopping the mighty US from going to UN and do what it seems right, why these unnamed security official quoting articles which are just for one purpose other then else.
 
And what exactly benefit would this bring to the ISI and Pakistan? :disagree:.

This sort of propaganda reminds me of World War II where the Americans launched massive biased propaganda against the Japanese, making them out to be subhumans whom were just out there to cause rampage in the world.

Well they not only did propaganda, but they did send American - Japanese origin people to detention camps for the time period of war.

I wonder what is stopping the mighty US from doing hard steps against Pakistan if they have so much evidence. Why the US still provides money, aid and weapons to a country which it says it harboring people who are killing American people in Afghanistan.
 
This is a good news gentlemen , lets hope Pakistan army responds by pulling out of FATA.
 
America’s SPECTRE Syndrome In Afghanistan
By Ejaz Haider


Ernst Stavro Sirajuddin Blofeld Haqqani is now running SPECTRE (SPecial Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion), renamed in Afghanistan as the Haqqani Network.

All the troubles of the US and its allies stem from this reincarnation of SPECTRE. The only entity that can take care of this shadowy organisation is Pakistan. The capacity of this organisation to trouble America is exclusively owed to its ability to retire to North Waziristan after striking inside Afghanistan, sometime as deep as in Kabul. Its members seem to be able to fly in and out of Afghanistan, undetected, despite the presence there of US, Nato and Isaf troops.


It’s the only entity that is hampering the US from neatening up Afghanistan. Get rid of the Network and Afghanistan will be fine — the government will work, the Taliban will vanish, corruption will end, pluralism will flourish, democracy will take root, Afghan society will enter the 21st century, America will be safe and everyone will live happily ever after.

Am I being reductive? Please read the long report by the Combating Terrorism Centre at West Point which argues that the most “underappreciated dimension” of the Haqqani network is its “global character” and the “central role it has played in the evolution of al-Qa’ida and the global jihadi movement”. Read also the report about the meeting between US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Pakistan’s Foreign Minister, Hina Rabbani Khar ,where the “first and last thing” on the agenda was the Haqqani Network and the September 13 Kabul attack.

The fact is that the Afghanistan problem is not just about the Haqqani Network. Afghanistan has multiple problems, most of which have nothing whatsoever to do with the Haqqanis. Even if the Haqqani Network were entirely taken out, Afghanistan would remain largely the same. In fact, if the only stumbling block between an Afghanistan gone bad and an idyllic Afghanistan were the Network, Afghanistan would have been a piece of cake, not the wicked problem it has become.

Secondly, if the insurgency in Afghanistan was only run by the Haqqanis, JSOC (Joint Special Operations Command) would not be conducting thousands of night operations for the last year-and-half across all of Afghanistan, operations that are terribly unpopular.

Thirdly, if use of force was the only answer to Afghanistan’s problems, the US would have, by now, brought it under control. But the use of force, by itself, is clearly not enough. As Mr Abdullah Abdullah told me in April in Washington, what is missing is the ability of the Afghan government to reach out to its people. It is common knowledge that the Afghan governors cannot even survive in their respective vilayats without striking some kind of deal with the Taliban commanders in the area.

Fourthly, the three spectacular attacks in recent weeks, beginning with the downing of a Chinook carrying a SEAL team, the suicide attack that injured 70 US troops, both in Maydan Wardag, and now the September 13 Kabul attack clearly show that the line of communication of the insurgents cannot stretch back to North Waziristan. All these attacks have happened deep inside the Afghan territory and indicate the steady loss of control of territory by the Afghan government and the foreign troops.

If, for the sake of the argument it is conceded that the Taliban line of communication does extend back to North Waziristan, then the ability of the fighters to go deep in and mount attacks makes an utter mockery of the military and intelligence capabilities of the US and its allies despite the tremendous resources at their disposal.

Fifthly, as should be clear from Sirajuddin Haqqani’s interview to Reuters, his fighters are not based in North Waziristan. It makes eminent sense for him to have relocated to the Loya Paktia given the heightened frequency of the drone attacks in North Waziristan and the fact that the Network controls the three provinces of Khost, Paktia and Paktika. They are also unlikely to be based either in Dande Darpa Khel in North Waziristan or Zambar in Khost, both locations known to intelligence agencies.

Finally, Siraj’s interview dispels the propaganda that the Haqqani Network is Al Qaeda. Instead, Siraj told Reuters that “we would support whatever solution our shura members suggest for the future of Afghanistan”, a clear reference to the Afghan Taliban leadership. Siraj also said that they rejected previous attempts at talks by the US and the Afghan government because those overtures were aimed at “creating divisions” among the Taliban. It is therefore misleading to suggest that the Haqqanis operate outside the overall strategic objectives of the Taliban.

Siraj’s interview and signalling is in line with Mullah Omar’s Eidul Fitr message, which dealt with three basic points: the Afghanistan-specific focus of the Taliban; their readiness to negotiate meaningfully, and a warning to the neighbours to desist from interfering in Afghanistan’s internal affairs. Another important motif running through that message was Taliban’s an inclusive approach to governance. In that, this year’s Eid message is very different from the one Mullah Omar delivered last year which rejected negotiations and called for the trial of President Hamid Karzai and his political coterie.

A few quick points need to be made. The US has come round to talking to the Taliban despite some opposition to this dialogue both in Washington and Kabul. Most leading Afghan experts around the world think this is the only way forward, especially — and this is crucial — if the Taliban accept that they cannot rule Afghanistan to the exclusion of other entities. There are clear indications, and Maulana Fazlur Rehman confirmed it to some of us at a recent SAFMA (South Asian Free Media Association) meeting in Lahore, that they understand and appreciate this. Given this, and given rising opposition by the Afghans, including officials, to the use of force by the US in Afghanistan, Washington should fast track this dialogue instead of asking Pakistan to open another front for itself by going into North Waziristan. The dialogue is where Pakistan needs to play a positive role because that is where its interests must converge with that of the US.

Maulana Fazlur Rehman also backed my argument that any policy needs to make a clear distinction between the Afghan Taliban and the TTP and its affiliates. The time to go into North Waziristan would be after the US-Taliban talks have reached an advanced level. That would help Pakistan greatly in dealing a blow to the TTP network.

For all the right reasons the US and Pakistan need to cooperate rather than getting into a game of brinkmanship.

Published in The Express Tribune, September 21st, 2011.
 
Then what is the Un for ?? Un Security council for ??

Why not go to them, show the evidence and then attack Pakistan or sanction it ?? What is stopping the US from going on such course of action and show to the world the hypocrisy of Pakistan and banish Pakistan from the world community ??
Kicking the Nazis out of the League didn't improve matters. Perhaps there isn't yet enough that's showy enough. The 1960s Soviet terror network in West Germany was not shut down until one of their assassins defected, spilled the beans, and the police confirmed his story from forensic evidence - they didn't know what to look for until he told them. (ref: KGB: The Hidden Hand)


Why not voice for regime change in Pakistan on the UN platform, just how they lied to the world on Iraqi WMD and then subsequently attacking Iraq.
The U.S. didn't "lie" on the WMD bit - the U.S. was deceived by the Iraqis. And there were many other reasons cited to oust Saddam. Nevertheless, the U.S. doesn't want to be caught in such a web twice.

AQ supposedly / allegedly killed US people on 9/11 -
Now you are in lu-lu-land and your thoughts can no longer be respected. The rule is you are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts - and voicing "smoke and mirrors" doubts falls into that category.

Why these unnamed sourced articles and no evidence, why not go to UN ??
I suppose U.N. exposure would merely embarrass Pakistan further without changing its policies.

Indeed, at this stage it looks less like Pakistan is running the Haqqanis than like the Haqqanis are running Pakistan. As Zardari tells us (Wikileaks), Pakistan may be a nuclear power but when a Pakistani policeman arrests a militant he has to worry that somebody will slip into his home at night and slit his throat.

I recall that it is you, TaimiKhan, not I, who is convinced that too much advocacy for decent government in Pakistan is dangerous. Scores of dead investigative journalists tend to back up your claim.
 
Since the USA has little leverage now. It should wait until it has lowered its footprint in Afghanistan to a level that can be supported by non-Pakistani supply routes. Then it should take its revenge on the ISI. There are many ways to take revenge later.

Steps are already being taken..Co-operation with Uzbekistan seems to be on cards..
 
either refuse aid or take aid,you will have to take action.
you cant avoid it;)

Pakistan can get the US on the backfoot if we have the right leadership which we dont. Pulling out of FATA will devastate Obama The poster boy's plans to pull out of Afghanistan by 2014.

But we all know how big of a dick is Zardari & co.
 
The U.S. didn't "lie" on the WMD bit - the U.S. was deceived by the Iraqis. And there were many other reasons cited to oust Saddam. Nevertheless, the U.S. doesn't want to be caught in such a web twice..

So essentially you are saying that the Iraqis deceived the Americans to attack their own country? Nice :lol:
 
Pakistan can get the US on the backfoot if we have the right leadership which we dont. Pulling out of FATA will devastate Obama The poster boy's plans to pull out of Afghanistan by 2014.

But we all know how big of a dick is Zardari & co.


how pakistan can get usa on back foot??
if u r indicating towards supply routes,they are ready with new route.
or anything else.

if u r using proxies then they will kill more in drone strikes,result to the more civilian casualities.

you cant exchange nukes,they have better systems than u.

so tell me how can pak bring down usa??
 
Indeed, at this stage it looks less like Pakistan is running the Haqqanis than like the Haqqanis are running Pakistan. As Zardari tells us (Wikileaks), Pakistan may be a nuclear power but when a Pakistani policeman arrests a militant he has to worry that somebody will slip into his home at night and slit his throat.

I recall that it is you, TaimiKhan, not I, who is convinced that too much advocacy for decent government in Pakistan is dangerous. Scores of dead investigative journalists tend to back up your claim.

Your statement above proves why we would'nt go join hands with Haqqanis. . .
 
Your statement above proves why we would'nt go join hands with Haqqanis. . .
"Join hands", no. Submit to them, yes.

Think of what kind of nation you are. Are you the sort to risk your necks by standing up against tyranny, or are you the sort to keep quiet and make money in your fat and beautiful land, by hook or by crook, always justifying your choices by reassuring yourself that there is somebody worse out there whose deeds and choices should be reviled before your own, or somebody else who should fight the good fight?
 

Back
Top Bottom