US predator strikes inside Pakistan - without permission

[maqsad]

Has this been posted already? Happened yesterday I was surprised not to see a thread here.

U.S. strikes within Pakistan — without notice

In the predawn hours of Jan. 29, a CIA Predator aircraft flew in a slow arc above the Pakistani town of Mir Ali. The drone's operator, relying on information secretly passed to the CIA by local informants, clicked a computer mouse and sent the first of two Hellfire missiles hurtling toward a cluster of mud-brick buildings a few miles from the town center.

The missiles killed Abu Laith al-Libi, a senior al-Qaeda commander and a man who had repeatedly eluded the CIA's dragnet. It was the first successful strike against al-Qaeda's core leadership in two years, and it involved, U.S. officials say, an unusual degree of autonomy by the CIA inside Pakistan.

Having requested the Pakistani government's official permission for such strikes on previous occasions, only to be put off or turned down, this time the U.S. spy agency did not seek approval. The government of Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf was notified only as the operation was underway, according to the officials, who insisted on anonymity because of diplomatic sensitivities.

Model for the future

Officials say the incident was a model of how Washington often scores its rare victories these days in the fight against al-Qaeda inside Pakistan's national borders: It acts with assistance from well-paid sympathizers inside the country, but without getting the government's formal permission beforehand.

It is an approach that some U.S. officials say could be used more frequently this year, particularly if a power vacuum results from yesterday's election and associated political tumult. The administration also feels an increased sense of urgency about undermining al-Qaeda before President Bush leaves office, making it less hesitant, said one official familiar with the incident.

Independent actions by U.S. military forces on another country's sovereign territory are always controversial, and both U.S. and Pakistani officials have repeatedly sought to obscure operational details that would reveal that key decisions are sometimes made in the United States, not in Islamabad. Some Pentagon operations have been undertaken only after intense disputes with the State Department, which has worried that they might inflame Pakistani public resentment; the CIA itself has sometimes sought to put the brakes on because of anxieties about the consequences for its relationship with Pakistani intelligence officials.

Pakistan considered unreliable

U.S. military officials say, however, that the uneven performance of their Pakistani counterparts increasingly requires that Washington pursue the fight however it can, sometimes following an unorthodox path that leaves in the dark Pakistani military and intelligence officials who at best lack commitment and resolve and at worst lack sympathy for U.S. interests.

Top Bush administration policy officials -- who are increasingly worried about al-Qaeda's use of its sanctuary in remote, tribally ruled areas in northern Pakistan to dispatch trained terrorists to the West -- have quietly begun to accept the military's point of view, according to several sources familiar with the context of the Libi strike.

"In the past it required getting approval from the highest levels," said one former intelligence official involved in planning for previous strikes. "You may have information that is valid for only 30 minutes. If you wait, the information is no longer valid."

But when the autonomous U.S. military operations in Pakistan succeed, support for them grows in Washington in probably the same proportion as Pakistani resentments increase. Even as U.S. officials ramp up the pressure on Musharraf to do more, Pakistan's embattled president has taken a harder line in public against cooperation in recent months, the sources said. "The posture that was evident two years ago is not evident," said a senior U.S. official who frequently visits the region.

A U.S. military official familiar with operations in the tribal areas, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk about the operations, said: "We'll get these one-off flukes once every eight months or so, but that's still not a strategy -- it's not a plan. Every now and then something will come together. What that serves to do [is] it tamps down discussion about whether there is a better way to do it."

U.S. strikes in Pakistan without notice - Washington Post - MSNBC.com

 

[maqsad]

Article continued...

Observing their prey

Alerted to the suspicious convoy, the CIA used a variety of surveillance techniques to follow its progression through Mir Ali, North Waziristan's second-largest town, and to a walled compound in a village on the town's outskirts.

The stopping place itself was an indication that these were important men: The compound was the home of Abdus Sattar, 45, a local Taliban commander and an associate of Baitullah Mehsud, the man accused by both the CIA and Pakistan of plotting the assassination of Benazir Bhutto on Dec. 27.

With all signs pointing to a unique target, CIA officials ordered the launch of a pilotless MQ-1B Predator aircraft, one of three kept at a secret base that the Pakistani government has allowed to be stationed inside the country. Launches from that base do not require government permission, officials said.


During the early hours of Jan. 29, the slow-moving, 27-foot-long plane circled the village before vectoring in to lock its camera sights on Sattar's compound. Watching intently were CIA and Air Force operators who controlled the aircraft's movements from an operations center at Creech Air Force Base in Nevada.

On orders from CIA officials in McLean, the operators in Nevada released the Predator's two AGM-114 Hellfire missiles, 100-pound, rocket-propelled munitions each tipped with a high-explosive warhead. The missiles tore into the compound's main building and an adjoining guesthouse where the al-Qaeda officers were believed to be staying.

Even when viewed from computer monitors thousands of miles away, the missiles' impact was stunning. The buildings were completely destroyed, and as many as 13 inhabitants were killed, U.S. officials said. The pictures captured after the attack were "not pretty," said one knowledgeable source.

Libi's death was confirmed by al-Qaeda, which announced his "martyrdom" on Feb. 1 in messages posted on the Web sites of sympathetic groups. One message hailed Libi as "the father of many lions who now own the land and mountains of jihadi Afghanistan" and said al-Qaeda's struggle "would not be defeated by the death of one person, no matter how important he may be."

A temporary impact

Publicly, reaction to the strike among U.S. and Pakistani leaders has been muted, with neither side appearing eager to call attention to an awkward, albeit successful, unilateral U.S. military operation. Some Pakistani government spokesmen have even questioned whether the terrorist leader was killed.

"It's not going to overwhelm their network or break anything up definitively," acknowledged a military official briefed on details of the Libi strike. He added: "We're now in a sit-and-wait mode until someone else pops up."

Richard A. Clarke, a former counterterrorism adviser to the Clinton and Bush administrations, said he has been told by those involved that the counterterror effort requires constant pressure on the Pakistani government.

"The United States has gotten into a pattern where it sends a high-level delegation over to beat Musharraf up, and then you find that within a week or two a high-value target has been identified. Then he ignores us for a while until we send over another high-level delegation," Clarke said.

Some officials also emphasized that such airstrikes have a marginal and temporary impact. And they do not yield the kind of intelligence dividends often associated with the live capture of terrorists -- documents, computers, equipment and diaries that could lead to further unraveling the network.

The officials stressed that despite the occasional tactical success against it, such as the Libi strike, the threat posed by al-Qaeda's presence in Pakistan has been growing. As a senior U.S. official briefed on the strike said: "Even a blind squirrel finds a nut now and then. But overall, we're in worse shape than we were 18 months ago."

 

[IceCold]

Another challenge for the new government, since they said they were gonna call back the troops and stop this war against fellow pakistanies, it remains to be seen what will they gonna do and how will they stop the US from striking inside pakistan.

 

[Energon]

Another challenge for the new government, since they said they were gonna call back the troops and stop this war against fellow pakistanies, it remains to be seen what will they gonna do and how will they stop the US from striking inside pakistan.

I'm not sure there's really a way to stop the US forces from carrying out these missions unless the next president decides to end operations in Pakistan. However that is highly unlikely at this point.

 

[maqsad]

This guy Abu Laith al-Libi does not sound like a pakistani though. However it is embarassing and disgraceful that this is occuring. Firstly because the SSG or whoever should be able to take this kind of info and capture him alive. Secondly because the CIA evidently has the ability to happily assasinate anyone inside pakistan via remote control without the pak military even being aware of it. Thirdly it humiliates the pak govt and the military in front of all pakistanis as being powerless chaprasis.

I dunno why the pak military doesn't get it's act together technologically speaking by growing indegenous programs that can at least detect and deter air invasions. I mean at least that way there is some diginity involved because the CIA will be forced to call mushy up and say "hey please don't shoot down the predator pretty please" but instead they are laughing their heads off in Langley and then getting on the phone calling mushy up and saying "hey just to let you know, we are gunna blow up this house in Mir Ali so don't scramble anything in case friendly fire happens".

 

[maqsad]

I'm not sure there's really a way to stop the US forces from carrying out these missions unless the next president decides to end operations in Pakistan. However that is highly unlikely at this point.

Do you mean a way to stop them politically? Or technologically?

 

[Energon]

Do you mean a way to stop them politically? Or technologically?

Both. It is highly unlikely that the PAF would ever dare to fire on a US asset, and even if this happened, they'd only make sure that the predetor has a swarm of F22s circling around to shoot down any PAF fighter that approaches it.

 

[maqsad]

Both. It is highly unlikely that the PAF would ever dare to fire on a US asset, and even if this happened, they'd only make sure that the predetor has a swarm of F22s circling around to shoot down any PAF fighter that approaches it.

Right but if PAF has the technological capacity to detect all US assets violating air space then that adds a certain professional dignity. It would also force the CIA and the pentagon to treat the pak military with a little more respect.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Posted elsewhere, but since there is s thread here..

The crux of the matter:

We'll get these one-off flukes once every eight months or so, but that's still not a strategy -- it's not a plan. Every now and then something will come together. What that serves to do [is] it tamps down discussion about whether there is a better way to do it."

This is still no substitute for lasting peace, nor are these tactics going to make much of a difference in the overall war. Since a NATO invasion is improbable, and a new Govt. soon to be in charge, how will the dice roll now? I do see pressure from the US on the PPP to "do more" as being a deal breaker for any PML-N/PPP alliance.

 

[Energon]

Right but if PAF has the technological capacity to detect all US assets violating air space then that adds a certain professional dignity. It would also force the CIA and the pentagon to treat the pak military with a little more respect.

The US and other NATO members probably have a vast array of land, air and space assets covering the whole of western Pakistan and Afghanistan, so I highly doubt that the Pakistan armed forces are unaware of their constant presence. That however does not mean that anything will be done about it.

Any time the US has intelligence on potential targets, they'll go ahead and carry out attacks of this sort. What their intelligence gathering capacity is (on the ground) will remain unknown for the most part, but when they do, strikes are imminent.

 

[Energon]

This is still no substitute for lasting peace, nor are these tactics going to make much of a difference in the overall war. Since a NATO invasion is improbable, and a new Govt. soon to be in charge, how will the dice roll now? I do see pressure from the US on the PPP to "do more" as being a deal breaker for any PML-N/PPP alliance.

If the CIA has intel on certain operators they will strike (as in this situation). The new government as you said will be pressured to "do more" and given some time to "prove themselves." If this does not meet the US's expectations, they'll just increase the scope of operations with more air strikes and perhaps occasional special forces deployments; the possibility of a full fledged invasion and occupation will however remain extremely unlikely.

 

[maqsad]

The US and other NATO members probably have a vast array of land, air and space assets covering the whole of western Pakistan and Afghanistan, so I highly doubt that the Pakistan armed forces are unaware of their constant presence. That however does not mean that anything will be done about it.

Obviously the US and NATO have a vast array of gadgets watching everything and their SIGINT is top of the line with the possible exception of Russia. All I am saying is that pakistan should be able to see any intruding aircraft or spacecraft moving around well outside pakistani borders and airspace.

This lowtech HUMINT focused culture of ISI and the military needs to be quickly overhauled while the country is still in one piece! I mean these people don't even take basic sensible steps like setting up webcams and CCTVs around potential sabotage targets in Balochistan. I dunno what the matter is with them?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

If the CIA has intel on certain operators they will strike (as in this situation). The new government as you said will be pressured to "do more" and given some time to "prove themselves." If this does not meet the US's expectations, they'll just increase the scope of operations with more air strikes and perhaps occasional special forces deployments; the possibility of a full fledged invasion and occupation will however remain extremely unlikely.

They may perhaps do that, but any escalation will continue to erode support within Pakistan, and make it even harder for any Government to take a pro-WoT stand. Since a NATO invasion is highly unlikely, and these tactics will only provide limited military success, I would argue that "some time" is not going to cut it. The US will not go beyond a particular threshold, which it is pretty much at right now, unless Pakistani security forces are completely withdrawn (Which is unlikely to happen since the FC is stationed there).

The US will really have no choice but to let the politics in Pakistan work out - it cannot succeed against the Taliban without PA help.

 

[Energon]

Obviously the US and NATO have a vast array of gadgets watching everything and their SIGINT is top of the line with the possible exception of Russia. All I am saying is that pakistan should be able to see any intruding aircraft or spacecraft moving around well outside pakistani borders and airspace.

This lowtech HUMINT focused culture of ISI and the military needs to be quickly overhauled while the country is still in one piece! I mean these people don't even take basic sensible steps like setting up webcams and CCTVs around potential sabotage targets in Balochistan. I dunno what the matter is with them?

Actually I would venture a guess and say that good human intelligence sources on the ground are far more valuable than any gadget in the US arsenal. In fact, one of the biggest setback for the US at the onset of the post 9/11 conflicts was the absence of ground intel.

Having said that, the recent NYT articles which raised a lot of hullabaloo actually had ISI officers stating that they've lost most of their operatives in western Pakistan after Musharraf decided to do a 180. This if true, is a major concern.

 

[Energon]

They may perhaps do that, but any escalation will continue to erode support within Pakistan, and make it even harder for any Government to take a pro-WoT stand. Since a NATO invasion is highly unlikely, and these tactics will only provide limited military success, I would argue that "some time" is not going to cut it. The US will not go beyond a particular threshold, which it is pretty much at right now, unless Pakistani security forces are completely withdrawn (Which is unlikely to happen since the FC is stationed there).

The US will really have no choice but to let the politics in Pakistan work out - it cannot succeed against the Taliban without PA help.

I think that it has finally dawned upon the US that there will never really be a large support base within the populace of Pakistan when it comes to the Wot; at least not in the way they would like it.

The scope of military operations will be dependent upon two things:
1. The level of intel
2. The success rate of the PA.

I don't think one can realistically declare the exact "threshold" given that the abovementioned factors are highly dynamic.

It is clear that this conflict cannot simply be "won" militarily. However within the realm of military operations, the general consensus among the US and NATO forces seems to be that the PA cannot be heavily relied upon on account of a high number of soldiers/officers who may be sympathetic to the cause of the radicals. Also, the level of infiltration etc within the PA is completely an internal matter and subsequently not in the hands of the US/NATO, which means that the only remaining option is occasional unilateral action when it comes to highly sensitive targets.

Having said this, there have been radical changes within Pakistan and it's armed forces over the past few months. There is a new chief, a new government and a new sense of urgency as far as the dangers of radicalism are concerned. This may result in a complete restructuring within the military which in turn may compel the US/NATO to reconsider their opinion of the PA.

However, if the US remains unhappy with lack of progress of the PA, they will most certainly expand the scope of their operations; especially if Obama comes to power.