What's new

US weighs stepped-up military forays into Pakistan

pkpatriotic

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Apr 2, 2008
Messages
2,317
Reaction score
0
US weighs stepped-up military forays into Pakistan - Yahoo! News
By PAMELA HESS and MATTHEW LEE, Associated Press Writers
23 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - Top Bush administration officials are pressing the president to direct U.S. troops in Afghanistan to be more aggressive in pursuing militants into Pakistan on foot as part of a proposed radical shift in regional counterterrorism strategy, The Associated Press has learned.:disagree:

Senior intelligence and military aides want President Bush to give American soldiers greater flexibility to operate against al-Qaida and Taliban fighters who cross the border from Pakistan's lawless tribal border area to conduct attacks inside Afghanistan, officials say.

The plan could include sending U.S. special forces teams, temporarily assigned to the CIA, into the tribal areas to hit high-value targets, according to an intelligence official with direct knowledge of the plan.:disagree::angry:
Such a move would be controversial, in part because of Pakistani opposition to U.S. incursions into its territory, and the proposal is not universally supported in Washington. It comes amid growing political instability in Pakistan and concerns that elements of Pakistan's security forces are collaborating with extremists.

Senior members of Bush's national security team met last week at the White House to discuss the recommendations and are now weighing how to proceed, the officials said.

The top agenda item at the meeting of the so-called deputies committee — usually the No. 2 officials at the departments of Defense, and State, plus the intelligence agencies and the National Security Council — was to "review and potentially revise cross-border strategy," a person familiar with the session told the AP.

"What the deputies committee has raised is, given the possibility that political fragmentation in Pakistan is going to continue, do we need to change our strategy?" the official said. He and other current and former officials spoke on condition of anonymity because sensitive foreign policy matters are in play.

The deputies committee is two levels down from the president, so its recommendations would not immediately affect policy.

White House spokesman Tony Fratto declined to comment.

Pakistan's army spokesman Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas and Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammed Sadiq also refused to comment.

The current strategy — relying on Pakistan to keep a lid on the tribal areas along the border with Afghanistan — was meant to support Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, a strong ally of the U.S. who took control of Pakistan in 1999 in a bloodless coup. Musharraf was sidelined this spring when a coalition government trounced Musharraf's allies in parliamentary elections. He remains president but with vastly diminished influence.

Pakistan's governing coalition announced Thursday it will seek to impeach Musharraf, cranking up pressure on the U.S.-backed former general to resign.

In Washington, the State Department and some Pentagon officials are leery of the new proposal, warning of repercussions from the Pakistani government, which they fear could be further destabilized, while some officials in the CIA are pushing the plan.

Officials closer to the front lines in Afghanistan also are pushing for a newly aggressive stance. The rules currently limiting U.S. incursions into Pakistan when in hot pursuit of enemy fighters or targets would not be stretched under the plan. But U.S. forces would be encouraged to use that authority liberally.

The Associated Press reported last year that U.S. rules of engagement allowed ground forces to go a little over 6 miles into Pakistan when in hot pursuit, and when forces were targeted or fired on by the enemy. U.S. rules allow aircraft to go 10 miles into Pakistan air space.

Afghanistan's ambassador to the U.S. supports the plan.

"The argument that we may destabilize Pakistan has taken us to where we are right now," Ambassador Said T. Jawad told the AP. "Pursuing the policy of public praise and private pressure on Pakistan doesn't work."

But defense officials say they are cautioning against stepping up military operations in Pakistan without specific approval from Islamabad. They say violating Pakistani sovereignty would anger the Pakistani people and could affect U.S. use of the country as a base from which to resupply U.S. forces in Afghanistan.

Jawad said U.S. and Afghan forces know the location of training camps, places Taliban extremists live and where there have been large gatherings of al-Qaida members, but the current rules of engagement have hampered attacking those targets.

"We need to enhance the capacity of hitting these targets," he said.

The recommendations also call for developing direct relationships with Pashtun tribes on the Pakistani side of the border. That engagement has largely been left to Pakistan's security service, which U.S. officials increasingly fear is riddled with extremists and militant sympathizers.

Pakistan and the United States have somewhat contrary short-term interests in the Federally Administered Tribal Area, a Maryland-sized swath of ungoverned territory bordering Afghanistan.

It is home to about 2 million Pakistanis, representing between 20 and 30 fiercely independent tribes, several with well-armed, militant branches. The region also is increasingly home to al-Qaida terrorists and a growing network of foreign fighters, according to Defense Department officials.

Bowing to U.S. pressure, Musharraf three years ago directed a military crackdown on the tribal area to root out al-Qaida fighters. The tribes resisted the intrusion into their affairs. Prior to 2007 there were around a dozen tribal attacks a year in Pakistan. Last year there were nearly 100, according to U.S. defense officials.

Many tribes have decades-long associations with al-Qaida leaders, dating back to the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan that they fought against. Al-Qaida leaders have intermarried with the tribes and are a source of arms and weapons.

Now, the defense officials said, Pakistani officials are primarily concerned with negotiating an end to the attacks outside the tribal areas. But the U.S. concern is primarily al-Qaida in the tribal areas, and the negotiations are unlikely to affect al-Qaida's increasingly free rein throughout the region.
 
The plan could include sending U.S. special forces teams, temporarily assigned to the CIA, into the tribal areas to hit high-value targets, according to an intelligence official with direct knowledge of the plan..

This is something I'd prefer to see ISI and SSG doing but if it eliminates terrorists its worth it.
 
Have to the love the Afghan a-ss patrol, sorry I mean government officials, taking every opportunity to advocate military intervention in Pakistan.

Presiding over a wrecked state themselves, they cannot resist baying for Pakistani blood and supporting destabilizing acts in Pakistan. And lets not foll ourselves why they would do this - Afghanistan has never given up on 'Greater Afghanistan', and Karzai is the living proof of that desire.
 
This is something I'd prefer to see ISI and SSG doing but if it eliminates terrorists its worth it.

I wish it were that simple JK! Do you really think that a Pakistani government can survive if these gung-ho SF operators start directing strikes as they have done in Afghanistan where plenty of non-combatants die?

Secondly, as soon as the Americans start pouring into the tribals areas, the whole tribal region will erupt with calls for Jihad..not sure if Americans want that as the levels of infiltration will increase. Currently infiltration is happening under wraps, once US forces come inside of tribal areas, the infiltration will increase (there is no way that US/ISAF and the Afghan police (I mean ANA) can block these infiltrations especially when these folks are going in to hit back after they have been hit in the tribal areas). Pak-Afghan border cannot be sealed. If it can be, then they should help Pakistan do it. We are more than willing to do that.
 
I wish it were that simple JK! Do you really think that a Pakistani government can survive if these gung-ho SF operators start directing strikes as they have done in Afghanistan where plenty of non-combatants die?

Secondly, as soon as the Americans start pouring into the tribals areas, the whole tribal region will erupt with calls for Jihad..not sure if Americans want that as the levels of infiltration will increase. Currently infiltration is happening under wraps, once US forces come inside of tribal areas, the infiltration will increase (there is no way that US/ISAF and the Afghan police (I mean ANA) can block these infiltrations especially when these folks are going in to hit back after they have been hit in the tribal areas). Pak-Afghan border cannot be sealed. If it can be, then they should help Pakistan do it. We are more than willing to do that.

The sealing of the border is what I have been recommending for along time. it should be done as a joint measure and the posts should be jointly mounted by PA and NATO.
Araz
 
Karzai has always been strongly against the Pak-Afghan border being sealed probably because he is one of many Afghans who will not stop dreaming about anexing parts of NWFP, FATA and Balochistan.

I don't know what the position of the US is and I don't know what the position is of the provincial leadership in FATA, NWFP and Balochistan regarding fencing and mining of certain border areas. I do remember reading a story about some border fencing being ripped down by Afghan soldiers and border guards after Pakistan but some up.
 
The recommendations also call for developing direct relationships with Pashtun tribes on the Pakistani side of the border. That engagement has largely been left to Pakistan's security service, which U.S. officials increasingly fear is riddled with extremists and militant sympathizers.

Going after the so called terrorists is just a cover up for what i have highlighted. They want a direct contact with the pashtun tribes on the Pakistan side, does it ring any bell. Its all part of a bigger plan, the greater Agfhanistan. Too bad our jack *** GOP is too busy between the power struggle and whats worse is that we elected them in despite knowing their history. The propaganda against the ISI has increased dramatically and so has against the army, the blame game from the Indian side has started once again with now Karzai joining in hands, why cant we wake up of whats going all around us. What really depresses me is when i hear on a normal day routine people very causally speaking of Pakistan not being there on the map of 2012 or 15 or whatever that is. How pathetic have we become as a nation.:tsk:
 
Going after the so called terrorists is just a cover up for what i have highlighted. They want a direct contact with the pashtun tribes on the Pakistan side, does it ring any bell. Its all part of a bigger plan, the greater Agfhanistan. Too bad our jack *** GOP is too busy between the power struggle and whats worse is that we elected them in despite knowing their history. The propaganda against the ISI has increased dramatically and so has against the army, the blame game from the Indian side has started once again with now Karzai joining in hands, why cant we wake up of whats going all around us. What really depresses me is when i hear on a normal day routine people very causally speaking of Pakistan not being there on the map of 2012 or 15 or whatever that is. How pathetic have we become as a nation.:tsk:

Well said "IceCold" as highlighted above in your quoted post.
I really got disappointed by watching the people's response in our society, that no one worried about country's sovereignty despite of the knowledge about the intentions(exposed now) of tricky enemies who are now near to stepping in to harm our home land.

US worked a new theory to capture the whole economy /sources and resources of developing countries specially Pakistan. They are now planned to send their experts to lead our different sectors. So we can have better understanding about their actual objectives by their deep intentions of intervention on our economical sources.

This is a nastiest time for our home land security, where we are surrounded by antagonists. we (as a nation and political elites) have to prove ourselves as a live dignified independent nation by considering national security issues on top priority, put all personal clashes & conflicts behind, we as whole nation should be unite and to be adamant. Our politicians, /legislators and other ruling elites have to realize that, they are enjoying high perks and packages in Pakistan as it’s is still save by the grace of Almighty God, they have to now manage consensus with public, the whole team of cabinet ministers, bureaucrats, professionals (Government can take advises from the professionals/experts from private sectors) should sit together with determination regardless day or night (as they have been working out on issue of personal clashes) to plan a firm national strategy with consideration of all elements of national power (Economic, political, psychosocial, technological and military and its moral) by having country’s Defense military & effective clandestine team work strategy, on top priority basis to confront unambiguous border security and well prepared to brazen out hazy or clear conspiracies.

The time is crucial for our loving country, while we (nation) are just keep on hearing fake chanting from ruling elites, they have to prove now, and should reveal their guts (if any) and ‘Will’ as Modern strategy requires an intuitive synthesis of policy, political purpose, values, military power, military readiness, economics and the process of negotiation.

As I told in myseveral previous post “if there is a Will, there is a way”, other wise there may no way now to even draw their own last "Will"
GOD BLESS US, LONG LIVE :pakistan:PAKISTAN:pakistan:
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom