The Pakistan Update

Pakistani PM Yousuf Raza Gilani is travelling to Qatar where officials indicate he will discuss peace efforts in Afghanistan.

The government has described the official agenda of his three-day visit as an opportunity to boost trade ties.

But officials have also confirmed that US efforts to establish a dialogue with the Taliban, hosted by the Qataris, will be discussed.

Analysts say his trip raises questions about Pakistan’s role in future talks.

The BBC’s Jill McGivering says that it is not clear what position Mr Gilani will take. He says his country wants a stable Afghanistan and will support any Afghan-led peace process

“He will meet among others the Emir of Qatar, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani and Prime Minister Sheikh Hamad bin Jassem bin Jabr al-Thani,” foreign ministry spokesman Abdul Basit is quoted as saying by the AFP news agency.

He added that the visit would seek to open up opportunities for co-operation between the countries.

But analysts say the issue of talks with the Taliban will also be considered important.

Our correspondent says that there is a sense that Pakistan, like the Afghan government, has felt excluded from the talks process – and takes that exclusion as a diplomatic snub.

The Taliban confirmed last month that they planned to set up a political office in Qatar ahead of possible talks with the US.

Pakistan has stressed recently in public that it is now being briefed by the Americans on those talks.

The Qatar talks are now being challenged by President Karzai’s initiative to instigate separate direct talks involving the Taliban and the Afghan government, hosted by the Saudis.

The Taliban’s support for the rival process is far from certain and it is not clear which set of talks, if any, will be backed by Pakistan.

Given its influence with the Taliban, Islamabad’s choice may be crucial. The difficulty for the US, our correspondent says, is that Pakistan’s proximity to the Taliban is what makes it both part of a possible solution and also part of the problem.

Pakistan has been accused in the past of playing a double game when it comes to the Taliban. If both the Americans and the Afghan government are now eager for its help, its loyalties could once again be tested.

Officials say that Mr Gilani will meet the Emir of Qatar, Sheikh Hamad Bin Khalifa Al-Thani and Prime Minister Sheikh Hamad Bin Jassim Bin Jabr Al-Thani.

Originally appeared on bbc news.

Tags: Afghanistan, hamad bin jassim bin jabr al-thani, Taliban, US, Yousaf Raza Gilani

Posted in Afghanistan, Around, News | 1 Comment »

A United Nations report blaming a record loss of Afghan civilian lives last year on insurgents and the Taliban was dismissed as “untrue” by a Taliban spokesman Saturday.

Meanwhile, a commander of the International Security Assistance Force was encouraged by the report’s findings that coalition forces were not to blame for the increased casualties, but agreed that civilian deaths must drop. The U.N. Assistance Mission in Afghanistan said 3,021 civilians were killed last year, up from 2,790 the prior year.

In an e-mail sent to CNN, Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid “strongly” disputed the U.N. mission’s report as “untrue.”

“It has been 10 years since UNAMA has started blaming our Mujahideen with such numbers and untrue figures while the invading forces are using tons of explosives every day in our country, conducting raids on civilian houses and they are killing our innocent people,” Mujahid said in the e-mail.

“Unfortunately I should say that UNAMA, which is operating under the umbrella of the U.N. as a propaganda tool for the invading forces, is trying to blame Mujahideen for the majority of the killings happening in Afghanistan,” Mujahid wrote.

“It is unfortunate that UNAMA is supporting oppressor Americans and other invading forces and is undermining its international reputation,” Mujahid stated.

A total of 11,864 civilians have been killed in the Afghanistan conflict since 2007, the U.N. mission said.

“Afghan children, women and men continue to be killed in this war in ever-increasing numbers,” Jan Kubis, the U.N. special representative for the secretary-general, said in a statement. “For much too long Afghan civilians have paid the highest price of war. Parties to the conflict must greatly increase their efforts to protect civilians to prevent yet another increase in civilian deaths and injuries in 2012.”

General John R. Allen, ISAF commander, said the report showed a reduction in coalition-related civilian casualties.

“Every citizen of Afghanistan must know ISAF will continue to do all we can to reduce casualties that affect the Afghan civilian population. This data is promising but there is more work to be done,” Allen said in a statement.

“The most striking — and obvious — component of the report is the increasing number of civilian casualties attributed to insurgents,” said Allen. “IEDs are now responsible for roughly one out of three civilian casualties according to UNAMA. The death toll from insurgent attacks is much too high and deserves Mullah Omar’s direct attention and action.”

The U.N. report said last year’s deaths are 8% more than in 2010, and double the number in 2007.

The vast majority of 2011 civilian casualties — 77%, according to the U.N. report — were caused by anti-government forces. The number of deaths attributable to the Afghan army and international forces declined year-over-year by 4%, to 410.

The report concludes that the higher number of casualties was due to changing tactics on the part of insurgents, including greater use of improvised explosive devices (IEDs), deadlier suicide attacks and more targeted assassinations.

IEDs alone killed 967 Afghan men, women and children in 2011. Many of the 495 victims of targeted killings were provincial and district governors, peace council members and tribal elders.

Among the most disturbing statistics: in the second half of 2011, the number of women and children killed grew by 29 and 51% respectively, compared to 2010. That is in part due to the growing use of the pressure-plate IEDs, which are indiscriminate — such that a van carrying civilians is just as likely to set off the explosive as a Humvee.

“A piece of shrapnel had gone through his head. My son is dead, and his loss is killing me and my wife. He was the only son I had,” said a man in Mazar-e Sharif, who was quoted in the report.

“My daughter is nine years old, and every day before I leave for work, she cries: ‘Mama, don’t go to work, I don’t need to eat,’ “a police officer in Herat was quoted as saying.

The U.N. report says several statements from Taliban leaders in 2011 pledging greater efforts to avoid civilian casualties “neither resulted in improved protection of civilians nor minimized civilian casualties.”

While NATO can take comfort from the fact that its forces — and its allies in the Afghan National Army — caused fewer civilian casualties last year, it is clear that overall security for civilians has not improved. This is despite the deployment of well over 100,000 international troops across Afghanistan in 2011.

In addition to casualties, the number of Afghan civilians displaced by conflict soared last year. According to the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, conflict and insecurity displaced some 185,000 people in Afghanistan, a jump of 41% compared to 2010.

The U.N. report suggests that there has been a significant geographic shift in casualties. As NATO and Afghan Army units focused on the southern provinces of Kandahar and Helmand, the number of civilian casualties fell sharply in the second half of 2011.

But elsewhere — in southeastern, eastern and northern Afghanistan — incidents rose. The number of civilians killed in Kabul province, including in the capital itself, more than tripled largely because of several devastating suicide bombings.

The figures show that the number of casualties caused by NATO and allied night operations dropped sharply, despite the much greater intensity and frequency of such operations. That suggests better intelligence and tactics among pro-government forces. But the number of civilian killed in NATO airstrikes — a source of friction with the government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai — rose 9%.

Increasingly, as the transition to Afghan leadership gets underway, local security duties are being assigned to a relatively new force: the Afghan Local Police. The U.N. says it has received “mixed reports” about this entity’s overall performance. While most suggested that it had improved security, there were also accounts of human rights abuses and corruption.

Altogether, the U.N. Assistance Mission concludes that “the unremitting toll of civilian casualties coupled with pervasive intimidation affected many civilians directly, and many more indirectly, by fueling uncertainty, tension and fear.”

The report’s authors welcome “ideas that could contribute toward peace negotiations,” adding their value will be measured by reduced civilian casualties and improved security

Originally appeared on cnn.

Tags: Afghan Taliban, Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai, NATO, United Nations, zabiullah mujahid

Posted in Afghanistan, Around, News | No Comments »

Afghanistan and Pakistan plan to open a second front in negotiations with the Taliban in Saudi Arabia as US-brokered talks get under way in Qatar, officials said Sunday.

The Taliban, ousted from power by a US-led invasion in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, announced this month that they planned to set up a political office in Qatar ahead of talks with Washington.

And Taliban negotiators have begun holding preliminary talks with US officials on plans for negotiations aimed at ending the decade-long Afghan war, a former Taliban official said Sunday.

But Afghan and Taliban officials indicated in response to a BBC report about plans for talks in Saudi Arabia that both Kabul and Islamabad – usually at loggerheads on the issue – were looking for their own talks with the Taliban.

Asked for his response to the BBC report, Afghan foreign ministry spokesperson Janan Mosazai said: “Of course, we support any steps toward the Afghan peace process.” He refused to comment further.

But a senior Afghan government official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told AFP the BBC report was accurate, saying: “We will always pursue all roads toward peace in Afghanistan, including contacts with the Taliban that are not limited to the Qatar office.”

A member of the Taliban’s leadership council, the Pakistan-based Quetta Shura, also backed the report of talks in Saudi Arabia.

“The idea that the Taliban should have a point of contact in Saudi is pushed by the Pakistan and Afghan governments,” he said on condition of anonymity.

“This is because they think they have been sidelined. They want some control over peace talks.”

Supporting this theory, Kabul announced Sunday that Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar would visit Kabul on Wednesday, marking what Mosazai called a “new phase” in co-operation between the two countries.

Khar would meet President Hamid Karzai to “discuss the fight against terrorism and Pakistan’s essential support to the peace process in Afghanistan,” he said.

Khar’s visit comes after the always-touchy relations between the two countries broke down following the assassination of Kabul’s chief peace envoy, Burhanuddin Rabbani, in September.

Karzai accused Pakistan of responsibility for the murder and said Islamabad was sabotaging all attempts at negotiations with the Taliban.

The president was wary over being sidelined in the Qatar talks, leading Washington to dispatch special envoy Marc Grossman to Kabul last week to assure him of a central role for his government in any major negotiations.

And in another effort to soothe Karzai’s doubts, a delegation from the Qatar government is expected to visit Kabul to explain its role in the talks.

Preliminary negotiations between the US and the Taliban are already under way in the Gulf state, a former Taliban official who is now a member of the Afghan government appointed High Peace Council said Sunday.

“The actual peace talks have not yet begun – they are in the process of trust-building and obviously this will take some time,” Mawlavi Qalamuddin, who once led the Taliban’s feared religious police when the hardline Islamists were in power, told AFP.

One of the trust-building measures demanded by the Taliban is the release of five of its members from Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, while Washington wants the insurgents to renounce violence.

Originally appeared in the montreal gazette

Tags: 9/11 attacks, Afghanistan, burhanuddin rabbani, Guantánamo, Hamid Karzai, hina rabbani khar, islamists, Kabul, malvi qalamuddin, Saudi Arabia, Taliban, US

Posted in Afghanistan, Around, Blog | No Comments »

India and Pakistan on Wednesday announced several initiatives to accelerate cooperation in the oil and gas sector, as the two energy-starved nuclear-armed neighbors try to mend economic ties despite political differences.

Energy ministers from India and Pakistan said the two nations may jointly take part in developing a gas field in Turkmenistan.

In addition, India has proposed to export petroleum products to its South Asian neighbor, said Oil Minister Jaipal Reddy, while addressing a joint briefing with his Pakistani counterpart, Asim Hussain.
Mr. Hussain is in New Delhi for talks on a proposed 1,680-kilometer pipeline that will transport gas from Turkmenistan’s Yolotan-Osman field to India and Pakistan through Afghanistan.

“We intend to have a joint strategy on the upstream sector where Turkmenistan is to develop its gas field,” Mr. Hussain said.

“We will have to wait for the response of the Turkmenistan government,” Mr. Reddy said. “Since everything is progressing smoothly, we are optimistic about it.”

An agreement to build a Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India pipeline will help both India and Pakistan secure gas supplies and also benefit Turkmenistan, which has the world’s fourth-largest gas reserves, including the Yolotan-Osman Gas field with estimated reserves of as much as 13 trillion cubic meters.

The $7.6 billion proposed pipeline could carry about 90 million standard cubic meters of gas per day. According to the plan, Afghanistan would get 14 million cubic meters of the gas, while India and Pakistan would equally share the balance.

Discussions on the pipeline have been continuing for about two decades and the project has U.S. backing as it will provide millions of dollars to Afghanistan in the form of transit fees and also job opportunities. The pipeline will also reduce South Asia’s dependence on Iran, which has been seeking to supply gas to India and Pakistan through another proposed pipeline.

About 1,535 kilometers of the Turkmenistan pipeline will pass through Afghanistan and Pakistan, including the Kandahar province that has high Taliban presence, and tribal areas, posing a security challenge to the project.

Mr. Hussain said Pakistan is separately going ahead with a multibillion-dollar gas-pipeline project with Iran. “The gas-supply purchase agreement has been signed with Iran. We are meeting all schedules on time.”

India, which was part of the project initially, isn’t actively pursuing it as the talks stalled on security and pricing issues. Mr. Reddy declined to comment on India’s participation.

Pakistan’s comments come as the U.S. and the European Union push toward banning or discouraging Iranian oil trade as part of efforts to force Tehran into suspending its alleged nuclear-weapons program.

Mr. Reddy said India has offered to export gasoline, diesel, jet fuel and fuel oil besides sulfur, polyethylene and polypropylene to Pakistan, according to an Indian government statement.

It said Pakistan will save freight costs as several Indian refineries are located close to the border between the countries.

Indian refiners will study the feasibility of product pipelines to Pakistan provided they receive long-term guarantees for product purchases, Mr. Reddy added.

Tags: Afghanistan, Pak India Dialogue, Pak-India Relations, turkmenistan

Posted in India, News | 8 Comments »

By Rizwan Ghani

Pakistan is about to redefine its relations with America after the Salala tragedy. The parliament is going to discuss Pak-US relations. Our policy makers should remember France’s reaction over deaths of its soldiers. A careful look at domestic and international developments will show that beyond transactional relationship based on Afghanistan and NATO, there is no future of permanent Pak-US relations. PPP supports the relations but Mualana Fazl ur Rehman has said that America is the enemy of Pakistan. The overwhelming majority of public (more than 90 %) is against Pak-US relations. Just like US military-industrial complex, a powerful lobby in Pakistan supports Pak-US relations to protect its profits in US and Afghanistan. There are fundamental differences in Pak-US policies on human rights, Constitutions, economic models, political systems and even the internet. However, countries are redirecting their foreign policies to face recession, increasing oil prices and avert military conflicts.

Where does Pakistan stand on China and permanent NATO presence in the region? How does the government plan to react beyond the rhetoric of redlines to any future US attacks on Pakistan? China has decided to deal with America diplomatically. Obama’s recently issued defense review is China centric. It aims to maintain permanent US presence in Asia. A NATO like alliance has been forged between America and five East Asian nations (Japan, Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia and South Korea). Under the doctrine of “offshore balancing”, the troop number will be cut in future military operations. Instead, there will be an increase in use of air force and navy. It will be replaced with high technology use and missile shields (in Turkey). Unmanned surveillance vehicles including drones, nanotechnology and 24/7 (satellite) surveillance will substitute human intelligence networks. War outsourcing is part of the Obama doctrine. The imposition of passage levy on NATO is one part of the complex picture, which deals with constitution, armed forces and public opinion. Our liberal media blames government policies for paid military operations. The armed forces feel let down for their services to the nation and obeying government orders. The constitutionalists object to use of national armed force within state boundaries as unconstitutional and gross violations of fundamental rights and international conventions. It brings state, government, civil society and media at crossroads, which in turn exposes the state and its institutions to foreign exploitation. Memo is just one example of this complexity, in which each party believes it is on high moral ground or is a victim. However, from America’s perspective, it is a good business deal. No body bags, media scrutiny, domestic pressure to end dirty wars, accountability for crimes against humanity, power to prolong wars due to reduced costs and safety fallouts for the American public (NATO spent one crore plus monthly for Pakistani route as compared to ten crores for other routes). To protect its national unity and interests, Pakistan cannot be part of America’s outsourcing policy.

Can Pakistan support US imperialism? US takes it as its right to interfere in others affairs under its illegal doctrine of imperialism- no to national boundaries and sovereignties. Hillary’s redline threat is nothing new, it is part of American policy since 1963. Kennedy invited national poet Robert Frost to his inauguration speech to send a new foreign policy message of “Good Fences make good neighbors” to the world, an end to Vietnam war, and fight against what he called the “common enemies of man: tyranny, poverty, disease, and war itself”. He was murdered (in Texas), and Frost was replaced by Walt Whitman as beacon of new foreign policy, “Democracy is like grassland with no boundaries”. Reportedly, Tokyo is paying $2bn plus annually for 70 US military bases in Japan instead of giving the money to unemployed Japanese demanding eviction of US forces. Washington has formed an anti-China “String of Pearls” in the Far East comprising Japan, South Korea, Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia and Australia. America does not respect nations and international laws, which recognize sovereign rights and boundaries of states. It is about time Pakistan upholds Iqbal’s message of freedom from the west, adopts Islamic values and restores faith in self and nation.

Not-so-covert warfare is part of US foreign policy. The thawing of North, South Korea relations under the Sunshine Act was derailed by sinking of South Korean military vessel leading to 42 deaths because united Korean Peninsula undermines US interest in the region. The Chinese tourists were shot dead in Philippines resulting in scrapping of scheduled talks between Beijing and Manila. Manila was rewarded with Philippines Sea. Mumbai blasts rocked Pak- Indo talks on Kashmir. International conspiracy has stopped Islamabad from demanding resolution of Kashmir issue as per the UN Resolutions and it is struggling to prove its innocence as a terror sponsoring state. Delhi was rewarded with Indo-US nuclear deal for adopting “friendly” policies against China, Afghanistan and Baluchistan. Islamabad should not send Mumbai Judicial Commission to India because old ploy of terrorism is being used to sell so-called war against terrorism (SWAT) to justify permanent occupation of Asia through Afghanistan, Philippines and CARS (Not-so-covert warfare…, Jan. 21, Arab News). Our parliament should scrap all US sponsored agreements to protect national interests. The US sponsored Afghan Trade Agreement must be scrapped to start energy and trade corridor between Pakistan, ME, China, Russia and Europe. All NATO agreements and foreign intelligence networks should be ended (Norway’s security agents in Pakistan, Jan. 20, Pak. observer), Pak-Afghan border should be sealed and regulated as per international laws. Pakistan must demand the withdrawal of all foreign forces from Afghanistan so that three million Afghan refugees can return to Afghanistan and the Afghans can take control of their country. Telecommunication and energy sectors should be privatized to regain control of security and economy. Reportedly, invisible ‘closed phone’ networks can be established within existing telecommunication networks. In Greece, a local engineer was murdered for reporting spy software. A judicial inquiry should be ordered to determine the role of multinationals, foreign forces and anti-state elements in mobile-triggered attacks in Pakistan. The material used in these attacks is not available in the region and attack timings show that they were aimed at winning public support in the west and conning Pakistanis. Under Beggar Thy Neighbor policy, the energy sector was used to initiate a pancake collapse of our economy to control our foreign policy, national security including denuclearization, and to sustain America’s SWAT. Therefore, Pakistan needs to expose acts of sabotage against armed forces, public and the state. Also, those responsible, not the public, should pay the Rs. 160 bn debt. There should be public inquiries of 7/7 and 9/11. The Ripple Effect (BBC documentary) should be shown on our national TV.

Pakistan and America cannot get along due to fundamental differences. The violation of human rights including use of drones, no accountability for forced sterilization, police state and racism is part of America’s policies. Unlike US, the extra judicial killings, racism and forced sterilization are crimes in Pakistan. Our Constitution envisages a welfare state, a parliamentary form of government, no fixed term for the PM, independent judiciary, Sharia based law, Freedom of Information, internet freedom, and a government obliged to protect rights of weak against strong including equitable wealth distribution. Americans have however made the judiciary subservient to parliament, practice full presidential terms and protect them for war crimes and crimes against humanity (pending court case against Nixon for ordering the killing of Vietnamese civilians). The US state cannot protect poor from the rich, hold rich accountable (Swiss Banks and 50,000 US tax evaders), media from paying for information despite FoIA (New York Times), public from SOPA ‘nanny state surveillance’ and separate religion from State (political resistance against right to abortion).

Originally appeared pakistan observer.

Tags: Afghanistan, NATO, Pak US relations

Posted in Afghanistan, Around | 12 Comments »

By Tom Wright

Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani fired his defense secretary Wednesday just hours after the nation’s military warned that Mr. Gilani’s recent attacks on the army chief could have “grievous consequences.”
Mr. Gilani, in recent weeks, has taken an unusually strident tone against the army, which has ruled Pakistan for half its 65-year history and maintains a powerful role.

Last month, Mr. Gilani told a meeting he was worried about a potential conspiracy to unseat his government and warned the military to remember that it is governed by civilian institutions.

The increasing tensions risk destabilizing Pakistan and causing policy paralysis at a time when the U.S. is hoping for the country’s support as it attempts to deepen peace talks with the Taliban and wind down the war in Afghanistan.

Mr. Gilani has been angered by allegations which surfaced in the fall that his government asked for Washington’s help to forestall a coup in May after the covert U.S. raid that killed Osama bin Laden. That raid, on a Pakistan garrison town and without forewarning the Pakistanis, viagra embarrassed the military.

Pakistan’s Supreme Court is conducting an investigation into the allegations. The ruling Pakistan People’s Party denies involvement and says the probe is politically motivated. It has blamed the court for siding with the military in an attempt to destabilize the government. The army has backed the probe.

Mr. Gilani upped his attack on the army this week, giving an interview to China’s official People’s Daily Online, in which he claimed that army chief Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani and head of the Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate spy agency Ahmed Shuja Pasha had acted unconstitutionally in responding through written answers to the court’s questions.

The statement was engineered to embarrass Gen. Kayani, who was on a six-day visit to China, which ended Tuesday.

The army responded with a news release Wednesday which denied the army had submitted its responses directly to the Supreme Court, as charged by Mr. Gilani, but had instead gone through the Defense Ministry, as required by the constitution.

“This has very serious ramifications with potentially grievous consequences for the country,” the army said of Mr. Gilani’s assertions.

It did not elaborate what the consequences could be. The statement set off discussion in Pakistan’s media of a potential military takeover.

But the government showed few signs of stepping back from a fight. Immediately following the release, Mr. Gilani’s office announced the government was firing Naeem Khalid Lodhi, a retired army general who was the country’s top defense bureaucrat, for misconduct.

A Pakistani official said Mr. Gilani believed Mr. Lodhi had worked to help the military increase pressure on the civilian government. Mr. Gilani replaced Mr. Lodhi with Nargis Sethi, a career bureaucrat who is also currently cabinet secretary and viewed as close to the prime minister.

The heightened tensions come after Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari, who co-chairs the PPP, went to Dubai for emergency medical treatment in December after suffering a mini-stroke. That visit sparked rumors he was going into exile to flee the Supreme Court’s probe. That proved untrue, and Mr. Zardari returned to Pakistan in late December.

The PPP-led administration, which came to power in 2008, has balanced the military by giving it wide powers to run foreign policy and defense. This strategy, until now, has kept the government in power, but recent tensions show this arrangement is coming under stress.

Mr. Zardari also has faced a hostile Supreme Court, which has become a third center of aspirant executive power in the country after the civilian government and the military.

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court warned Mr. Gilani, the prime minister, that he could be removed from office if he refuses to take action against Mr. Zardari over corruption charges.

The court in 2009 ruled to throw out an amnesty on corruption investigations that had shielded Mr. Zardari from investigation. Mr. Zardari spent 11 years in a Pakistan jail for alleged corruption but was never formally convicted of a crime.

Mr. Zardari, the widower of Benazir Bhutto, the former Pakistan prime minister who was assassinated in 2007, says the charges dating to the 1990s were politically motivated.

The government has refused to open a corruption investigation, citing the president’s immunity from prosecution.

This originally appeared in the wall street journal.

Tags: Afghanistan, General Kiyani, Osama Bin Laden, Supreme Court of Pakistan, Taliban, washington, Yusuf Raza Gilani

Posted in News | 8 Comments »

By Ariel Zirulnick

A two-month lull in drone strikes in Pakistan ended yesterday with a strike in North Waziristan. The temporary halt was widely believed to be an attempt by the US to prevent an irreparable break in an already fragile relationship after a mistaken US attack killed two dozen Pakistani soldiers – although it’s unclear whether ties have sufficiently mended.

The strike is the first since the US mistakenly staged an airstrike against a Pakistani military position along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border in mid-November, causing yet another diplomatic crisis between the two countries. The US insists it believed the position was held by militants, who use the border region as a staging ground for attacks on NATO troops in Afghanistan.

Yesterday’s drone strike targeted a home in North Waziristan, killing at least four militants, Reuters reports.

Amid Pakistani fury after the mid-November strike, the US heeded a Pakistani call to vacate the air base in southwestern Pakistan that was used for staging drone strikes – although it denied that the two-month cessation of drone attacks was linked to the incident, Reuters reports. US officials told the agency that the break in strikes was merely due to a lack of intelligence on targets.

Drone surveillance missions have continued, launching from bases in Afghanistan, according to The New York Times.

However, The Associated Press reports that US officials said the lull was part of an effort “to tamp down tensions with Pakistan,” as does The New York Times in a report yesterday. Pakistan also closed down critical NATO supply routes to Afghanistan after the November strike, and the US is still working to get the routes reopened.

Relations don’t seem to have improved much since November, according to the AP – Pakistan rejected a US probe into the incident that attributed the attack to “a persistent lack of trust” and “a series of communications and coordination errors on both sides.”

According to the AP, it was the longest break in drone use in Pakistan since the campaign got underway in 2009.

Drones have been a critical part of the Obama administration’s counterterrorism operations in the region, particularly as the war winds down.

The New York Times reported yesterday that the lull has emboldened Al Qaeda and Pakistani militants, allowing them to regroup and increase attacks on both Pakistani security forces and NATO forces in Afghanistan.

Diplomats and intelligence analysts say the pause in C.I.A. missile strikes — the longest in Pakistan in more than three years — is offering for now greater freedom of movement to an insurgency that had been splintered by in-fighting and battered by American drone attacks in recent months. Several feuding factions said last week that they were patching up their differences, at least temporarily, to improve their image after a series of kidnappings and, by some accounts, to focus on fighting Americans in Afghanistan.

…

A logistics operative with the Haqqani terrorist group, which uses sanctuaries in Pakistan to carry out attacks on allied troops in Afghanistan, said militants could still hear drones flying surveillance missions, day and night. “There are still drones, but there is no fear anymore,” he said in a telephone interview. The logistics operative said fighters now felt safer to roam more freely.

Originally appeared in csmonitor.com

Tags: Afghanistan, NATO, North Waziristan, US Pakistan relations

Posted in News | 13 Comments »

By Greg Miller and Karen Deyoung

Adm. Mike Mullen’s assertion last week that an anti-American insurgent group in Afghanistan is a “veritable arm” of Pakistan’s spy service was overstated and contributed to overheated reactions in Pakistan and misperceptions in Washington, according to American officials involved in U.S. policy in the region.

The internal criticism by the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they did not want to challenge Mullen openly, reflects concern over the accuracy of Mullen’s characterizations at a time when Obama administration officials have been frustrated in their efforts to persuade Pakistan to break its ties to Afghan insurgent groups.

The administration has long sought to pressure Pakistan, but to do so in a nuanced way that does not sever the U.S. relationship with a country that American officials see as crucial to winning the war in Afghanistan and maintaining long-term stability in the region.

Mullen’s testimony to a Senate committee was widely interpreted as an accusation by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff that Pakistan’s military and espionage agencies sanction and direct bloody attacks against U.S. troops and targets in Afghanistan. Such interpretations prompted new levels of indignation among senior officials in both the United States and Pakistan.

Mullen’s language “overstates the case,” said a senior Pentagon official with access to classified intelligence files on Pakistan, because there is scant evidence of direction or control. If anything, the official said, the intelligence indicates that Pakistan treads a delicate if duplicitous line, providing support to insurgent groups including the Haqqani network but avoiding actions that would provoke a U.S. response.

“The Pakistani government has been dealing with Haqqani for a long time and still sees strategic value in guiding Haqqani and using them for their purposes,” the Pentagon official said. But “it’s not in their interest to inflame us in a way that an attack on a [U.S.] compound would do.”

U.S. officials stressed that there is broad agreement in the military and intelligence community that the Haqqani network has mounted some of the most audacious attacks of the Afghanistan war, including a 20-hour siege by gunmen this month on the U.S. Embassy compound in Kabul.

A senior aide to Mullen defended the chairman’s testimony, which was designed to prod the Pakistanis to sever ties to the Haqqani group if not contain it by force. “I don’t think the Pakistani reaction was unexpected,” said Capt. John Kirby. “The chairman stands by every word of his testimony.”

But Mullen’s pointed message and the difficulty in matching his words to the underlying intelligence underscore the suspicion and distrust that have plagued the United States and Pakistan since they were pushed together as counterterrorism partners after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

U.S. military officials said that Mullen’s testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee has been misinterpreted, and that his remark that the Haqqani network had carried out recent truck-bomb and embassy attacks “with ISI support” was meant to imply broad assistance, but not necessarily direction by Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence agency.

U.S. officials have long accused Pakistan of providing support to the Haqqani network and allowing it to operate along the Afghanistan border with relative impunity, a charge that Pakistani officials reject.

But Mullen seemed to take the allegation an additional step, saying that the Haqqani network “acts as a veritable arm of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence agency,” a phrase that implies ISI involvement and control.

That interpretation might be valid “if we were judging by Western standards,” said a senior U.S. military official who defended Mullen’s testimony. But the Pakistanis “use extremist groups — not only the Haqqanis — as proxies and hedges” to maintain influence in Afghanistan.

“This is not new,” the official said. “Can they control them like a military unit? We don’t think so. Do they encourage them? Yes. Do they provide some finance for them? Yes. Do they provide safe havens? Yes.”

That nuance escaped many in Congress and even some in the Obama administration, who voiced concern that the escalation in rhetoric had inflamed anti-American sentiment in Pakistan.

U.S. officials said that even evidence that has surfaced since Mullen’s testimony is open to differences in interpretation, including cellphones recovered from gunmen who were killed during the assault on the U.S. Embassy.

One official said the phones were used to make repeated calls to numbers associated with the Haqqani network, as well as presumed “ISI operatives.” But the official declined to explain the basis for that conclusion.

The senior Pentagon official treated the assertion with skepticism, saying the term “operatives” covers a wide range of supposed associates of the ISI. “Does it mean the same Haqqani numbers [also found in the phones] or is it actually uniformed officers?” of Pakistan’s spy service.

U.S. officials said Mullen was unaware of the cellphones until after he testified.

Pakistani officials acknowledge that they have ongoing contact with the Haqqani network, a group founded by Jalaluddin Haqqani, who was one of the CIA-backed mujaheddin commanders who helped drive the Soviet Union out of Afghanistan in the 1980s. Now in poor health, Haqqani has since yielded day-to-day control of the network to his son, Sirajuddin.

U.S. officials see indications that their Pakistani counterparts can exert influence on the Haqqani group in some cases, if not exert control.

Last year, at the United States’ behest, the ISI appealed to the Haqqani group not to attack polling stations during Afghan elections, a request that appears to have been honored. The senior Pentagon official declined to say how U.S. intelligence knows that the request was made, except to say, “We were aware of it.”

Mullen’s testimony was prepared at a time of intense frustration with Pakistan, in the aftermath of the embassy attack and other incidents. His remarks were striking in part because Mullen has long been sympathetic to Pakistan, traveling frequently to Islamabad and meeting more than two dozen times with its army chief, Gen. Ashfaq Kayani.

But with his term as Joint Chiefs chairman about to expire, Mullen has become increasingly frustrated with the failure to get Pakistan to cut ties with Haqqani, and instructed his staff to compose testimony for last week’s hearing that would convey a message of exasperation.

In Pakistan, a military official emerged from a meeting of corps commanders Sunday saying they would make no move against Haqqani in North Waziristan and warning that a unilateral U.S. action would have “disastrous consequences.”

The reaction in the Pakistani press to Mullen’s message has been more severe. A column this week by retired air vice marshal Shahzad Chaudry asked, “What could be the possible motives for America’s recent diatribes?” It concluded that the United States was intentionally sowing chaos in the region to weaken Pakistan.

In Washington, a senior Obama administration official said that “no one has any interest in walking back” what Mullen said, even while voicing concern over the comments’ impact on the fragile relationship with Pakistan.

“If the Pakistanis are finally scared about this, great,” the administration official said. “But we don’t want to walk [the relationship] over a cliff.”

This article originally appeared in the Washington Post.

Tags: Admiral Mike Mullen, Afghanistan, anti-american sentiment, Pak US relations, Pakistan, President Obama

Posted in News | 65 Comments »

By Mahir Ali

A few days before Barack Obama`s much-anticipated announcement about reversing the troop surge in Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai issued one of his sporadic declarations of relative independence from the forces that have sustained him in office for nine years.

“They are here for their own purposes, for their own goals, and they are using our soil for that,” he said in reference to the American and Nato military presence. Karzai also spoke of “chemical materials” in the western weaponry — presumably a reference to the use of uranium or other radioactive materials — which he said meant that “our people get killed, but also our environment is damaged.”

The first American response was a rebuke from retired general Karl Eikenberry, the outgoing US ambassador in Kabul (who, incidentally, advised Obama against a surge two years ago). “America has never sought to occupy any nation in the world,” he declared. “We are a good people.”

Quite a few nations that have borne the brunt of American imperialism would beg to differ. Yet his statement that “when we hear ourselves being called occupiers and worse … our pride is offended and we begin to lose our inspiration to carry on” is open to interpretation as a partial explanation for the withdrawals whereby American troop strength in Afghanistan will be reduced by 33,000 before the end of next year.

But that will still leave twice as many boots on the ground as there were at the start of Obama`s tenure. The US president`s explanation for his drawdown — in the face of opposition from the military hierarchy and administration hawks — did not pursue the Eikenberry line of thought. Nor did he make the mistake of declaring `mission accomplished`, despite the suggestion that the withdrawal was justified because its goals had been achieved.

There is plenty of evidence, however, that domestic political considerations are the primary driving force behind the slashing of resources expended on military adventures overseas. Nearly 10 years after the September 11 terrorist attacks, opinion polls suggest that a majority of Americans oppose the military presence in Afghanistan. And the urge to conclude American participation in this open-ended conflict is by no means restricted to Democrats: a substantial proportion of prospective Republican candidates for next year`s presidential contest appear to be keen on a more rapid withdrawal of forces.

None of them are willing to admit, of course, that the American response to 9/11 was essentially misdirected. At the time, a commando operation against Al Qaeda would have made considerably more sense than an all-out invasion of Afghanistan. The Taliban regime — officially recognised only by its sponsors in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the UAE — was indeed appalling in any number of ways, but it did not pose a threat to the US.

The sanctuary it afforded to Osama bin Laden and his cohorts was incidental. The 9/11 attacks were not contingent on a base in Afghanistan. The conspirators held consultations in Hamburg and trained in the US. The location of their mentors was only marginally relevant. It did not suffice as justification for all-out war. Yet hardly anyone in the US opposed that war when it was launched. The thirst for retribution is not hard to fathom; the nation described in the second half of the 20th century by one of its outstanding personalities, Martin Luther King Jr, as “the greatest purveyor of violence in the world” wasn`t accustomed to being attacked on its own soil. But the effort to quench that thirst was misdirected from the outset. It exhibited a bloodlust that more than matched that of its foes — who had, let`s not forget, been its allies until a few years before.

It is now being argued that the incipient pullout from Afghanistan is somehow related to the successful targeting of bin Laden and the degradation of Al Qaeda. Bin Laden was tracked down to a not-very-safe house in Pakistan, far away from the drone zone where American forces have long operated with impunity from unassailable heights. Al Qaeda`s remaining adherents in the region — believed to number in the dozens — as well as the Taliban leadership are believed to mostly be in Pakistan.

That makes it hard to explain why combat operations are being conducted in Afghanistan — amid, mind you, contacts that could lead to negotiations with the Taliban.

American security relations with Pakistan, meanwhile, have hit a new low in the wake of the bin Laden raid. It does not require particularly deep insight to fathom why the CIA decided against sharing its plans for that raid with Pakistani authorities. Although no substantial evidence has emerged of high-level Pakistani involvement in providing a sanctuary to bin Laden, the manner in which Harkat-ul-Mujahideen — a banned militant group with suspected links to military intelligence — and Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR) reacted almost simultaneously with vehement denials of American insinuations of contacts between Harkat and Al Qaeda is certainly intriguing.

ISPR has also been keen to reject American press reports about a brewing revolt within the Pakistani armed forces against the military hierarchy on account of its relations with the US. Doth it protest too much?

Perhaps. It has long been obvious, though, that the struggle against violent religious extremists in Pakistan is something of a lost cause unless it can be portrayed as a Pakistani war. The drone attacks regularly launched from the Shamsi air base in Balochistan have not been particularly helpful in this regard, especially when they entail civilian casualties. The idea that the Americans will maintain forces numbering 25,000 or so even after a `complete` withdrawal from Afghanistan a few years hence, in order to retain the capacity for military interventions in Pakistan, is not particularly reassuring.

The notion that Pakistan is host to terrorists with an international reach is hardly a fantasy. But the notion that US military adventures and expeditions abroad — be they in Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Yemen or Pakistan — are somehow going to diminish the likelihood of attacks on American soil remains a dangerous illusion.

This article originally appeared in Dawn.

Tags: 9/11 attacks, Afghanistan, Barack Obama, Hamid Karzai, Iraq, karl eikenberry, martin luther king, NATO, Pakistan, somalia, Taliban, us military, yemen

Posted in Afghanistan, Blog | 1,766 Comments »

With “optimism” and “an open mind,” the Indian and Pakistani foreign secretaries on Thursday began two-day talks here to bridge the trust deficit, which touched a new low after the 26/11 attack, by focusing on peace and security and confidence-building measures (CBMs) on Kashmir.

The talks between Indian Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao and her Pakistani counterpart Salman Bashir have been divided into three segments.

The two top diplomats held discussions on peace and security and CBMs across the Line of Control in Kashmir. The second and third round of talks on Jammu and Kashmir and promotion of friendly exchanges will take place here on Friday.

Both Rao and Bashir struck notes of cautious optimism as they first held restricted talks before they were joined by their delegations.

Welcoming the Indian side, Bashir stressed that they were approaching the talks with a “great sense of confidence, optimism and determination.” “We wish to engage with you in not only walking the trajectory but also exploring new avenues further,” he said.

Rao agreed, saying this was an “apt” statement.

Bashir added that this was an important point in the relationship and will also help the two sides prepare the agenda for the meeting of the two foreign ministers in the near future.

Rao, on her part, said that “we have a clear agenda in front of us for discussions” and noted that there have been good meetings in the past few months. “We are approaching these talks with an open and constructive mind,” she said.

The talks took place on a day US President Barack Obama announced an initial withdrawal of 10,000 US troops from Afghanistan, the violence-torn country that has emerged as an arena of rivalry between India and Pakistan.

During her three-day stay to Islamabad, Rao will call on Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani. She returns to India Saturday afternoon.

The two-day talks are expected to set the stage for the meeting of the foreign ministers in New Delhi.

Rao is expected to convey India’s disappointment with the slow progress in the trial in Pakistan of those suspected to be behind the Nov 26-29, 2008 Mumbai attacks that claimed the lives of 166 people, including some foreigners. Latest intelligence inputs suggest that the infrastructure of anti-India terrorist groups still operates on Pakistani soil.

The two sides are also expected to discuss nuclear CBMs, an issue that has gained greater salience in view of reports about the danger of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons falling into the hand of terrorists.

This is the first high-level engagement between the two estranged neighbours since Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh hosted his counterpart Yousuf Raza Gilani at the World Cup semi-final in Mohali March 30.

In February, the two countries decided to resume talks on all bilateral issues, reviving the dialogue process that was frozen in the wake of the Mumbai terror attack. Since then, the defence, interior and commerce secretaries have met in the last few months.

Rao touched down here in the morning and stressed that the talks aimed at an eventual normalisation of relations.

“I have come to Pakistan with an open mind and a constructive spirit in order to work towards building trust and confidence in our relationship, thereby leading to an eventual normalisation of relations for the well-being and prosperity of our peoples,” Rao said in her arrival statement.

She said her’s was an important visit as it marks the penultimate leg of the resumed dialogue process before the Pakistani foreign minister reaches India next month.

Rao said the discussions would include “peace and security, including confidence-building measures, Jammu and Kashmir and promotion of friendly exchanges”.

“I bring with me the best wishes of the people and the government of India for the people and government of Pakistan. We wish to see a stable, peaceful and prosperous Pakistan,” she said.

While India has called for patience while dealing with Pakistan, Gilani has said that “core issues”, including Kashmir, needed to be discussed.

At the same time, Gilani has underscored the need for increased trade as well as people-to-people contacts.

On Wednesday, he said that the future of Pakistan was closely linked with the resolution of the Kashmir dispute.

In New Delhi, the main opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), upped the ante on the Kashmir issue and warned the government against making any compromise on it. BJP leader LK Advani threatened to launch a mass demonstration if the government went in for a settlement of the Kashmir issue with Pakistan.

Tags: Afghanistan, Kashmir Issue, Mumbai Attacks, Nirupama Rao, Pak-India Relations, President Obama, Salman Bashir

Posted in India | 1,806 Comments »