Monday, December 07, 2009

Rehman Malik: India involved in terror incidents in Pakistan:

font-size small font-size largefont-sizeprintemail share

Interior Minister Rehman Malik. – APP (File Photo)

'All Ullema to be consulted on anti-terror policy'

KARACHI: Interior Minister Rehman Malik said on Monday that evidence of Indian involvement in destabilising Pakistan has been handed over to the foreign office in Islamabad.
Speaking to the media at the Karachi Airport, Malik said that the country is passing through a crucial phase in its history, and stated that 'India is involved in the terror incidents in the country.'

The minister said arms and ammunitions were being smuggled into the country from Afghanistan.

He stressed the need of ending cross border infiltration between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

India involved in terror incidents in Pakistan: Malik

Monday, 07 Dec, 2009

Tags: rehman malik,pak-afghan border,pakistan border,indian weapons

Indian Strategic plans about Pakistan
Secretary of State Clinton during the campaign called Pakistanis paranoid about Indian intentions. Ms. Clinton please explain this article (not the only one) published in India's most presitgious Defense journal.
India's real intentions about Pakistan. See Indian Defense Review article
The India Doctrine by Munshi The India Doctrine by Isha Khan Dhaka Bangladesh book cover Indian intelligence: “‘the aim of RAW is to keep internal disturbances flaring up and the ISI preoccupied so that Pakistan can lend no worthwhile resistance to Indian designs in the region.”
Listing of Indian RAWs bomb blasts in Pakistan
“India supporting the terrorists in tribal areas & Balochistan” FM Qureshi

Sunday, December 06, 2009

Hillary Clinton: Two good (words), bad (deeds) and the ugly (blood on her hands)

Secretary of State Ms. Hillary Clinton is saying all the right words in this AP story. However her acts don’t clearly jive with her actions. Most Pakistani analysts are skeptical of her words, because of several reasons. Firstly, she is not consistent in her statements. She says one thing in Delhi, another in Beijing, and something else in Washington. Her statements in front of the Senate and the Congress are usually very Anti-Pakistan. Her statements in front of the US media are vitriolic and her comments to other world leaders are enigmatic. Then she wonders why Pakistanis don’t trust her.

There has been no movement for the creation of the Reconstruction Opportunity Zones (ROZs). There has been little progress in the signing of a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between the US and Pakistan. The trickle of military hardware sent to Pakistan is a joke. How can Pakistan fight the war without Chinooks, Apaches, UAVs, F-16s, F-22s, F-35s, and AWACs. How can the Frontier Constabulary and the Frontier Corps bring positive results without 100,000 M-16s, 150,000 night vision glasses, 150,000 bullet proof vests, and 50,000 Humvees? When will the hardware arrive? When will actions match words?

The international and domestic press in Pakistan continues to publish stories about the Xe/Blackwater/DynaCorp operations in and around Pakistan. Major media sources in Islamabad have documented the agents who rumble through Pakistani customs and immigration as if they ruled the planet.All this pours water over the possible good intentions that Ms. Clinton may have about or for Pakistan.

Blackwater's founder Erik Prince contradicted this statement in a recent interview, telling Vanity Fair that Blackwater works with US Special Forces in identifying targets and planning missions, citing an operation in Syria. The magazine also published a photo of a Blackwater base near the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.

The previously unreported program, the military intelligence source said, is distinct from the CIA assassination program that the agency's director, Leon Panetta, announced he had canceled in June 2009. "This is a parallel operation to the CIA," said the source. "They are two separate beasts." The program puts Blackwater at the epicenter of a US military operation within the borders of a nation against which the United States has not declared war--knowledge that could further strain the already tense relations between the United States and Pakistan. In 2006, the United States and Pakistan struck a deal that authorized JSOC to enter Pakistan to hunt Osama bin Laden with the understanding that Pakistan would deny it had given permission. Officially, the United States is not supposed to have any active military operations in the country.

 

font-size small font-size largefont-sizeprintemail share

‘We are launching initiatives to help strengthen Pakistan’s infrastructure, especially in energy and water … so you can have the resources you require in your homes, schools, and businesses,’ said Clinton in a message meant to allay misgivings of the Pakistani people about the US. - File photo

All of the above is fine and dandy—but Pakistanis can point to a dozen concrete projects that China has constructed and built for Pakistan. Most Pakistanis cannot point to any American project of value. If the US had built 50 world class universities, there would be millions of pro-American Pakistani graduates. If the US had built 1000 American hospitals, there would be tens of millions of healthy Pakistanis risking their lives for America. If there had been 5000 US sponsored schools in Pakistan, hundreds of millions of Pakistanis would be respecting the Stars and Stripes. If the US had eliminated tariffs on Pakistani textiles, millions of Pakistanis would be employed by the textile industry and not be loitering about street-corners discussing the root causes of extremism.If Washington had allowed a Free Trade Agreement with Islamabad, the Pakistani and American business community would be taking advantage of the inner strengths of Pakistani labor—hard work, a good ethic and English peaking skills. If the US had supported Pakistan in building the dozen or so dams that it needs.

WASHINGTON: Renewing US commitment to a long-term relationship with Pakistan, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the Obama Administration has requested a significant increase in economic development assistance for the country, a key partner in curbing violent extremism in the region.

‘We are committed to Pakistan’s security, stability, and sovereignty for the long term,’ said Clinton.

The last time we heard this sentence was from President Richard M. Nixon who said “Pakistan is the cornerstone of US policy”. I distinctly remember the year—it was 1971—somehow the 7th fleet never made it to the Bay of Bengal. We also remember the tall pronouncements made to Pakistan when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan—all Pakistan got was the Pressler and Symington amendments. Pakistanis in general are scared of Greek Trojans bearing gifts.

She said President Obama’s strategy, announced this week, reflects the American nation’s commitment to building a broad partnership with the Pakistani people.

This partnership, she remarked, is based on common values and a shared commitment to democratic rule, robust economic development, safety and security of all Pakistanis and the defeat of militants and terrorists who, she claimed, hide along the country’s western border.

‘We’ve already begun to implement elements of President Obama’s strategy. We have requested a significant increase in economic development assistance, including through the landmark Kerry-Lugar-Berman legislation,’ Clinton said in a message to the Pakistani people.

A General who has lost a war, can do only two things—he can ask for more troops and he can blame others. General Petraeus has done both. He has gotten 30,000 more troops and he has been blaming others for his own incompetence, and the inefficiency of this leadership. The blame others phenomenon includes the Pakistanis and the Iranians. His ephemeral Quetta Shura does not exist with a building and a flag on it. There are however Afghan refugee camps in Baluchistan, which are a hangover of the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Then, as now, millions of Afghans ran from the oppression and the occupation in Afghanistan.

They live in refugee camps in and around Quetta. Pakistan has repeatedly asked the Afghan government to take back the refugees. It had also planned to mine the and fence the border. All these Pakistani proposals have not only rejected by Mr. Karzai, he has vehemently opposed them.

Admiral Mullen is wrong about Pakistan

Admiral Mullen is wrong about Afghanistan. The rude Admiral Michael Mullen is still wrong on Afghanistan

Admiral Mullen is wrong asking for additional troop “trainers” for Kabul. He has got some–what will be do with them.

Bluster before Exit: Obama’s last hurrah—30,000 troops “for 18 months” then withdrawal by 2011

International Council of Security and Development (ISOC): Taliban control “virtually all” of Afghanistan

Mullah Omar stays most of the time in Pakistan: Petraeus

    • US commander says Haqqani network in North Waziristan a ‘big concern’ * Washington helped create extremist organisation
      Daily Times Monitor

LAHORE: Afghan Taliban leader Mullah Omar stays most, if not all, of the time in Pakistan, US Army General David Petraeus told the National Public Radio (NPR) on Friday.

In an interview with NPR, Petraeus said Pakistan had taken important steps against the Taliban in the last nine months. “I think there was a major development there about nine months ago that is very worth discussing. And that is a recognition by the Pakistani population, by virtually all of the political leaders, including the major opposition figure, Nawaz Sharif, and the bulk of the clerics that the most pressing threat to the very existence of Pakistan is the extremist syndicate, again, and, in particular, the Pakistani Taliban,” he said. He particularly mentioned the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) as an existential threat to Pakistan.

If US Generals continue to spew vitriolic venom against Pakistan and continue to issue veiled ultimatums to the Pakistan Army and overt threats to the Pakistani state, then all the nice words coming out of the mouth of Ms. Hillary Clinton are words that have no meaning.Unless Ms. Clinton can halt the public lashing of Pakistani institutions and the state, there she cannot expect to be taken seriously.

The chief American diplomat said the US looks forward to strengthening and continuing the partnership not only between the governments, but between the Pakistani and American people in the months and years to come.

‘We are launching initiatives to help strengthen Pakistan’s infrastructure, especially in energy and water, which is what the Pakistani people have told us you need, so you can have the resources you require in your homes, schools, and businesses.

President Obama’s strategy is the product of broad consultation, including with many of the partners in Pakistan, Clinton said.

‘We join the people of Pakistan in our deep concern about the threat posed by al-Qaida and its extremist allies. We condemn the violence that has been inflicted on innocent Pakistani people in recent months with bombings and other brutal assaults targeting civilians, your military, and other important aspects of your country and society,’ said Clinton.

The United States and Nato forces, numbering around 100,000 are trying to contain Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan, eight years after September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States which led to the US invasion of Afghanistan. Nato allies have also pledged to increase their troops presence in Afghanistan by 7,000 after the American announcement of 30,000 additional troops.

Can Ms. Clinton explain the presence of Xe/Blackwater in Pakistan? Can she put a halt to constant US carping about Pakistan Nuclear weapons? Can US generals quit blaming Pakistan for their defeat in Afghanistan? Can they quit finding excuses for their incompetence in Kabul? Can US politicians halt their aggressiveness by mentioning “existential threats” to Pakistan. Obviously, these subtle threats are not so subtle in the light of the blatant and overt threats on the eve of September 11th, 2009? Will America continue to tolerate the Indian RAW offices disguised as Consulates along the Pakistani-Afghan border? Will the US begin treating Pakistan at par with Bharat (aka India) in terms of respect on Nuclear Technology and arms? If the answer is no to any of these questions, then no amount of nice talk can be taken seriously.

ISLAMABAD – Much before the terror attack on the Naval Headquarters in E-9 sector of Islamabad, the complex was being monitored by the US embassy. TheNation has learnt that on November 18, a gentleman working for the US embassy in Islamabad, (see photocopy of ID card) Mr Abdul Ghafoor, was stopped by Naval police and intelligence personnel in the morning as he was suspiciously monitoring the entry/exit of Zafar gate (at Zafar Chowk) and doing reconnaissance work of naval installations.

Suspicions were further heightened when it was discovered that he was using a motorbike with a number plate that was found to be fake when checked. The chassis of the bike also seemed to have been tampered with. He offered a flimsy explanation to the effect that he was checking the route on which the ambassador had to travel.

The US and its Nato allies depend on Pakistan not only for transportation of supplies for their mission in landlocked Afghanistan but also to curb militant activity along the porous Pak-Afghan border.

Meanwhile, Pakistan, which has launched major anti-militant operations in its north-western areas, is confronting a wave of retaliatory bombings and is concerned about any spill-over effect of fighting in the Afghan provinces bordering its tribal areas.

Pakistan remains host to the largest population of refugees in the world, with over two million Afghans still living on its soil.—APP Clinton seeks to reassure Pakistanis on ties, Sunday, 06 Dec, 2009, Tags: clinton,US,pakistan,aid,obama,afghanistan,economy,energy,water,security

The US waive the Pakistani debt and build the Indus Highway—which it has been using with impunity as if it was funded by the US government. The Indus Highway was built for the Pakistani people not ISAF, NATO or US forces. The Indus Highway was built for Pakistani commerce not American military occupation.

Pakistan suffers from drone attacks on a daily basis. Pakistanis face a 911 everyday. Every drone attack shakes the nation. They get imbedded in the national conscience. No self-respecting nation on earth can tolerate this sort of abuse. The continued bombardment of Pakistani territory does not win the US any friends in the land of the Indus. The American wink-wink-nod-nod game of connivance with the Pakistani leadership, further alienates the rulers from the masses, and works as a recruitment poster for the militants who then paint the leadership as American lackeys working for US interests and not interested in protecting Pakistani lives. No amount of aid can overcome this seething hatred.

The more of more aid comes with more strings and more threats—eliminating the efficacy of the goodwill gestures. The current aid levels are a joke and a half. While the US spends $143 Billion in aid to Afghanistan, Pakistan gets a miserly $1.5 Billion (three fourths of which is spent on US consultants and logistics—and the rest doled out the US Ambassador’s favorite NGO). Pakistan has been a US ally since the 50s, a founding member of SEATO, CENTO, a frontline state against the USSR, the arrowhead that destroyed the Soviet Union. It is a Major Non-NATO-Ally (NMMA), but it remains the most abused “friend” of the US. It has lost more soldiers than any other country in the world in the war on terror—yet is is threatened on a daily basis by the US or its other coalition partners. Pakistanis have stood by Americans in Vietnam, Korea and since 911—however it is Bharat (aka India) that gets the Nuclear deal, state dinners, the latest planes, and invitations to the G-20. It is ironic that Ms. Clinton talks about “long term relationships” while admiral Mullen has Quetta in his gun-sights.

Without concrete steps on the ground, all words are useless!

Saturday, December 05, 2009

Obama’s secret war against Pakistan

At a covert forward operating base run by the US Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) in the Pakistani port city of Karachi, members of an elite division of Blackwater are at the center of a secret program in which they plan targeted assassinations of suspected Taliban and Al Qaeda operatives, "snatch and grabs" of high-value targets and other sensitive action inside and outside Pakistan, an investigation by The Nation has found. The Blackwater operatives also assist in gathering intelligence and help direct a secret US military drone bombing campaign that runs parallel to the well-documented CIA predator strikes, according to a well-placed source within the US military intelligence apparatus.

The source, who has worked on covert US military programs for years, including in Afghanistan and Pakistan, has direct knowledge of Blackwater's involvement. He spoke to The Nation on condition of anonymity because the program is classified. The source said that the program is so "compartmentalized" that senior figures within the Obama administration and the US military chain of command may not be aware of its existence.

The White House did not return calls or email messages seeking comment for this story. Capt. John Kirby, the spokesperson for Adm. Michael Mullen, Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told The Nation, "We do not discuss current operations one way or the other, regardless of their nature." A defense official, on background, specifically denied that Blackwater performs work on drone strikes or intelligence for JSOC in Pakistan. "We don't have any contracts to do that work for us. We don't contract that kind of work out, period," the official said. "There has not been, and is not now, contracts between JSOC and that organization for these types of services."

Blackwater's founder Erik Prince contradicted this statement in a recent interview, telling Vanity Fair that Blackwater works with US Special Forces in identifying targets and planning missions, citing an operation in Syria. The magazine also published a photo of a Blackwater base near the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.

The previously unreported program, the military intelligence source said, is distinct from the CIA assassination program that the agency's director, Leon Panetta, announced he had canceled in June 2009. "This is a parallel operation to the CIA," said the source. "They are two separate beasts." The program puts Blackwater at the epicenter of a US military operation within the borders of a nation against which the United States has not declared war--knowledge that could further strain the already tense relations between the United States and Pakistan. In 2006, the United States and Pakistan struck a deal that authorized JSOC to enter Pakistan to hunt Osama bin Laden with the understanding that Pakistan would deny it had given permission. Officially, the United States is not supposed to have any active military operations in the country.

Blackwater, which recently changed its name to Xe Services and US Training Center, denies the company is operating in Pakistan. "Xe Services has only one employee in Pakistan performing construction oversight for the U.S. Government," Blackwater spokesperson Mark Corallo said in a statement to The Nation, adding that the company has "no other operations of any kind in Pakistan."

A former senior executive at Blackwater confirmed the military intelligence source's claim that the company is working in Pakistan for the CIA and JSOC, the premier counterterrorism and covert operations force within the military. He said that Blackwater is also working for the Pakistani government on a subcontract with an Islamabad-based security firm that puts US Blackwater operatives on the ground with Pakistani forces in counter-terrorism operations, including house raids and border interdictions, in the North-West Frontier Province and elsewhere in Pakistan. This arrangement, the former executive said, allows the Pakistani government to utilize former US Special Operations forces who now work for Blackwater while denying an official US military presence in the country. He also confirmed that Blackwater has a facility in Karachi and has personnel deployed elsewhere in Pakistan. The former executive spoke on condition of anonymity.

His account and that of the military intelligence source were borne out by a US military source who has knowledge of Special Forces actions in Pakistan and Afghanistan. When asked about Blackwater's covert work for JSOC in Pakistan, this source, who also asked for anonymity, told The Nation, "From my information that I have, that is absolutely correct," adding, "There's no question that's occurring."

"It wouldn't surprise me because we've outsourced nearly everything," said Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, who served as Secretary of State Colin Powell's chief of staff from 2002 to 2005, when told of Blackwater's role in Pakistan. Wilkerson said that during his time in the Bush administration, he saw the beginnings of Blackwater's involvement with the sensitive operations of the military and CIA. "Part of this, of course, is an attempt to get around the constraints the Congress has placed on DoD. If you don't have sufficient soldiers to do it, you hire civilians to do it. I mean, it's that simple. It would not surprise me."

The Counterterrorism Tag Team in Karachi

The covert JSOC program with Blackwater in Pakistan dates back to at least 2007, according to the military intelligence source. The current head of JSOC is Vice Adm. William McRaven, who took over the post from Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who headed JSOC from 2003 to 2008 before being named the top US commander in Afghanistan. Blackwater's presence in Pakistan is "not really visible, and that's why nobody has cracked down on it," said the source. Blackwater's operations in Pakistan, he said, are not done through State Department contracts or publicly identified Defense contracts. "It's Blackwater via JSOC, and it's a classified no-bid [contract] approved on a rolling basis." The main JSOC/Blackwater facility in Karachi, according to the source, is nondescript: three trailers with various generators, satellite phones and computer systems are used as a makeshift operations center. "It's a very rudimentary operation," says the source. "I would compare it to [CIA] outposts in Kurdistan or any of the Special Forces outposts. It's very bare bones, and that's the point."

Blackwater's work for JSOC in Karachi is coordinated out of a Task Force based at Bagram Air Base in neighboring Afghanistan, according to the military intelligence source. While JSOC technically runs the operations in Karachi, he said, it is largely staffed by former US special operations soldiers working for a division of Blackwater, once known as Blackwater SELECT, and intelligence analysts working for a Blackwater affiliate, Total Intelligence Solutions (TIS), which is owned by Erik Prince. The military source said that the name Blackwater SELECT may have been changed recently. Total Intelligence, which is run out of an office on the ninth floor of a building in the Ballston area of Arlington, Virginia, is staffed by former analysts and operatives from the CIA, DIA, FBI and other agencies. It is modeled after the CIA's counterterrorism center. In Karachi, TIS runs a "media-scouring/open-source network," according to the source. Until recently, Total Intelligence was run by two former top CIA officials, Cofer Black and Robert Richer, both of whom have left the company. In Pakistan, Blackwater is not using either its original name or its new moniker, Xe Services, according to the former Blackwater executive. "They are running most of their work through TIS because the other two [names] have such a stain on them," he said. Corallo, the Blackwater spokesperson, denied that TIS or any other division or affiliate of Blackwater has any personnel in Pakistan.

The US military intelligence source said that Blackwater's classified contracts keep getting renewed at the request of JSOC. Blackwater, he said, is already so deeply entrenched that it has become a staple of the US military operations in Pakistan. According to the former Blackwater executive, "The politics that go with the brand of BW is somewhat set aside because what you're doing is really one military guy to another." Blackwater's first known contract with the CIA for operations in Afghanistan was awarded in 2002 and was for work along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.

One of the concerns raised by the military intelligence source is that some Blackwater personnel are being given rolling security clearances above their approved clearances. Using Alternative Compartmentalized Control Measures (ACCMs), he said, the Blackwater personnel are granted clearance to a Special Access Program, the bureaucratic term used to describe highly classified "black" operations. "With an ACCM, the security manager can grant access to you to be exposed to and operate within compartmentalized programs far above 'secret'--even though you have no business doing so," said the source. It allows Blackwater personnel that "do not have the requisite security clearance or do not hold a security clearance whatsoever to participate in classified operations by virtue of trust," he added. "Think of it as an ultra-exclusive level above top secret. That's exactly what it is: a circle of love." Blackwater, therefore, has access to "all source" reports that are culled in part from JSOC units in the field. "That's how a lot of things over the years have been conducted with contractors," said the source. "We have contractors that regularly see things that top policy-makers don't unless they ask."

According to the source, Blackwater has effectively marketed itself as a company whose operatives have "conducted lethal direct action missions and now, for a price, you can have your own planning cell. JSOC just ate that up," he said, adding, "They have a sizable force in Pakistan--not for any nefarious purpose if you really want to look at it that way--but to support a legitimate contract that's classified for JSOC." Blackwater's Pakistan JSOC contracts are secret and are therefore shielded from public oversight, he said. The source is not sure when the arrangement with JSOC began, but he says that a spin-off of Blackwater SELECT "was issued a no-bid contract for support to shooters for a JSOC Task Force and they kept extending it." Some of the Blackwater personnel, he said, work undercover as aid workers. "Nobody even gives them a second thought."

The military intelligence source said that the Blackwater/JSOC Karachi operation is referred to as "Qatar cubed," in reference to the US forward operating base in Qatar that served as the hub for the planning and implementation of the US invasion of Iraq. "This is supposed to be the brave new world," he says. "This is the Jamestown of the new millennium and it's meant to be a lily pad. You can jump off to Uzbekistan, you can jump back over the border, you can jump sideways, you can jump northwest. It's strategically located so that they can get their people wherever they have to without having to wrangle with the military chain of command in Afghanistan, which is convoluted. They don't have to deal with that because they're operating under a classified mandate."

In addition to planning drone strikes and operations against suspected Al Qaeda and Taliban forces in Pakistan for both JSOC and the CIA, the Blackwater team in Karachi also helps plan missions for JSOC inside Uzbekistan against the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, according to the military intelligence source. Blackwater does not actually carry out the operations, he said, which are executed on the ground by JSOC forces. "That piqued my curiosity and really worries me because I don't know if you noticed but I was never told we are at war with Uzbekistan," he said. "So, did I miss something, did Rumsfeld come back into power?"

Pakistan's Military Contracting Maze

Blackwater, according to the military intelligence source, is not doing the actual killing as part of its work in Pakistan. "The SELECT personnel are not going into places with private aircraft and going after targets," he said. "It's not like Blackwater SELECT people are running around assassinating people." Instead, US Special Forces teams carry out the plans developed in part by Blackwater. The military intelligence source drew a distinction between the Blackwater operatives who work for the State Department, which he calls "Blackwater Vanilla," and the seasoned Special Forces veterans who work on the JSOC program. "Good or bad, there's a small number of people who know how to pull off an operation like that. That's probably a good thing," said the source. "It's the Blackwater SELECT people that have and continue to plan these types of operations because they're the only people that know how and they went where the money was. It's not trigger-happy fucks, like some of the PSD [Personal Security Detail] guys. These are not people that believe that Barack Obama is a socialist, these are not people that kill innocent civilians. They're very good at what they do."

The former Blackwater executive, when asked for confirmation that Blackwater forces were not actively killing people in Pakistan, said, "that's not entirely accurate." While he concurred with the military intelligence source's description of the JSOC and CIA programs, he pointed to another role Blackwater is allegedly playing in Pakistan, not for the US government but for Islamabad. According to the executive, Blackwater works on a subcontract for Kestral Logistics, a powerful Pakistani firm, which specializes in military logistical support, private security and intelligence consulting. It is staffed with former high-ranking Pakistani army and government officials. While Kestral's main offices are in Pakistan, it also has branches in several other countries.

A spokesperson for the US State Department's Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC), which is responsible for issuing licenses to US corporations to provide defense-related services to foreign governments or entities, would neither confirm nor deny for The Nation that Blackwater has a license to work in Pakistan or to work with Kestral. "We cannot help you," said department spokesperson David McKeeby after checking with the relevant DDTC officials. "You'll have to contact the companies directly." Blackwater's Corallo said the company has "no operations of any kind" in Pakistan other than the one employee working for the DoD. Kestral did not respond to inquiries from The Nation.

According to federal lobbying records, Kestral recently hired former Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Roger Noriega, who served in that post from 2003 to 2005, to lobby the US government, including the State Department, USAID and Congress, on foreign affairs issues "regarding [Kestral's] capabilities to carry out activities of interest to the United States." Noriega was hired through his firm, Vision Americas, which he runs with Christina Rocca, a former CIA operations official who served as assistant secretary of state for South Asian affairs from 2001 to 2006 and was deeply involved in shaping US policy toward Pakistan. In October 2009, Kestral paid Vision Americas $15,000 and paid a Vision Americas-affiliated firm, Firecreek Ltd., an equal amount to lobby on defense and foreign policy issues.

For years, Kestral has done a robust business in defense logistics with the Pakistani government and other nations, as well as top US defense companies. Blackwater owner Erik Prince is close with Kestral CEO Liaquat Ali Baig, according to the former Blackwater executive. "Ali and Erik have a pretty close relationship," he said. "They've met many times and struck a deal, and they [offer] mutual support for one another." Working with Kestral, he said, Blackwater has provided convoy security for Defense Department shipments destined for Afghanistan that would arrive in the port at Karachi. Blackwater, according to the former executive, would guard the supplies as they were transported overland from Karachi to Peshawar and then west through the Torkham border crossing, the most important supply route for the US military in Afghanistan.

According to the former executive, Blackwater operatives also integrate with Kestral's forces in sensitive counterterrorism operations in the North-West Frontier Province, where they work in conjunction with the Pakistani Interior Ministry's paramilitary force, known as the Frontier Corps (alternately referred to as "frontier scouts"). The Blackwater personnel are technically advisers, but the former executive said that the line often gets blurred in the field. Blackwater "is providing the actual guidance on how to do [counterterrorism operations] and Kestral's folks are carrying a lot of them out, but they're having the guidance and the overwatch from some BW guys that will actually go out with the teams when they're executing the job," he said. "You can see how that can lead to other things in the border areas." He said that when Blackwater personnel are out with the Pakistani teams, sometimes its men engage in operations against suspected terrorists. "You've got BW guys that are assisting... and they're all going to want to go on the jobs--so they're going to go with them," he said. "So, the things that you're seeing in the news about how this Pakistani military group came in and raided this house or did this or did that--in some of those cases, you're going to have Western folks that are right there at the house, if not in the house." Blackwater, he said, is paid by the Pakistani government through Kestral for consulting services. "That gives the Pakistani government the cover to say, 'Hey, no, we don't have any Westerners doing this. It's all local and our people are doing it.' But it gets them the expertise that Westerners provide for [counterterrorism]-related work."

The military intelligence source confirmed Blackwater works with the Frontier Corps, saying, "There's no real oversight. It's not really on people's radar screen."

In October, in response to Pakistani news reports that a Kestral warehouse in Islamabad was being used to store heavy weapons for Blackwater, the US Embassy in Pakistan released a statement denying the weapons were being used by "a private American security contractor." The statement said, "Kestral Logistics is a private logistics company that handles the importation of equipment and supplies provided by the United States to the Government of Pakistan. All of the equipment and supplies were imported at the request of the Government of Pakistan, which also certified the shipments."

Who is Behind the Drone Attacks?

Since President Barack Obama was inaugurated, the United States has expanded drone bombing raids in Pakistan. Obama first ordered a drone strike against targets in North and South Waziristan on January 23, and the strikes have been conducted consistently ever since. The Obama administration has now surpassed the number of Bush-era strikes in Pakistan and has faced fierce criticism from Pakistan and some US lawmakers over civilian deaths. A drone attack in June killed as many as sixty people attending a Taliban funeral.

In August, the New York Times reported that Blackwater works for the CIA at "hidden bases in Pakistan and Afghanistan, where the company's contractors assemble and load Hellfire missiles and 500-pound laser-guided bombs on remotely piloted Predator aircraft." In February, The Times of London obtained a satellite image of a secret CIA airbase in Shamsi, in Pakistan's southwestern province of Baluchistan, showing three drone aircraft. The New York Times also reported that the agency uses a secret base in Jalalabad, Afghanistan, to strike in Pakistan.

The military intelligence source says that the drone strike that reportedly killed Pakistani Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud, his wife and his bodyguards in Waziristan in August was a CIA strike, but that many others attributed in media reports to the CIA are actually JSOC strikes. "Some of these strikes are attributed to OGA [Other Government Agency, intelligence parlance for the CIA], but in reality it's JSOC and their parallel program of UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicles] because they also have access to UAVs. So when you see some of these hits, especially the ones with high civilian casualties, those are almost always JSOC strikes." The Pentagon has stated bluntly, "There are no US military strike operations being conducted in Pakistan."

The military intelligence source also confirmed that Blackwater continues to work for the CIA on its drone bombing program in Pakistan, as previously reported in the New York Times, but added that Blackwater is working on JSOC's drone bombings as well. "It's Blackwater running the program for both CIA and JSOC," said the source. When civilians are killed, "people go, 'Oh, it's the CIA doing crazy shit again unchecked.' Well, at least 50 percent of the time, that's JSOC [hitting] somebody they've identified through HUMINT [human intelligence] or they've culled the intelligence themselves or it's been shared with them and they take that person out and that's how it works."

The military intelligence source says that the CIA operations are subject to Congressional oversight, unlike the parallel JSOC bombings. "Targeted killings are not the most popular thing in town right now and the CIA knows that," he says. "Contractors and especially JSOC personnel working under a classified mandate are not [overseen by Congress], so they just don't care. If there's one person they're going after and there's thirty-four people in the building, thirty-five people are going to die. That's the mentality." He added, "They're not accountable to anybody and they know that. It's an open secret, but what are you going to do, shut down JSOC?"

In addition to working on covert action planning and drone strikes, Blackwater SELECT also provides private guards to perform the sensitive task of security for secret US drone bases, JSOC camps and Defense Intelligence Agency camps inside Pakistan, according to the military intelligence source.

Mosharraf Zaidi, a well-known Pakistani journalist who has served as a consultant for the UN and European Union in Pakistan and Afghanistan, says that the Blackwater/JSOC program raises serious questions about the norms of international relations. "The immediate question is, How do you define the active pursuit of military objectives in a country with which not only have you not declared war but that is supposedly a front-line non-NATO ally in the US struggle to contain extremist violence coming out of Afghanistan and the border regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan?" asks Zaidi, who is currently a columnist for The News, the biggest English-language daily in Pakistan. "Let's forget Blackwater for a second. What this is confirming is that there are US military operations in Pakistan that aren't about logistics or getting food to Bagram; that are actually about the exercise of physical violence, physical force inside of Pakistani territory."

JSOC: Rumsfeld and Cheney's Extra Special Force

Colonel Wilkerson said that he is concerned that with General McChrystal's elevation as the military commander of the Afghan war--which is increasingly seeping into Pakistan--there is a concomitant rise in JSOC's power and influence within the military structure. "I don't see how you can escape that; it's just a matter of the way the authority flows and the power flows, and it's inevitable, I think," Wilkerson told The Nation. He added, "I'm alarmed when I see execute orders and combat orders that go out saying that the supporting force is Central Command and the supported force is Special Operations Command," under which JSOC operates. "That's backward. But that's essentially what we have today."

From 2003 to 2008 McChrystal headed JSOC, which is headquartered at Pope Air Force Base and Fort Bragg in North Carolina, where Blackwater's 7,000-acre operating base is also situated. JSOC controls the Army's Delta Force, the Navy's SEAL Team 6, as well as the Army's 75th Ranger Regiment and 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment, and the Air Force's 24th Special Tactics Squadron. JSOC performs strike operations, reconnaissance in denied areas and special intelligence missions. Blackwater, which was founded by former Navy SEALs, employs scores of veteran Special Forces operators--which several former military officials pointed to as the basis for Blackwater's alleged contracts with JSOC.

Since 9/11, many top-level Special Forces veterans have taken up employment with private firms, where they can make more money doing the highly specialized work they did in uniform. "The Blackwater individuals have the experience. A lot of these individuals are retired military, and they've been around twenty to thirty years and have experience that the younger Green Beret guys don't," said retired Army Lieut. Col. Jeffrey Addicott, a well-connected military lawyer who served as senior legal counsel for US Army Special Forces. "They're known entities. Everybody knows who they are, what their capabilities are, and they've got the experience. They're very valuable."

"They make much more money being the smarts of these operations, planning hits in various countries and basing it off their experience in Chechnya, Bosnia, Somalia, Ethiopia," said the military intelligence source. "They were there for all of these things, they know what the hell they're talking about. And JSOC has unfortunately lost the institutional capability to plan within, so they hire back people that used to work for them and had already planned and executed these [types of] operations. They hired back people that jumped over to Blackwater SELECT and then pay them exorbitant amounts of money to plan future operations. It's a ridiculous revolving door."

While JSOC has long played a central role in US counterterrorism and covert operations, military and civilian officials who worked at the Defense and State Departments during the Bush administration described in interviews with The Nation an extremely cozy relationship that developed between the executive branch (primarily through Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld) and JSOC. During the Bush era, Special Forces turned into a virtual stand-alone operation that acted outside the military chain of command and in direct coordination with the White House. Throughout the Bush years, it was largely General McChrystal who ran JSOC. "What I was seeing was the development of what I would later see in Iraq and Afghanistan, where Special Operations forces would operate in both theaters without the conventional commander even knowing what they were doing," said Colonel Wilkerson. "That's dangerous, that's very dangerous. You have all kinds of mess when you don't tell the theater commander what you're doing."

Wilkerson said that almost immediately after assuming his role at the State Department under Colin Powell, he saw JSOC being politicized and developing a close relationship with the executive branch. He saw this begin, he said, after his first Delta Force briefing at Fort Bragg. "I think Cheney and Rumsfeld went directly into JSOC. I think they went into JSOC at times, perhaps most frequently, without the SOCOM [Special Operations] commander at the time even knowing it. The receptivity in JSOC was quite good," says Wilkerson. "I think Cheney was actually giving McChrystal instructions, and McChrystal was asking him for instructions." He said the relationship between JSOC and Cheney and Rumsfeld "built up initially because Rumsfeld didn't get the responsiveness. He didn't get the can-do kind of attitude out of the SOCOM commander, and so as Rumsfeld was wont to do, he cut him out and went straight to the horse's mouth. At that point you had JSOC operating as an extension of the [administration] doing things the executive branch--read: Cheney and Rumsfeld--wanted it to do. This would be more or less carte blanche. You need to do it, do it. It was very alarming for me as a conventional soldier."

Wilkerson said the JSOC teams caused diplomatic problems for the United States across the globe. "When these teams started hitting capital cities and other places all around the world, [Rumsfeld] didn't tell the State Department either. The only way we found out about it is our ambassadors started to call us and say, 'Who the hell are these six-foot-four white males with eighteen-inch biceps walking around our capital cities?' So we discovered this, we discovered one in South America, for example, because he actually murdered a taxi driver, and we had to get him out of there real quick. We rendered him--we rendered him home."

As part of their strategy, Rumsfeld and Cheney also created the Strategic Support Branch (SSB), which pulled intelligence resources from the Defense Intelligence Agency and the CIA for use in sensitive JSOC operations. The SSB was created using "reprogrammed" funds "without explicit congressional authority or appropriation," according to the Washington Post. The SSB operated outside the military chain of command and circumvented the CIA's authority on clandestine operations. Rumsfeld created it as part of his war to end "near total dependence on CIA." Under US law, the Defense Department is required to report all deployment orders to Congress. But guidelines issued in January 2005 by former Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence Stephen Cambone stated that Special Operations forces may "conduct clandestine HUMINT operations...before publication" of a deployment order. This effectively gave Rumsfeld unilateral control over clandestine operations.

The military intelligence source said that when Rumsfeld was defense secretary, JSOC was deployed to commit some of the "darkest acts" in part to keep them concealed from Congress. "Everything can be justified as a military operation versus a clandestine intelligence performed by the CIA, which has to be informed to Congress," said the source. "They were aware of that and they knew that, and they would exploit it at every turn and they took full advantage of it. They knew they could act extra-legally and nothing would happen because A, it was sanctioned by DoD at the highest levels, and B, who was going to stop them? They were preparing the battlefield, which was on all of the PowerPoints: 'Preparing the Battlefield.'"

The significance of the flexibility of JSOC's operations inside Pakistan versus the CIA's is best summed up by Senator Dianne Feinstein, chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. "Every single intelligence operation and covert action must be briefed to the Congress," she said. "If they are not, that is a violation of the law."

Blackwater: Company Non Grata in Pakistan

For months, the Pakistani media has been flooded with stories about Blackwater's alleged growing presence in the country. For the most part, these stories have been ignored by the US press and denounced as lies or propaganda by US officials in Pakistan. But the reality is that, although many of the stories appear to be wildly exaggerated, Pakistanis have good reason to be concerned about Blackwater's operations in their country. It is no secret in Washington or Islamabad that Blackwater has been a central part of the wars in Afghanistan and Pakistan and that the company has been involved--almost from the beginning of the "war on terror"--with clandestine US operations. Indeed, Blackwater is accepting applications for contractors fluent in Urdu and Punjabi. The US Ambassador to Pakistan, Anne Patterson, has denied Blackwater's presence in the country, stating bluntly in September, "Blackwater is not operating in Pakistan." In her trip to Pakistan in October, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton dodged questions from the Pakistani press about Blackwater's rumored Pakistani operations. Pakistan's interior minister, Rehman Malik, said on November 21 he will resign if Blackwater is found operating anywhere in Pakistan.

The Christian Science Monitor recently reported that Blackwater "provides security for a US-backed aid project" in Peshawar, suggesting the company may be based out of the Pearl Continental, a luxury hotel the United States reportedly is considering purchasing to use as a consulate in the city. "We have no contracts in Pakistan," Blackwater spokesperson Stacey DeLuke said recently. "We've been blamed for all that has gone wrong in Peshawar, none of which is true, since we have absolutely no presence there."

Reports of Blackwater's alleged presence in Karachi and elsewhere in the country have been floating around the Pakistani press for months. Hamid Mir, a prominent Pakistani journalist who rose to fame after his 1997 interview with Osama bin Laden, claimed in a recent interview that Blackwater is in Karachi. "The US [intelligence] agencies think that a number of Al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders are hiding in Karachi and Peshawar," he said. "That is why [Blackwater] agents are operating in these two cities." Ambassador Patterson has said that the claims of Mir and other Pakistani journalists are "wildly incorrect," saying they had compromised the security of US personnel in Pakistan. On November 20 the Washington Times, citing three current and former US intelligence officials, reported that Mullah Mohammed Omar, the leader of the Afghan Taliban, has "found refuge from potential U.S. attacks" in Karachi "with the assistance of Pakistan's intelligence service."

In September, the Pakistani press covered a report on Blackwater allegedly submitted by Pakistan's intelligence agencies to the federal interior ministry. In the report, the intelligence agencies reportedly allege that Blackwater was provided houses by a federal minister who is also helping them clear shipments of weapons and vehicles through Karachi's Port Qasim on the coast of the Arabian Sea. The military intelligence source did not confirm this but did say, "The port jives because they have a lot of [former] SEALs and they would revert to what they know: the ocean, instead of flying stuff in."

The Nation cannot independently confirm these allegations and has not seen the Pakistani intelligence report. But according to Pakistani press coverage, the intelligence report also said Blackwater has acquired "bungalows" in the Defense Housing Authority in the city. According to the DHA website, it is a large residential estate originally established "for the welfare of the serving and retired officers of the Armed Forces of Pakistan." Its motto is: "Home for Defenders." The report alleges Blackwater is receiving help from local government officials in Karachi and is using vehicles with license plates traditionally assigned to members of the national and provincial assemblies, meaning local law enforcement will not stop them.

The use of private companies like Blackwater for sensitive operations such as drone strikes or other covert work undoubtedly comes with the benefit of plausible deniability that places an additional barrier in an already deeply flawed system of accountability. When things go wrong, it's the contractors' fault, not the government's. But the widespread use of contractors also raises serious legal questions, particularly when they are a part of lethal, covert actions. "We are using contractors for things that in the past might have been considered to be a violation of the Geneva Convention," said Lt. Col. Addicott, who now runs the Center for Terrorism Law at St. Mary's University School of Law in San Antonio, Texas. "In my opinion, we have pressed the envelope to the breaking limit, and it's almost a fiction that these guys are not in offensive military operations." Addicott added, "If we were subjected to the International Criminal Court, some of these guys could easily be picked up, charged with war crimes and put on trial. That's one of the reasons we're not members of the International Criminal Court."

If there is one quality that has defined Blackwater over the past decade, it is the ability to survive against the odds while simultaneously reinventing and rebranding itself. That is most evident in Afghanistan, where the company continues to work for the US military, the CIA and the State Department despite intense criticism and almost weekly scandals. Blackwater's alleged Pakistan operations, said the military intelligence source, are indicative of its new frontier. "Having learned its lessons after the private security contracting fiasco in Iraq, Blackwater has shifted its operational focus to two venues: protecting things that are in danger and anticipating other places we're going to go as a nation that are dangerous," he said. "It's as simple as that."

The Secret US War In Pakistan By Jeremy Scahill, 05 December, 2009, The Nation

Jeremy Scahill, a Puffin Foundation Writing Fellow at The Nation Institute, is the author of the bestselling Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army, published by Nation Books. He is an award-winning investigative journalist and correspondent for the national radio and TV program Democracy Now!.

Barbaric & Cowardly attack on Mosque

This desperate act of cowards will not dilute the determination of the armed forces and the people to fight the terrorists and mercenaries who cross the borders to create murder and mayhem in Pakistan.

Soldiers take position outside a besieged mosque in Rawalpindi on December 4, 2009. — AFP

RAWALPINDI: Funeral prayers for high-ranking officers, including Major-General Bilal Omar, who died in yesterday's Parade Land mosque attack, were held at the Chaklala garrison on Saturday.

Chief of the Army Staff (COAS) General Ashfaq Pervaiz Kayani and Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani attended the funeral prayers.

General Kayani said acts of cowardice will not dent the resolve of the armed forces and the nation to fight against terrorism.

Meanwhile, funeral prayers for three of the victims of yesterday's mosque attack were held at the Racecourse ground in Rawalpindi.

Security was tightened in and around the ground with the military police, Punjab police and Rangers performing the task. Meanwhile, special traffic arrangements were made at the funeral services held in the Westridge-I area of Rawalpindi.

Relatives of the victims as well as high-ranking officers from the armed forces attended the services.

The Peshawar Road area was also put on high alert and cordoned off as intelligence personnel and the military police conducted investigations into yesterday's attacks. — DawnNews

Acknowledging Pakistan as a Nuclear state

The US National Security Adviser James Jones acknowledged the fact that Pakistan was a Nuclear power. The status was attained despite Nuclear sanctions and in spite of major sanctions placed on Pakistan for a decade. Even now, if one were to believe the reporting of Sy Hersh, the US is trying to snatch the Nuclear bombs that Pakistan possesses.

While many in Pakistan think of General Jones statements as seminal—the fact of the matter is that it doesn’t matter what Mr. Jones thinks. He can’t even win a war in Afghanistan.

font-size small font-size largefont-sizeprintemail share

Pakistan has ‘enormous responsibilities within the community of nations that have nuclear weapons’: White House National Security Advisor James Jones told reporters. —File photo

WASHINGTON: US National Security Adviser James Jones said on Friday that Pakistan was a member of the community of nations that had nuclear weapons and was well aware of its responsibilities in this regard.

‘Pakistan is a nuclear state and has enormous responsibilities within the community of nations that have nuclear weapons,’ said the retired general while briefing reporters on President Barack Obama’s new strategy for the Pakistan-Afghan region.

‘And they (the Pakistanis) are very well aware of that. We have regular consultations on those issues. I think the future of US-Pakistan relationship is bright and it transcends problems related to insurgents and nuclear weapons.’

This marks the first time that a senior US official has publicly acknowledged Pakistan’s status as a state within the nuclear community and also as a state that was aware of the responsibilities that came with the status.

The statement follows demands from Islamabad that Washington grant the same status to Pakistan as it did to India while signing an agreement to provide nuclear technology to New Delhi.

Although the US is unlikely to offer a similar agreement to Pakistan, placing the country in the nuclear bracket is an important step forward in that direction.

At the same briefing, Mr Jones also declared that the United States could not leave Afghanistan until terrorist safe havens in Pakistan’s tribal areas were uprooted.

This, he explained, meant that the United States had ‘no intention of leaving Afghanistan in the near future and certainly not in 2011.’

When announcing 30,000 fresh troops to Afghanistan on Tuesday, President Obama indicated the United States would begin to withdraw from that country in July 2011. Pakistan is nuclear state, acknowledges US By Anwar Iqbal, Saturday, 05 Dec, 2009

Tags: nuclear weapons,Pakistan nuclear,nuclear proliferation

General Patraeus still harping on old tune about Quetta Shura

A General who has lost a war, can do only two things—he can ask for more troops and he can blame others. General Petraeus has done both. He has gotten 30,000 more troops and he has been blaming others for his own incompetence, and the inefficiency of this leadership. The blame others phenomenon includes the Pakistanis and the Iranians. His ephemeral Quetta Shura does not exist with a building and a flag on it. There are however Afghan refugee camps in Baluchistan, which are a hangover of the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Then, as now, millions of Afghans ran from the oppression and the occupation in Afghanistan.

They live in refugee camps in and around Quetta. Pakistan has repeatedly asked the Afghan government to take back the refugees. It had also planned to mine the and fence the border. All these Pakistani proposals have not only rejected by Mr. Karzai, he has vehemently opposed them.

Admiral Mullen is wrong about Pakistan

Admiral Mullen is wrong about Afghanistan. The rude Admiral Michael Mullen is still wrong on Afghanistan

Admiral Mullen is wrong asking for additional troop “trainers” for Kabul. He has got some–what will be do with them.

Bluster before Exit: Obama’s last hurrah—30,000 troops “for 18 months” then withdrawal by 2011

International Council of Security and Development (ISOC): Taliban control “virtually all” of Afghanistan

Mullah Omar stays most of the time in Pakistan: Petraeus

    • US commander says Haqqani network in North Waziristan a ‘big concern’ * Washington helped create extremist organisation
      Daily Times Monitor

LAHORE: Afghan Taliban leader Mullah Omar stays most, if not all, of the time in Pakistan, US Army General David Petraeus told the National Public Radio (NPR) on Friday.

In an interview with NPR, Petraeus said Pakistan had taken important steps against the Taliban in the last nine months. “I think there was a major development there about nine months ago that is very worth discussing. And that is a recognition by the Pakistani population, by virtually all of the political leaders, including the major opposition figure, Nawaz Sharif, and the bulk of the clerics that the most pressing threat to the very existence of Pakistan is the extremist syndicate, again, and, in particular, the Pakistani Taliban,” he said. He particularly mentioned the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) as an existential threat to Pakistan.

Petraeus said the TTP and the Afghan Taliban were “a threat to our Pakistani partners or even a trans-national threat in terms of extremism”.
Haqqani: The US general said the Siraj Haqqani network, believed to be operating from North Waziristan, was a “big concern”.

“The leader of the Haqqani network is a big concern because, although their leadership tends to be occupying an area on the Pakistani side of the border, the Haqqani network is one of the syndicate of extremist elements that operate in the eastern part of Afghanistan.” “[Haqqani] is the head of an organisation that causes significant problems in Afghanistan and also can cause problems for Pakistani authorities as well.”

The Indian intelligence machinery is very active in Balochistan, providing training, logistical support and arms to Baloch malcontents. It is obvious that General  Petraeus knows about this and is tolerating the insurgents. These Baloch terrorists are also going across the border into Iran and creating problems for both Pakistan and Iran—putting pressure on Iran-Pakistan relations.

Extremist creatiion: The US general said Washington had been party to the creation of these militant groups. “The existence of these organisations, their initial development was actually a reaction to Soviet occupation [of Afghanistan] and funded by, among others, some of the US contribution to the anti-Soviet occupation of Afghanistan,” he said. “We funded many of them when they were the mujahideen who were fighting the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.”
He told NPR that the Afghan Taliban were located “in various locations in Pakistan... typically in Balochistan. It’s called the Quetta shura”. “I’m not sure that folks will say [the Taliban] right inside the city [Quetta] or precisely — it will move around and so forth. But... has historically been centred on that city,” Petraeus said. “And when the Taliban were ejected, defeated along with Al Qaeda and other extremist elements that were located in Afghanistan prior to 9/11... they dispersed in these very rugged areas of eastern Afghanistan, the tribal areas of Pakistan and then down in the Balochistan as well”.
He said there were limits to how fast the world expected Pakistan to overcome terrorism. “The fact is that they have shifted a substantial amount of their military capability from, for example, the Indian border, from other locations, indeed to deal with this extremist threat. And I think you cannot underestimate how important the steps they have taken in the last nine or 10 months have been,” he said.

“They have also taken very significant casualties in these fights with the extremists. And their civilians have suffered severe losses as well, as these extremists have fought back,” Petraeus said. “And again, a good bit of this fighting, of course, has been from the [TTP] former Baitullah Mehsud organisation and from some of the other extremist elements that have — as the Pakistani forces, the frontier corps and the military have gone after them — have indeed then blown up innocent civilians in marketplaces, visiting cricket teams, [and] of course all the way back to the assassination of Benazir Bhutto.”

General Petraeus however chooses to play the blame game. He doesn’t bring concrete proposals or solid proof of his actions. What he does is shed strange allegations and acidic comments about the whereabouts of people like Laden and Omar.  Obviously this is a propaganda campaign to prepare the groundwork to begin bombing Quetta. 

Indian Fascists: “No question of regretting Babri Masjid demolition” RSS Chief Manmohan

CHANDIGARH: Seventeen years after the Babri Masjid was pulled down, RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat on Saturday said there was no question for the Sangh to regret for what had happened and maintained that their full support to the "Ram temple movement" will continue.

Bhagwat

RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat. (AP Photo)

Addressing a meet-the-press programme here, Bhagwat said the pulling down of the structure was not any conspiracy, but a spontaneous reaction from the karsewaks "whose sentiments and emotions had been hurt".
"Whatever happened was connected with the movement for the construction of the Ram temple. The sentiments of the karsewaks were hurt that also included many Muslims. So the question for the RSS to regret does not arise," he said.
Without naming any one he said, "afsos jinko karna chahiye woh karein" (those who ought to regret, should do so).
When asked to name any prominent Muslim leader who participated in the "karsewa" on December 6, the day when the mosque was brought down, Bhagwat said, "There were many Muslims. Prominent names that I can remember include (senior BJP leader) Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi and another leader from Mumbai, Muzaffar Hussain".
He stressed that the Sangh's full support to the Ram temple movement, which was being run by Sant Mahatama religious leaders), will continue as it had extended its support in the past. "The Sangh works as per their direction," he added.
"Whether Ram temple will be built with the support of the government or through any court directive or by change of heart (consensus among different sections of people), but we are committed to this (the movement for its construction)," he said.
He said in fact after the 1992 Babri Masjid demolition the interaction of the Sangh with other communities, including the Muslims and the Christians increased.
"Our intentions are clear. We have no enmity with any community," Bhagwat said, adding that the Sangh has not been properly understood by the people.
"To understand the Sangh one has to come in its fold for a couple of years. The taste of sugar is felt only after eating it," he said.
Bhagwat said that propaganda against the Sangh is also creating misconceptions about the organisation. "Now the misconceptions about the Sangh are being removed," he said adding that his media interaction here, the first ‘Meet the Press’ programme by any RSS sanghchalak was also a step in the direction of clearing the misconceptions.

US withdrawal from Afghanistan: Indian advice ignored by President Obama

Assuring India that the US has no intention of leaving Afghanistan in a hurry, a top official has said President Barack Obama's decision to start pulling out in 2011 indicated no disagreement with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's advise to stay the course there.

"The president and the prime minister did have discussions about this" during Manmohan Singh's state visit here last week, Obama's National Security Advisor General James Jones told reporters Friday. "The US has no intention of leaving Afghanistan in the near future, certainly not in 2011," he said when asked if the pullout decision indicated a disagreement with Manmohan Singh's assessment that a premature talk of exit would only encourage terrorists.

"And we are very confident that by the application of over 100,000 US troops and a significant increase of NATO and non-NATO contributing countries we would be able to achieve the conditions by which the Afghans can take more responsibility for the conduct of their internal affairs," Jones said.

That would allow the US to be able to start to bring some of its troops home, "the rate at which it will happen would be conditioned obviously on the situation on the ground," he said. "But when you have a situation like this it simply can't be that this is going to go on for ever."

Obama had decided "to focus everybody's attention on a reasonable time frame in which we can see real change Jones said. "And on not there has been no disagreement." On the contrary to "put it positively there has been full agreement on this with Obama's military and civilian advisors as also the international community."

"So I'll take it as a positive not a negative," Jones said. "If we would do our job right between now and then this will have a good result."

Indian PM fails to get aircraft carrier, Admiral Gorshkov, deal signed

 

The Hindh (aka India) PM has been traveling pillar to post, from the current friend to the old friend. He has singing the mantra about Pakistan. He hasn’t got traction yet—not even in Moscow—the previous BFF of Delhi. In Washington he failed to get the 123 nuclear deal operationalized. He also failed to het US support for the Hindh seat on the UNSC. In the UK more of the same. In Moscow—he didn’t fare a lot better.

NEW DELHI: Shortly before his visit to Russia, PM Manmohan Singh on Friday expressed hope that Russia would use its influence to convince Pakistan that the strategy of using terror as an instrument of state policy was counter-productive and ran counter to the policy of good neighbourliness.

In an interview to the Russian media, Singh said Moscow had been a great friend of India and "stood by us through very difficult times''.

"We also believe that Russia being a great power can influence the conduct of Pakistan. Our hope is that Russia's influence will be utilised to convince Pakistan. On our part, if Pakistan territory ceases to be used by terrorists, we see immense opportunities for our two countries to work together in cooperation,'' the PM said.
Singh went on to say that India and Russia had common interests as both were victims of terrorism. "We face in the subcontinent the onset of terrorism aided, inspired and instigated by our neighbour. Russia and India can work together to devise effective counter-terror strategies through coordinating our intelligence and information system,'' he added.

Singh further said that cooperation in the field of nuclear energy had been a very important pillar of the relations between India and Russia and that the government had identified new sites for collaboration with Russia for nuclear power projects. Russia was one of the first countries with which India entered into civil nuclear cooperation after the NSG waiver last year and the final agreement is likely to be signed during Singh's visit.

"India and Russia have a history of close collaboration in the area of civil nuclear cooperation. New opportunities in this sector are opening up, and we would like to see greater Russian participation in our nuclear energy expansion programme,'' Singh said.

While the revised deal for the Russian aircraft carrier, Admiral Gorshkov, is unlikely to happen during the visit, Singh did admit that it would figure in the discussions.

"Cooperation in the field of defence has been a very important aspect of our relationship with Russia. We have been able to get equipment and technologies from Russia which were not available to us from any other country. Of course, Admiral Gorshkov will figure in my discussion and I am confident that we can find practical solutions to the problems that have arisen,'' said Singh. PM banks on old friend Russia to lean on Pakistan  TNN 5 December 2009, 01:59am IST

Thursday, December 03, 2009

Whereabouts of Osama Bin Laden: PM Yusuf Gilani snubs UKs Brown

 

Rupee News two days asked the poignant question--Why tepid response to Gordon Brown’s claptrap.

Today the Prime Minster of Pakistan asked the right questions and snubbed a surprised Mr. Brown. Mr. Gilani challenged the British Premier about his “conviction” about the whereabouts of Osama Bin Laden. He frankly told Mr. Brown, Osama is not in my country. It is exactly this sort of challenge that is needed to confront Mr. Brown’s claptrap. Bluster before Exit: Obama’s last hurrah—30,000 troops "for 18 months" then withdrawal by 2011

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8392211.stm

Gilani snubs Brown on Osama presence

Pakistan's PM Yousuf Raza Gilani has told Gordon Brown he does not think Osama Bin Laden is in his country.

Speaking after talks with the UK prime minister, Mr Gilani said the US had provided no "actionable" intelligence on the al-Qaeda leader's whereabouts.

Mr Brown hailed Pakistan's anti-terror efforts and pledged more support to help stabilise its border regions.

But the UK prime minister did not repeat his weekend call for Pakistan to do more to track down Bin Laden.

 

 

LONDON - Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani has said that the democratic system in Pakistan will keep going in spite of the difficult circumstances. He said reports that the government had granted permission for drone strikes on Balochistan were just a part of disinformation.

Talking to TheNation before leaving Britain for Pakistan on Thursday, the Prime Minister said President Obama’s statement was very encouraging for Pakistan in which he had vowed to promote security and prosperity of Pakistan and to honour its sovereignty.

“Pakistan appreciates Obama’s statement in which he said that the US relations with Pakistan are not limited to partnership in the war against terror. Islamabad is considering the implications of the new US policy. Obama administration has taken us into confidence on this policy,” he said.
He further said his government was collecting more information about the new policy. He said Gen Stanley McChrystal and Admiral Mike Mullen were coming to Pakistan who would formulate a plan with the coordination of our Army and the government so that the new US policy might not cast negative effects on Pakistan.

  • Letting Obama "win"–so that the US can withdraw quickly–& end Afghan occupation
  • Obama’s troop surge in Afghanistan: Only one component of strategy
  • The realism of Barack Obama


    The Prime Minister declared the news regarding attempt on CJ’s life and his own dismissal as baseless.
    He said that the decision of transfer of the National Command Authority to him by the President was an evidence of the President’s trust in him. When asked whether there were any differences between the government and the GHQ, the Prime Minister said such wishes would never come true.
    Earlier, staunchly defending his government’s efforts to crack down on Al-Qaeda militants, Prime Minister Yousuf Gilani said Pakistan does not believe Osama bin Laden is sheltering within its borders.


    He also said he wanted more clarity on new US war strategy in Afghanistan. Gilani said his government could not yet decide how and if it could implement Washington’s new approach.

    “We are studying that new policy. We need more clarity on it,” he said after talks in London with his British counterpart Gordon Brown. “After, when we get more clarity on the situation, then we will see how, if we can implement on that plan,” he told reporters in a joint Press conference with Brown.
    “I personally feel the military action is not the solution for problems. Therefore we must have an exit policy,” Gilani added. “Military action is only 10 per cent. The 90 per cent is that you have to strengthen, you have to complement with the political decisions, the social, cultural input in those areas.” Gilani snubs Brown on Osama presence, By: Asif Mehmood | Published: December 04, 2009

    Obama’s new Grand bargain: More aid, intelligence cooperation & a few threats

    Delhi Cut down to size: “India is a big player in that region as well,” Admiral Mike Mullen

  • Misreading Afghanistan with tinted glasses

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/shirley-cloyes-dioguardi/misreading-afghanistan_b_375200.html

     

    Public opposition to the mounting death toll in Afghanistan, the unsupportable cost of the war, and the corrupt government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai, has left US President Barack Obama and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown struggling to justify our presence there. Their military advisers insist that their counterinsurgency strategy to defeat the Taliban in Afghanistan is working and that a military buildup, preferably 40,000 new troops, is needed to win the war -- a war that President Obama not long ago called a "war of necessity."

    We disagree. Our policies are failing, and they are failing because they do not confront the hidden causes of the conflict. The crisis in Afghanistan is largely due to Pakistan's insecurity and its consequent support of the Afghan Taliban. Because of its fear of India, Pakistan is determined to dominate Afghanistan, and this is the problem we need to address.

    We should never forget that the Soviets sent 50,000 troops into Afghanistan; they put an enormous amount of effort into training the Afghan army; and they failed, largely because of Pakistan's support of Afghan rebels whose battle against the Soviets was financed by our governments. The idea that our fate will be different is erroneous, because Afghans do not want foreigners in Afghanistan, no matter how "nice" they are.

    Although every conflict is different, there are ominous similarities between the Russians in Afghanistan and our current escalation. The parallels between the US involvement in Vietnam and the war in Afghanistan are also stark. Just as Presidents Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon, unable to admit that America's strategy was failing, agreed the answer must be more troops, US Commander General Stanley McChrystal has called for an increase in US troops to 68,000 and Afghan forces from 134,000 to 240,000 by year's end. But no matter how hard they try, more troops will merely turn more Afghans against us.

    Barack Obama is not the first to misread Afghanistan. Successive administrations have failed to understand that the United States and NATO are bit players in what is fundamentally a war between Pakistan and Afghanistan. This conflict, over the Pashtun lands, has been ongoing since 1948, when Afghanistan voted against the creation of Pakistan in the United Nations and sent tribal fighters into the Pashtun border areas of Pakistan. It is the reason why Pakistan accepted American support of the Mujahedeen in the 1980s, and why later it supported Afghanistan's brutal Mujahedeen commander Gulbuddin Hekmatyr, and then the Taliban in their efforts to take over Afghanistan, since both promised to be friendly regimes to Pakistan.

    Ignoring this history, the US and British governments have missed the fact that the key to routing out the Taliban and other extremist elements lies not in Afghanistan, but in Pakistan. There are 25 million people in Afghanistan, while there are 200 million in Pakistan, and Pakistan is currently in meltdown -- the product of its insecurity over its borders with India, Kashmir, and Afghanistan and hence its chronic militarism and support of terrorism in India and Afghanistan.

    Until the international community creates conditions that make Pakistan feel secure about its borders with India and Afghanistan, the country will remain dominated by its military and most of its monies spent on weaponry instead of on health and education. Lack of education has kept generations of Pakistanis locked in poverty, and has created a fertile ground for Islamists. Any solution to Afghanistan is impossible without solving Pakistan's problems.

    Both the United States and Great Britain have failed to confront the role that Pakistan's fear of India plays in its conflict with Afghanistan. Today, despite numerous statements to the contrary, Pakistan is determined to remove from Kabul what it sees as the pro-Indian Durani regime (the Pashtun faction from which both Hamid Karzai and the old Kabul royal family originate) and replace it with a friendlier non-Durani Pashtun leadership. Pakistan thinks that its best bet is the Afghan Taliban, whose inept leadership will mean that Afghanistan is no longer a threat to them.

    A regional settlement is essential, and India needs to be at the table. We have spent years ignoring and then lamenting Pakistan's unwillingness to stop the Taliban on its side of the border, when the key all along has been a durable peace between Pakistan and India. To get both sides to agree, the United States needs to tell them that the "line of control" through the middle of Kashmir will become an enduring international border, guaranteed by international agreement.

    A comprehensive agreement with Afghanistan, enforced by the international community, should follow. The "Durand Line," the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan, needs to become a recognized international border. Pakistan accepts the line, but Afghanistan never has. An open border regime should be created, because the line cuts across communities and to head off the very real political objections in Kabul. The United States needs to stipulate that if either Pakistan or Afghanistan breaks this agreement, it will embargo them, cut all funding, and use any force necessary against terrorist threats. At the same time, the United States and NATO should agree to withdraw to base and downsize.

    Despite our governments' claims to be successfully fighting terrorism in Afghanistan, committing more troops to fight more Afghans is not the answer. It is not too late for both President Obama and Prime Minister Brown to stand up and say that "Our predecessors got it all wrong. Sending more troops to Afghanistan will backfire on us." In fact, our future depends on it.


    Shirley Cloyes DioGuardi
    is a foreign policy analyst and the former publisher of Lawrence Hill Books, specializing in domestic and international politics. Robert A. Churcher is a post-conflict specialist who worked for the British Government in Afghanistan from 2001 to 2008.