What's new

US Poised to Attack Extremists in FATA

Tribesmen vow to defend frontiers

MIRANSHAH: Tribal elders in the North Waziristan Agency warned on Tuesday that tribesmen were ready to defend their country against a possible invasion by foreign troops. “More than three million tribesmen would fight along the Pakistani security forces if foreign troops enter the Tribal Areas,” said Malik Afzal Khan. The warning followed reports that a large number of United States and NATO troops were assembling in areas surrounding Pakistan’s Tribal Areas. haji mujtaba

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan
 
WHITEWASH

Database failed U.S. in airstrike in Pakistan
By Eric Schmitt Published: July 15, 2008


WASHINGTON: The precise location of a Pakistani border post that was destroyed by U.S. airstrikes last month, killing 11 Pakistani paramilitary soldiers, was not in a U.S. database used to prevent accidental attacks on friendly forces, an investigation into the episode has concluded.

Had the coordinates of the remote outpost been logged into the database, it would have immediately raised a red flag when allied troops called in airstrikes after being fired on during a clash with insurgents on the Afghan border, U.S. officials who were briefed on the inquiry said.

The Pakistani forces killed in the strikes were apparently inside the building or possibly in bunkers near it, perhaps intermingled with the insurgents who had retreated back across the border into Pakistan in the chaotic fighting, said the officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because of diplomatic sensitivities.

But the monthlong investigation by U.S., Afghan and Pakistani officials into the episode, which occurred June 10, assigned no blame.

The incident provoked an angry protest from the Pakistani government and underscored faulty communication and coordination between allied forces fighting increasing cross-border attacks by Taliban and other militants.

Taliban fighters and other militants have used havens in Pakistan to carry out attacks in neighboring Afghanistan with increasing frequency, prompting senior NATO and U.S. military officials to press the new Pakistan government to take more aggressive action against the insurgents.

After the June 10 incident, each of the three countries involved conducted its own inquiry into what happened. They then tried, largely unsuccessfully, to reconcile their results.

The United States, for instance, concluded that the airstrikes were justified to defend a small team of U.S.-led soldiers who were ambushed. U.S. officials said a Pakistani liaison officer approved the airstrikes, apparently thinking there were no Pakistani forces in the area.

Pakistan, by contrast, told U.S. officials that none of its officers ever cleared the airstrikes and artillery fire.

To avoid further damage to relations, the United States and Pakistan have essentially agreed to disagree over important points of the investigation, including whether the Pakistani forces killed were aiding the insurgents or innocent victims caught in the crossfire.

"It's not inconceivable that the two forces could have been meters apart on opposite sides of a ridge line and not known of the other's presence," a senior U.S. defense official who was briefed on the investigation said
.

Instead, the two governments have pledged to take new steps to improve coordination and communication along the rugged, sparsely populated frontier.

"We have worked with them over time to ensure we have accurate grid coordinates for all locations," the defense official said. "If this position were in our database, it would have triggered a cautionary flag.

"At this point, I wouldn't describe it as a problem in targeting procedures. At this point, I think it can best be described as a problem in border coordination."

U.S. officials were also trying to determine whether the use of force - about a dozen bombs and artillery fire - was proportional to the threat to the allied forces on the ground.

"We always look at proportionality whenever there is collateral damage," the defense official said. "In this case, the number of weapons used - given a fleeting target over a little more than a kilometer in very vertical terrain - seems reasonable."
 
I doubt ISAF has the strength and will to enter Pakistan. US forces shall enter Pakistan if they choose to. ISAF shall only enter after US have entered. However one should understand that the situation shall deteriorate very quickly after that. By nature tribal people love their independence and guard it very jealously. This is the reason even Pakistan army did not entered the tribal areas.

Only FC has been used because it contains mostly people from NWFP having similar culture and traditions. After entering Pakistan US/ISAF forces shall encounter resistance from all tribal people and it would be next to impossible to differentiate between taliban and others. This will result in killings of locals. This inturn shall force government to act. Army shall be sent to the areas to control the situation and limit the US/ISAF forces operations to border areas.

This invariably shall result in PA/FC clashes with taliban and at some stage US/ISAF forces. We have already seen that in the heat of battle US/ISAF forces forget who they are targeting and fire at any one in the combat zone. This shall force PA/FC to return fire.

Now the situation is like this US/ISAF against taliban, PA/FC against taliban, taliban against US/ISAF/PA/FC, locals against US/ISAF. In the end it would be every one against every one. Messy situation isn't it.

Hope all get my point.

And by the way we have not considered another situation. While US/ISAF is moving towards Pakistan and all the media attention is on this issue what if Israel goes after Iranian nuclear facilities. Perhaps this is all a plan to divert attention so that they can act. Worth thinking isn't it?:cool:
 
Nato attacks 'rebels in Pakistan'

2a045a9dd084243c570b2b905fe1ac05.gif


Nato-led forces in Afghanistan say they have fired into Pakistan after coming under attack from there by suspected militants.

Troops used attack helicopters and artillery to fire from Paktika province after the militants fired rockets.

Nato said it had closely co-ordinated with Pakistan's military, who agreed to help if firing from Pakistan continued.

Nato rejected reports of a build-up of international forces on the Afghan side of the border in recent days.

Blame

The BBC's M Ilyas Khan in Islamabad says Pakistan's army has also downplayed the reports of a build-up of troops on the Afghan side of the border.

cc75f3f61c7857ba4dd5750825279fed.jpg

Alleged US missile strikes have sparked anger in Pakistan

Increased activity on Tuesday by forces across the border from the Waziristan tribal region in Pakistan sparked fears of clashes between them and Taleban militants hiding in the region.

But the Pakistani army says it was part of the coalition's routine exercise to rotate and reposition its troops.

The exercise led to the temporary closure of at least two main border crossings in the Waziristan region, witnesses say.

Taleban attacks on Afghan and international forces in Afghanistan have increased in recent months.

Both Afghan and Western officials say the Taleban are operating out of sanctuaries in Pakistan's tribal areas that border Afghanistan.

On Monday, Afghan President Hamid Karzai directly blamed Pakistani intelligence apparatus for organising last week's suicide attack on the Indian embassy in Kabul.

Pakistani Prime Minister Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani hit back on Wednesday, saying Pakistan had time and again declared that it wanted Afghanistan to be stable.

'Routine'

Witnesses said Tuesday's movement by coalition troops in several areas along the Waziristan border was "shocking".

They said hundreds of troops moved with tanks, armoured personnel carriers and artillery pieces and repositioned very close to the border.

The movement was accompanied by increased overflights by coalition helicopters and fighter jets, they said.

Pakistan army spokesman, Maj Gen Athar Abbas, told BBC News it was "routine movement and repositioning by the coalition forces, which is not unusual".

"We are watching the situation and are in touch with the coalition commanders in the area," he said.

Witnesses and administration officials in South Waziristan said a larger concentration of Afghan and coalition troops near Angoor Adda town on Tuesday led to the closure of the border crossing.

The main market of the town, which is located on the Pakistani side, remained closed because most shopkeepers live on the Afghan side of the border and were prevented by the coalition forces from crossing over.

The border gate on the Lwara Mandai crossing in North Waziristan tribal region also remained closed for traffic, witnesses said.

They said coalition forces had set up an outpost close to the border in the Lwara Mandai area.

Both border crossings were open to traffic on Wednesday however, witnesses said.

The Wazir tribe lives on both sides of the border, and controls the Lwara and Angoor Adda trade routes between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The army spokesman confirmed that the Angoor Adda crossing remained closed for nearly three hours on Tuesday "on the orders of the Afghan army", but said he had no information about the closure of Lwara Mandai.

He also rejected reports that coalition troops had deployed "too close" to the border.

"There is no coalition deployment that violates an agreed distance from the border which both sides have been observing," he said.
 
The Army has already shown that it can fight very effectively against the Taliban when needed - refer to the push against Baitullah Mehsud in Waziristan and Mullah Fazlullah in Swat, where the two entities could put up barely any resistance.

The Army "relocated" in both areas when the civilian government came into power, as 'peace deals' were attempted again.

The Army can fight, no question about that - the issues affecting the decision to fight however are many.

National consensus amongst Pakistanis on this war, political consensus, the development of a long term relationship with the US that goes beyond military supplies for the duration of this conflict, the continued hostile relationship with India (something that has reared its ugly head again with the unsubstantiated Indian allegations over the Embassy bombing and statements about the ISI), etc. etc.


Why does pakistan expect so much from US to fight terrorism. Is this not a war to protect humanity ? Is US the saviour of the world ? What is it that makes pakistan think so much to fight terrorists. Why does pakistan confuse beteen religion and security ? Does their [terrorists] being muslim make them friend ? Is Jihad not fighting the evil ? Islamis terrorism is just evil in the disguise of Islam and unless Islam rises against it, there cannot be a victory.
 
Why does pakistan expect so much from US to fight terrorism. Is this not a war to protect humanity ? Is US the saviour of the world ? What is it that makes pakistan think so much to fight terrorists. Why does pakistan confuse beteen religion and security ? Does their [terrorists] being muslim make them friend ? Is Jihad not fighting the evil ? Islamis terrorism is just evil in the disguise of Islam and unless Islam rises against it, there cannot be a victory.

err... what does that have to do with what I posted?

You do have one valid point - that Pakistan should be fighting this war regardless of whether we have a long term relationship with the US or not - but to do that effectively, many of the factors I mentioned need to be addressed.
 
If the US and NATO forces really amp up their aerial bombardment operations in western Pakistan it will become a matter of survival for the intelligentsia of the militants; in which case going into more inhabited areas which the US/NATO can't/won't bomb (for obvious reasons) will be an advantage enough.

As of right now the PA's efforts in the region haven't been very fruitful and they aren't nearly as big a threat as the NATO and US forces (if they decide to carry out continuous and elaborate operations in the area). As things stand right now, the status quo suits the militants the best. However if the US/NATO is to go ahead and get more involved in this area, then the dragnet option would be in the best interest of Pakistan (and everyone for that matter).
I don't understand why the movement of the militant intelligentsia into more inhabited areas is an advantage.

Remember that any such move from NATO will only bolster support for the militants in the Tribal areas and elsewhere, so finding new locations for training and regrouping in inhabited areas will not be an issue.

As far as any dragnet or major operation by the PA being implemented - it is not going to happen if the entire country is in an uproar over the infringement over Pakistani sovereignty.

The dynamics that resulted in the PA having to withdraw earlier this year (a huge unpopularity and indeed outright hostility sometimes from the electorate) will only be magnified, and the PA will in fact have even less room to act in such a situation. Given the severe stress the federation will be under with unilateral US violations of sovereignty, I doubt the Army will want to open another front against itself by acting in concert with such US actions.


The idea of strikes and incursions into Pakistan does not take into account any of these long term repercussions - its as if they will be carried out in a vacuum.

The most effective way of dealing with the situation remains through convincing Pakistan's civilian government to arrive at a consensus, and implement stronger measures, while at the same time acting to stop the myriad problems NATO has done little about in Afghanistan - the drug and weapons trade, poppy crop, development (Afghanistan and FATA), more manpower, better policing of the border, selective fencing and possibly mining, and better intelligence sharing.

The Pakistani government is currently dysfunctional, but it is also only a few months old. Lets not forget that everyone had essentially written off Maliki's government in Iraq a year or two ago, the same Maliki who is now demanding the US set a time table for withdrawal.

The US cannot solve the problems for Pakistan, it is Pakistan that has to do so, and democracy is a messy business, that only works over the long term.
There are multiple coalition partners with their own demands and agenda's, all of that has to be taken into account and a consensus arrived at. Unilateral strikes or invasions of a magnitude that would offer tangible results from the US perspective do nothing but exacerbate the situation and make arriving at that consensus impossible, and in fact distract the national discourse away from tackling extremism, to anti-US sentiment and warding off the US.

As Neo said - unilateral strikes and incursions might be an effective short term tactic, but they form an immensely flawed strategy for stabilizing the region in the medium to long term.
 
Talk of US 'attacking' Pakistan is too far fetched , they are in no position to launch large scale attacks against us

With oil prices at 4$+ at home and crumbling financials including the likes of
Bear Sterns , Freddi Mac , Fannie Mae , Indy Macc and and the list is ever growing , they'll be pretty hard pressed to go out for another misadventure speically after the huge failures Iraq and Afghanistan have been

By the grace of Allah we have enough fire power to cause very serious damage in a 2500 Km radius so nobody in their right mind will attack us.

The skrimishes on the Pak-Afgha border will continue till the US runs out of gas.

They abandoned a post after loosing 9 soldiers and yet they talk of attacking us. hehe to far fetched , they cant sustain a war wiht us

this war mongering is the work of zionist media other than that I see most indian news papers and inidan poster extra enthusiastc about the
prospect of US attacking Pakistan but that just about its .
 
Last edited:
War on Terrorism in Pakistan's National Interest

Written by: Afreen Baig

War on Terrorism in Pakistan’s National Interest « Our leader - Musharraf

Pakistan First : War on Terrorism in Pakistan’s National Interest


“Political instability, a growing insurgency, a demoralized army and an intensely anti-American population are the hallmarks of today’s Pakistan,” remarked US Senator Thomas Cooper recently.


War on Terrorism (WoT) did not start with the advent of 9/11, rather it started in 1980’s when Russia was defeated in Afghanistan, and the USA pulled out abandoning the hundreds of thousands of equipped and trained guerillas. Those guerillas and militants integrated in small pockets in various regions of Afghanistan and NWFP. They utilized their militancy to influence domestic tribes and mosques to instigate and promote radicalism. In 2000-01, Government of Pakistan was forced to ban several extremist outfits due to increase in sectarian violence and its effect on the lives of ordinary Pakistanis. For Pakistan - it was already at war with extremism!


9/11 further changed the political dimensions for USA, and also changed Pakistan’s destiny. A destiny that is full of expectations, decision making, media trial, uprising opportunist and extremist hoping to destabilize Pakistan. Who will be the ultimate winner is yet to be seen. The regional environment is a complex one and Pakistan is fighting a multi-faceted battle that will change the course of history.


9/11 put Pakistan in a complicated situation, where tough decisions had to be taken. Richard Armitage’s threatening message forced Pakistan to gauge the urgency and seriousness of the episode. The message was clear – the USA will do anything, to do what it had to do in its National Interest. NATO will follow suit. Pakistan was left alone to decide and protect its National Interest. The President decided in Nation’s self-interest and self-preservation. War on terrorism (WoT) marked its presence – it was inevitable!


Implications of war are grave and Pakistan having gone under a similar situation in 1980’s knew better. Millions of effected immigrants will insist & require safe dwellings in the tribal areas of NWFP. Keen RAW and Russian espionage missions will try to cross over and operate from our tribal areas. Transport of illegal weapons and arms would have taken place to support our local opportunist rebels. Desperation might have compelled the US and NATO forces to march into a sovereign Pakistan. Above all, India was more than willing to extend its support and services to US on its WoT. Keeping in mind these ground realities; we had to choose our destiny carefully.


Vigilant and military style analyses were contemplated to calculate the pros and cons. The leadership in Pakistan war-gamed the USA and NATO as an enemy and realized that it was worthless committing suicide over the obstinate Taliban. Our out-dated military was no match for the world’s strongest and finest military, excelling in Air-force supremacy. Pakistan’s stagnated economy had only slightly started recovering, after being tagged as one of the highest indebted countries. Galvanizing the whole nation into agreeing to fight the USA and NATO was another impossible task. Indian eagerness to join the War on Terror was an alarming condition that Pakistan could not have over-looked. Indian jets flying over Pakistan’s space, with our Strategic assets’ lying below were a suicidal recipe. An accidental Indian bomb dropped on our Kahuta plant would have created disaster.


The Pakistani leadership couldn’t and shouldn’t have risked the entire 160 million Nation, for a few obstinate Taliban. A Pakistani delegate was sent to negotiate with the Taliban to pursue them to hand over Osama bin Laden to USA. The consequences were also made clear, but the over confident Taliban lacked vision to foresee their destiny. Consequently, Pakistan was forced to cut off diplomatic ties with the stubborn Taliban. Given the looming conditions, only a lunatic would have advised the contrary.


The US plans were evident – they will go to war! When any country of the world goes to war, its neighboring countries are forced to secure their borders further raising the security color codes. Pakistan planned no different. It drew up plans to secure its NWFP border along Afghanistan. Around 80,000 troops were placed to patrol and were assigned specific targets. The ultimate decision to secure our borders did not completely go to waste, and was extremely beneficial in controlling cross border terrorism and infiltration. Pakistan had taken a carefully scrutinized decision.


In return for participation, the USA had assured Pakistan, that India and Israel will not participate in War on Terror. Second, the USA will not act unilaterally inside Pakistan. Third, the USA will reimburse the costs incurred on Pakistani troops and logistical help. Fourth, the USA will ensure rescheduling of Pakistan’s foreign debt. Pakistan’s intentions were sincere and made with utmost patriotism. Then, who started working behind the scenes, planning to destabilize Pakistan and how and why?


It is true, that the USA planned this war, not to fight terrorism, but to secure the vast reserves of gas and oil of the Caspian Sea region. Afghanistan was their selected and cheapest route to lay the oil and gas pipelines, starting from the central Asian states. Who then created trouble in Afghanistan, in the tribal areas of Pakistan and in Baluchistan, to jeopardize American interest and Pakistan’s booming economy?


Pakistan’s image had improved world-wide due to its participation in WoT. Rescheduling of Pakistan’s foreign debt gave it the space to implement visionary fiscal and macro-economic policies. The micro-economic and macro-economic policies boomed Pakistan’s stagnated economy from $75 billion into a $160 billion one. Our exports increased by a 100% and so did our revenue. Our currency’s rating was upgraded and Pakistan saw a new era of multi-national corporations. Foreign investment chose Pakistan as its destination and stock markets profited from the liberal policies. Institutions world-wide like the World Bank, IMF, and Asian Development Bank heaped praises on Pakistan’s economic reforms. Reports by J. P Morgan, the Merrill Lynch, the City Group and the Goldman Sachs gave high marks to Pakistan’s current and future economic prospects as well as to the prudent handing of economy by economic team of the government.


Pakistan had already started attracting the foreign investment that earlier used to eye the Indian market. Pakistan’s geo-strategic location and its competitive labor prices further won preference over the Indian destination. Pakistan’s development programs modernizing the infrastructure paid off well, compared to India’s crumbling infrastructure. Who obviously could not tolerate Pakistan’s bright future?


Three years back the relics of Baluchistan Liberation Army (BLA) re-emerged with force, advocating Liberation of Baluchistan from Pakistan. A total of 843 attacks and incidents of violence have been reported since 2002, in Baluchistan, including 54 attacks on law-enforcement agencies, 31 attacks on gas pipelines, 417 rocket attacks on various targets, 291 mine blasts and others on various occasions. It is reported that BLA members have become well-trained and well-armed, with machine guns, rocket-launchers, Motorola wireless sets, and Thuraya satellite phones receiving information about the movement of government troops. Their organized attacks using sophisticated weapons against the Pakistan Army and strategic installations compelled the Pakistani intelligence to determine the root cause and analyze the hands behind them.


PML-Q senator Mushahid Hussein Syed conceded last year, the involvement of Indian RAW in Baluchistan, while blaming India for exploiting the Afghan ministry of tribal affairs to conduct covert activities against Pakistan. He further accused RAW for establishing its training camps in Afghanistan in collaboration with the Northern Alliance remnants. Approximately 600 Ferraris, or Baluchi tribal dissidents, were getting specialized training to handle explosives, engineer bomb blasts, and use sophisticated weapons in these camps. This news came as no surprise. Indian agenda to orchestrate dissent and support extremist elements inside Baluchistan and NWFP started becoming evident.


Indian Foreign Ministry spokesman Navtej Sarna was quoted saying “The government of India has been watching with concern the spiraling violence in Baluchistan and the heavy military action, including use of helicopter gunships and jet fighters by the government of Pakistan to quell it and we hope the government of Pakistan will exercise restraint and take recourse to peaceful discussions to address the grievances of the people of Baluchistan.” This statement from Indian Foreign Ministry says it all clearly!


In early 2007, the Pakistani military authorities claimed there were 500-600 foreign militants in the South Waziristan area when army operations first started in early 2004. Of them, some 400 have either been killed or captured, according to the army, while a remaining 200 still “stranded” in North Waziristan are now using the Pakistan-Afghanistan border strip as their base to launch midnight guerilla attacks. The Media should question the presence of these Uzbeks, Tajiks, Arabs, and Afghans in Pakistan’s tribal agencies.


Abdullah Mehsud was detained at Camp Delta in Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba and held for 2 years. After his release in early 2004, he returned to Waziristan, and kidnapped two Chinese engineers working on a dam in his region. Who supplied him, Baitullah Mehsud and Maulana Fazallulah - with all the resources, weapons, logistics help, information and money to create havoc in NWFP? It is well known that India other than having an embassy in Kabul; set up four consulates, in Kandahar, Jalalabad, Mazar-e-Sharif and Herat – all neighboring NWFP. The intentions need no further elaboration.


This is also well known that the Russians were also eyeing the Caspian Sea oil and gas reserves. Energy deprived Indian economy also requires vast supply of gas and oil to sustain itself. A stable and booming Pakistan will steal the growth and regional aspirations that India desires. India cannot endure nor allow Pakistan to become another stable mini-China. Mainland China is competition tough and enough for India.


Israeli help to India is also apparent. Recently, the Israeli ambassador in New Delhi has said his country’s assistance to India ‘brought about the turnaround’ in the 1999 Kargil war with Pakistan. He said, “The ties between India and Israel were beyond sale and purchase of weapons. And with all due respect the secret part of it will remain secret”. Surely a bold statement!


Currently, the interest of both the USA and Pakistan are being bogged down. These masked groups of achievers seem to be making the most out of War on Terrorism and by trying to deliberately destabilize Pakistan. To top it all, the Pakistani media has projected Pakistan’s standing with respect to WoT in a wicked way. Their insistence that Pakistan military is fighting the US foreign war against our own citizens is nothing but deceit and sham exaggeration. The Pakistan military is rightly crushing these foreign agents and rebel separatist, whose sole intention is to destabilize Pakistan.


This WoT that started off as a simple patrolling exercise on NWFP border, has transformed into fighting off foreign extremists and militants trying to conquer tribal agencies in NWFP and Baluchistan. The US and NATO fight in Afghanistan, gave many conspiring elements and countries to execute their fiendish agendas. Had the leadership of Pakistan and the Armed Forces, not foreseen and calculated the effects of war in Afghanistan - Pakistan would have been in a much graver and tormenting situation.


Thus, Pakistan’s decision in 2001 was far-sighted that avoided direct conflict with the super-powers of the world, and by stationing 80,000 troops on borders, we were able to confine and control the small rebels. The leadership of Pakistan did earn unfair criticism in local media, but it saved Pakistan from a bigger disaster. Otherwise, those small consulates that are functioning from Afghanistan would have rooted themselves inside NWFP and few areas of Baluchistan. Those small miscreants in NWFP and Baluchistan, who are acting as agents of foreign agencies, will soon be eliminated and the involvement of foreign agencies exposed.


This War against Terrorism and Extremism can easily be won, if our Political parties would introduce democracy within them and give way to honest leadership; those who would prefer the interest of Pakistan above their personal feudalistic agendas of increasing wealth and estates.


Lastly, a quote by Robert Dreyfuss, which may not sound relevant for now, but it indicates volumes about a particular mindset. The book ‘Devil’s Game’ - published in 2005 quotes on page 336-337 - “Neo-conservatives want to control the Middle East, not reform it, even it means tearing countries apart and replacing them with rump mini-states along ethnic and sectarian lines. The Islamic right, in this context, is just one more tool for dismantling existing regimes, if that is what it takes.”


Pakistan must always decide in its National Interest! Pakistan cannot afford Political instability, growing insurgency and a demoralized Army! :pakistan:
 
I don't understand why the movement of the militant intelligentsia into more inhabited areas is an advantage.

Remember that any such move from NATO will only bolster support for the militants in the Tribal areas and elsewhere, so finding new locations for training and regrouping in inhabited areas will not be an issue.
Yes, a lot of manpower will be assembled in the frontier region; but the intelligentsia will relocate themselves to a more populated region where the US and NATO forces can't bomb indiscriminately.

As far as any dragnet or major operation by the PA being implemented - it is not going to happen if the entire country is in an uproar over the infringement over Pakistani sovereignty.

The dynamics that resulted in the PA having to withdraw earlier this year (a huge unpopularity and indeed outright hostility sometimes from the electorate) will only be magnified, and the PA will in fact have even less room to act in such a situation. Given the severe stress the federation will be under with unilateral US violations of sovereignty, I doubt the Army will want to open another front against itself by acting in concert with such US actions.
IMO the PA should be mobilized not necessarily to support the NATO forces, but rather for the sake of Pakistan itself. Come what may, these guys should be kept away from major Pakistani metropolises at all costs. Such an operation can be carried out with a fair amount of discretion, certainly a lot more than offensive operations against militants in the tribal regions.

The most effective way of dealing with the situation remains through convincing Pakistan's civilian government to arrive at a consensus, and implement stronger measures, while at the same time acting to stop the myriad problems NATO has done little about in Afghanistan - the drug and weapons trade, poppy crop, development (Afghanistan and FATA), more manpower, better policing of the border, selective fencing and possibly mining, and better intelligence sharing.
I agree. And its unfortunate how little has been done on this front so far; mostly because I think the west is virtually oblivious to the complexities involved in undertaking such an endeavor.

The US cannot solve the problems for Pakistan, it is Pakistan that has to do so, and democracy is a messy business, that only works over the long term.
There are multiple coalition partners with their own demands and agenda's, all of that has to be taken into account and a consensus arrived at. Unilateral strikes or invasions of a magnitude that would offer tangible results from the US perspective do nothing but exacerbate the situation and make arriving at that consensus impossible, and in fact distract the national discourse away from tackling extremism, to anti-US sentiment and warding off the US.
I agree. However right now the biggest problem for the US military is a sizable insurgency which is in fact being launched from Pakistani territory; and this opinion certainly seems to have a lot of credibility based on support from big names like Ahmed Rashid and Barnett Rubin (I recently had the opportunity to hear them speak about this topic and even engage in some discussions after) who are actively conducting research in the region (Rashid with the Pakistani tribals and Ruben with the Durand line issue). Expansion of the operational theater for the US and NATO forces is imminent and I'm fairly certain that there is nothing any Pakistani government can really do about it regardless of who is in power.
 
Expansion of the operational theater for the US and NATO forces is imminent and I'm fairly certain that there is nothing any Pakistani government can really do about it regardless of who is in power.

US forces will suffer very heavy casulties if they try this. We'll see when this happens , before that its all talk much like our neighbours from the east sat on our border for 9 months ( wonder why 9 months , maybe they were pregant or somehitng lol ).

During that build up us friends used to talk like attak karna ha tu karo what are they waitng for.

Same is true in this situation, its all talk and zionist medi at work to create pressure out of thin air haha thats what they are good at

Musaarf is no longer there to blindly follow the US agenda and its not a matter of dropping a few bombs here and there. There will be represussions if Pakistan is forced into a war

This is not central park that you can just come in for a stroll , there'll be large number of dead US/NATO soldiers , if they are up to it then go ahead and give it a go and find out what will happen

I see no reason why the Army should be mobilized for US agendas , Musharrf is no longer there and the Amry is playing its cards quite well up till now.
 
Another War: Is the US Preparing To Attack Pakistan?
Thursday July 17, 2008 (1309 PST)




The U.S. military has grown used to attacking small, weak nations like Grenada, Panama, and Iraq. Pakistan, with 163 million people, and an inadequately equipped but very tough 550,000-man army, will offer no easy victories. Those Bush Administration officials who foolishly advocate attacking Pakistan are playing with fire. Pakistan’s army officers who refuse to be bought may resist a U.S. attack on their homeland. The war will revive the old plan of chopping off Pakistan’s tribal region to merge it with Afghanistan.

The Bush Administration may be preparing to lash out at old ally Pakistan, which Washington now blames for its humiliating failures to crush al-Qaeda, capture its elusive leaders, or defeat Taliban resistance forces in Afghanistan.

One is immediately reminded of the Vietnam War when the Pentagon, unable to defeat North Vietnamese Army and Viet Cong forces, urged invasion of Cambodia.

Sources in Washington say the Pentagon is drawing up plans to attack Pakistan’s "autonomous" tribal region bordering Afghanistan. Limited "hot pursuit" ground incursions by U.S. forces based in Afghanistan, intensive air attacks, and special-forces raids into Pakistan’s autonomous tribal region are being evaluated.

This weekend, the U.S. national intelligence chief and other intelligence spokesmen confirmed that strikes against "terrorist targets" in Pakistan’s tribal belt are increasingly possible. These warnings were designed to both further pressure Pakistan’s beleaguered strongman, President Pervez Musharraf, into sending more troops to the tribal areas to fight his own people, and to prepare U.S. public opinion for a possible widening of the Afghanistan war into Pakistan.

Pakistan’s 27, 200 sq km tribal belt, officially known as the Federal Autonomous Tribal Area, or FATA, is home to 3.3 million Pashtun tribesmen. It has become a safe haven for al-Qaeda, Taliban, other Afghan resistance groups, and a hotbed of anti-American activity, thanks mostly to the U.S.-led occupation of Afghanistan which drove many militants across the border into Pakistan. Osama bin Laden is very likely sheltered in this region, as U.S. intelligence claims. [Editor’s Note: Likely, but as much likely to be anywhere else too.]

I spent a remarkable time in this wild, medieval region during the 1980’s and 90’s, traveling alone where even Pakistani government officials dared not go, visiting the tribes of Waziristan, Orakzai, Khyber, Chitral, and Kurram, and meeting their chiefs, called "maliks."

These tribal belts are always referred to as "lawless." Pashtun tribesmen could shoot you if they didn’t like your looks. Rudyard Kipling warned British Imperial soldiers over a century ago, when fighting cruel, ferocious Pashtun warriors of the Afridi clan, if they fell wounded, "save your last bullet for yourself."

But there is law: the traditional Pashtun tribal code, Pashtunwali, that strictly governs behavior and personal honor. Protecting guests was sacred. I was captivated by this majestic mountain region and wrote of it extensively in my book, "War at the Top of the World."

Pakistan’s Pashtun number 28–30 million, plus an additional 2.5 million refugees from Afghanistan. Pashtuns, one of the British Indian Army’s famed "martial races," occupy many senior positions in Pakistan’s military, intelligence service and bureaucracy, and naturally have much sympathy for their embattled tribal cousins in Afghanistan. The 15 million Pashtun of Afghanistan form that nation’s largest ethnic group and just under half the population.

The tribal agency’s Pashtun joined newly-created Pakistan in 1947 under express constitutional guarantee of total autonomy and a ban on Pakistani troops ever entering there.

But under intense U.S. pressure, President Pervez Musharraf violated Pakistan’s constitution by sending 80,000 federal troops to fight the region’s tribes, killing 3,000 of them. In best British imperial tradition, Washington pays Musharraf $100 million monthly to rent his sepoys (native soldiers) to fight Pashtun tribesmen. As a result, Pakistan is fast edging towards civil war.

The anti-Communist Taliban movement is part of the Pashtun people. Taliban fighters move across the artificial Pakistan-Afghanistan border, to borrow Maoism, like fish through the sea. Osama bin Laden is a hero in the region, and likely shelters there.

The U.S. just increased its reward for bin Laden to $50 million and plans to shower $750 million on the tribal region in an effort to buy loyalty. Bush/Cheney & Co. do not understand that while they can rent President Musharraf’s government in Islamabad, many Pashtun value personal honor far more than money, and cannot be bought. That is likely why bin Laden has not yet been betrayed.

Any U.S. attack on Pakistan would be a catastrophic mistake. First, air and ground assaults will succeed only in widening the anti-U.S. war and merging it with Afghanistan’s resistance to western occupation. U.S. forces are already too over-stretched to get involved in yet another little war.

Second, Pakistan’s army officers who refuse to be bought may resist a U.S. attack on their homeland, and overthrow the man who allowed it, Gen. Musharraf. A U.S. attack would sharply raise the threat of anti-U.S. extremists seizing control of strategic Pakistan and marginalize those seeking return to democratic government.

Third, a U.S. attack on the tribal areas could re-ignite the old irredentist movement to reunite Pashtun parts of Pakistan and Afghanistan into an independent state, "Pashtunistan." That could begin unraveling Pakistan, leaving its nuclear arsenal up for grabs, and India tempted to intervene.

The U.S. military has grown used to attacking small, weak nations like Grenada, Panama, and Iraq. Pakistan, with 163 million people, and a poorly equipped but very tough 550,000-man army, will offer no easy victories. Those Bush Administration officials who foolishly advocate attacking Pakistan are playing with fire.
 
Air strike kills top Taliban2nd-in-command gunned down along with 8 others at meeting of Kandahar insurgent leaders
By ALEXANDER PANETTA, THE CANADIAN PRESS


KANDAHAR, Afghanistan -- The Canadian military says the Taliban's self-declared "deputy governor of Kandahar" appears to have been killed in an air strike by international forces.

They say Mullah Mahmoud was second-in-command in the shadow government that the Taliban have created to lead Kandahar if they ever regain power.

The military made the announcement at a press conference with the government of Kandahar yesterday.

The coalition learned of a meeting of insurgent leaders from Afghan intelligence, and last week gunned down Mahmoud and eight of his companions during the meeting in Khakrez district.

The militants were apparently meeting to discuss yet another planned attack on the Arghandab valley, the lush farming area just a stone's throw from Kandahar city.



LEADERS 'UNWISE'

The militants have been cleared out of the area twice before -- including just last month after they declared themselves in control of a handful of riverside towns.

"That the Taliban would try to organize to attack Arghandab again shows how unwise their leaders are," Kandahar Gov. Asadullah Khalid said.

"Those people who have sons or brothers who have been fooled into working for the Taliban should call them to come home now and return to a peaceful life."

Meanwhile, U.S. troops abandoned a remote outpost in eastern Afghanistan where militants killed nine American soldiers this week and insurgents briefly overran the area, officials said yesterday, underlining the difficulties faced by forces in the border region.

Militants seized the village of Wanat in Nuristan province after driving out the handful of Afghan police left behind to defend government offices, officials said. Fifty more officers were deployed yesterday and regained control.

Sunday's attack by some 200 militants armed with machine guns, rocket-propelled grenades and mortars was the deadliest for the U.S. military in Afghanistan in three years. Rebels fought their way into the newly established base, wounding another 15 Americans and suffering heavy casualties of their own, before the defenders and warplanes could drive them back.

NATO said the post in the mountains close to the Pakistan border, had been vacated, but insisted that international and Afghan troops will "retain a strong presence with patrolling and other means."
 
Another War: Is the US Preparing To Attack Pakistan?

Thursday July 17, 2008

Eric Margolis

The U.S. military has grown used to attacking small, weak nations like Grenada, Panama, and Iraq. Pakistan, with 163 million people, and an inadequately equipped but very tough 550,000-man army, will offer no easy victories. Those Bush Administration officials who foolishly advocate attacking Pakistan are playing with fire. Pakistan’s army officers who refuse to be bought may resist a U.S. attack on their homeland. The war will revive the old plan of chopping off Pakistan’s tribal region to merge it with Afghanistan.

The Bush Administration may be preparing to lash out at old ally Pakistan, which Washington now blames for its humiliating failures to crush al-Qaeda, capture its elusive leaders, or defeat Taliban resistance forces in Afghanistan.

One is immediately reminded of the Vietnam War when the Pentagon, unable to defeat North Vietnamese Army and Viet Cong forces, urged invasion of Cambodia.

Sources in Washington say the Pentagon is drawing up plans to attack Pakistan’s "autonomous" tribal region bordering Afghanistan. Limited "hot pursuit" ground incursions by U.S. forces based in Afghanistan, intensive air attacks, and special-forces raids into Pakistan’s autonomous tribal region are being evaluated.

This weekend, the U.S. national intelligence chief and other intelligence spokesmen confirmed that strikes against "terrorist targets" in Pakistan’s tribal belt are increasingly possible. These warnings were designed to both further pressure Pakistan’s beleaguered strongman, President Pervez Musharraf, into sending more troops to the tribal areas to fight his own people, and to prepare U.S. public opinion for a possible widening of the Afghanistan war into Pakistan.

Pakistan’s 27, 200 sq km tribal belt, officially known as the Federal Autonomous Tribal Area, or FATA, is home to 3.3 million Pashtun tribesmen. It has become a safe haven for al-Qaeda, Taliban, other Afghan resistance groups, and a hotbed of anti-American activity, thanks mostly to the U.S.-led occupation of Afghanistan which drove many militants across the border into Pakistan. Osama bin Laden is very likely sheltered in this region, as U.S. intelligence claims. [Editor’s Note: Likely, but as much likely to be anywhere else too.]

I spent a remarkable time in this wild, medieval region during the 1980’s and 90’s, traveling alone where even Pakistani government officials dared not go, visiting the tribes of Waziristan, Orakzai, Khyber, Chitral, and Kurram, and meeting their chiefs, called "maliks."

These tribal belts are always referred to as "lawless." Pashtun tribesmen could shoot you if they didn’t like your looks. Rudyard Kipling warned British Imperial soldiers over a century ago, when fighting cruel, ferocious Pashtun warriors of the Afridi clan, if they fell wounded, "save your last bullet for yourself."

But there is law: the traditional Pashtun tribal code, Pashtunwali, that strictly governs behavior and personal honor. Protecting guests was sacred. I was captivated by this majestic mountain region and wrote of it extensively in my book, "War at the Top of the World."

Pakistan’s Pashtun number 28–30 million, plus an additional 2.5 million refugees from Afghanistan. Pashtuns, one of the British Indian Army’s famed "martial races," occupy many senior positions in Pakistan’s military, intelligence service and bureaucracy, and naturally have much sympathy for their embattled tribal cousins in Afghanistan. The 15 million Pashtun of Afghanistan form that nation’s largest ethnic group and just under half the population.

The tribal agency’s Pashtun joined newly-created Pakistan in 1947 under express constitutional guarantee of total autonomy and a ban on Pakistani troops ever entering there.

But under intense U.S. pressure, President Pervez Musharraf violated Pakistan’s constitution by sending 80,000 federal troops to fight the region’s tribes, killing 3,000 of them. In best British imperial tradition, Washington pays Musharraf $100 million monthly to rent his sepoys (native soldiers) to fight Pashtun tribesmen. As a result, Pakistan is fast edging towards civil war.

The anti-Communist Taliban movement is part of the Pashtun people. Taliban fighters move across the artificial Pakistan-Afghanistan border, to borrow Maoism, like fish through the sea. Osama bin Laden is a hero in the region, and likely shelters there.

The U.S. just increased its reward for bin Laden to $50 million and plans to shower $750 million on the tribal region in an effort to buy loyalty. Bush/Cheney & Co. do not understand that while they can rent President Musharraf’s government in Islamabad, many Pashtun value personal honor far more than money, and cannot be bought. That is likely why bin Laden has not yet been betrayed.

Any U.S. attack on Pakistan would be a catastrophic mistake. First, air and ground assaults will succeed only in widening the anti-U.S. war and merging it with Afghanistan’s resistance to western occupation. U.S. forces are already too over-stretched to get involved in yet another little war.

Second, Pakistan’s army officers who refuse to be bought may resist a U.S. attack on their homeland, and overthrow the man who allowed it, Gen. Musharraf. A U.S. attack would sharply raise the threat of anti-U.S. extremists seizing control of strategic Pakistan and marginalize those seeking return to democratic government.

Third, a U.S. attack on the tribal areas could re-ignite the old irredentist movement to reunite Pashtun parts of Pakistan and Afghanistan into an independent state, "Pashtunistan." That could begin unraveling Pakistan, leaving its nuclear arsenal up for grabs, and India tempted to intervene.

The U.S. military has grown used to attacking small, weak nations like Grenada, Panama, and Iraq. Pakistan, with 163 million people, and a poorly equipped but very tough 550,000-man army, will offer no easy victories. Those Bush Administration officials who foolishly advocate attacking Pakistan are playing with fire.

Pakistan News Service - PakTribune
 
The Berserkers are at it again - in the distant there is the echo of "bring it on" as was once pronounced in Iraq -- and what a success that has been - so ground is being laid for a new success?? Personally, I don't think this is other than a psyops plan -- a full scale invasionof Pakistan has never been on the cards and will not be. Incursions such as the Israeli model in Lebanon may be what the US may have in mind, but then again, that failed as well.

The US is terribly overstretched and all this attack Iran, Attack Pakistan, it's just not on the cards. Anyway, the damage will be to the Pakistani economy, the territorial integrity of Pakistan, at least in my opinion, will not suffer long term damage. Of course if the Pakistani shows typical weakness of resolve then the Chinese will reevaluate and the Russian, the Indian and the Iranian will help shove a falling wall.

Pakistan need not be stuck in "defiance", it can help itself and the US by giving the US options inside Afghanistan.

A islamic, pashtun political party that is not an AQ clone, that is not maoist in Islamic clothing, but is generally islamic, is not hostile to development, is friendly to Pakistan as well as "others", but generally focused on problems inside Afghanistan, ought to be supported by Pakistan.

The Taliban and their Pakistani allies are focused on the Karzai regime and it's American agenda, but the new political group, that MUST NOT have any mujahideen or warlords in it's central committee and which will hold internal elections for leadership, can, I think the space for such exists, win pashtun support.

The ethnic situation in Afghanistan is genuinely precarious, the new Islamic Pastun party must work to convince, in particular the Hazara, the Turkoman and the Uzbek communities that it has absolutely no interests in the talib ethnic and religious bigotry.

There will be no "Pakhtunistan" -- if there were to be such a thing, Afghanistan would cease to exist as it is now constituted - either way there is no significant support for such an idea -- it is merely a fear in Pakistan.

Anway, what the Palistani state ought to be doingcto address this "fear" is to seek to increase it's influence in Nangarhar, Kunar, Khost, Pakty and Paktika to an irresistable level - to begin with it should act to ensure that trade in these provices is transacted in Pakistani rupees -- trade in these provinces is already transacted in Pakistani Rupees (Kaldar) however; Afghan auhoirites confiscate and arrest persons should they discover trade in Pakistani rupees.

Pakistani products should find their way into these markets with ease and must be paid for in Pakistani rupees.
 
Back
Top Bottom