What's new

Karzai admits to sheltering Baloch Terrorists

@AM

And more he knows where they are. He just can't turn them over. Because they are too nobel and not terrorist. Even though killing after so many Security forces and civilians. Kidnapping UN official. They are nobel.

Khair Baksh Marri's son Balaach Marri, the leader of the group Baluch Liberation Army, was reportedly killed by Pakistani Security Forces at an undisclosed location.

Reports of his death came from the BLA, not from security forces, and they refused to say where he was killed. That to me indicates that he was likely killed in an SOF raid inside Afghanistan (since Afghanistan clearly has been sheltering these people), which the PA or GoP could not claim, and which is why his death was not announced by the GoP, but by his group.
 
Bharati support for terrorism in Balochistan is old story. What is more important is their support for TTP, which creates much more terror.

The wikileaks does not say anything about Indian involvement. The story is circulated only in Pakistan. There is no second country on earth takes this.

read it again, on wikileaks,

13. (S/NF) Boucher asked Karzai if he could assure Pakistan that the Bugtis were not supporting armed struggle and that India was not involved. Karzai said "yes", though he doubted Pakistan would accpet his assurances. Pakistan would continue to think India is involved. There is a lot of misinformation out there, Karzai commented. He said he knew Bugti, who was highly respected in the U.S. Karzai explained that Bugti had once tried to call Karzai but he had refused for the sake of good relations with Pakistan. Now he cannot forgive himself for refusing. Karzai assessed that Pakistan had troubles with many other tribes too, as a result of its trying to divide and conquer and turn the tribes against each other. Pakistan needed to address the bigger picture, Karzai urged. (Note: Halfway through the discussion of Bugti, Karzai signaled that the issue was too sensitive and asked that notetaking be suspended. End Note)
 
BBC and CNN. U are not so stupid to belive in what CNN and BBC tells u like they have alawys done in recent years?

Its on wikileaks just go and read ur self. I saw on ARY NEWS and who dont make up these stories. I will record next time.

Ask ur prime minister who admited too in Egypt.

I was waiting for that answer so noting new from Indians.
1.Read the article in post 2 and tell me where it says india is involved?
2.Regarding the proofs given at egypt-A lot of pakistanis were claiming that dossier containing proofs were given to india..Until your own fm admitted that no such proofs were given.
No dossier on Balochistan handed to India: Qureshi | Pakistan | News | Newspaper | Daily | English | Online
Manmohan Singh stated that he is ready for any talk regarding balochistan because india have nothing to hide,that is not admitting india's role in terror but asserting that our hands are clean.
 
there is no name for India any where..... pakistan should stop draging India where ever there is anti-pakistan activities.... we have lots of work to do other than pakistan
 
there is no name for India any where..... pakistan should stop draging India where ever there is anti-pakistan activities.... we have lots of work to do other than pakistan

The name of India is in fact in the cables, in the context of the US asking Karzai to assure Pakistan that India is not involved.

The fact that Karzai asks for no note-taking for the remainder of the meeting is very interesting. What could have possibly been so sensitive to discuss with respect to Pakistani accusations regarding Baluch terrorists being given sanctuary in Afghanistan, and alleged Indian support for them, that Karzai chose to go completely off the record?

As if the existing 'on the record' revelations about Afghanistan sheltering Bugti and other insurgents/terrorists was not explosive enough.
 
The name of India is in fact in the cables, in the context of the US asking Karzai to assure Pakistan that India is not involved.

The fact that Karzai asks for no note-taking for the remainder of the meeting is very interesting. What could have possibly been so sensitive to discuss with respect to Pakistani accusations regarding Baluch terrorists being given sanctuary in Afghanistan, and alleged Indian support for them, that Karzai chose to go completely off the record?

As if the existing 'on the record' revelations about Afghanistan sheltering Bugti and other insurgents/terrorists was not explosive enough.

Not really!.. do you mean to say that the guys who met karzai did not submit a report back to the US centre.
if there is india's involvement, it would have come up as a confidential statement and wud hav been recorded....
 
Not really!.. do you mean to say that the guys who met karzai did not submit a report back to the US centre.
if there is india's involvement, it would have come up as a confidential statement and wud hav been recorded....

Depends on whether any communication regarding India's role in supporting terrorists in Pakistan was classified as 'Top Secret' and therefore would not be included in this batch of leaked documents. Further, since the remainder of the meeting with Karzai was 'off the record', it would obviously not be included in this set of cables.
 
is it ok to start treads without source? I mean the tread title says that India is involved in balochistan, but no links to any sources confirming it, shouldnt the admins then delete this tread?
 
Depends on whether any communication regarding India's role in supporting terrorists in Pakistan was classified as 'Top Secret' and therefore would not be included in this batch of leaked documents. Further, since the remainder of the meeting with Karzai was 'off the record', it would obviously not be included in this set of cables.

great.. so why we need to have a headline stating that india is involved in baluchistan based on a speculation that there exists a document...
so till those speculative documents, let's not speculate...

lol.. coz there is too much of speculation in the air. and in my note...
:cheers:
 
Afghanistan's president, Hamid Karzai, has been sheltering a Pakistani rebel for several years, much to the annoyance of Pakistan's generals, US embassy cables show.

Brahamdagh Bugti, a leader of the nationalist insurgency in Balochistan province, emerges as a pawn in often stormy relations between Kabul and Islamabad that are spiced with intrigue and failed American efforts to broker a solution.

A stream of Pakistani demands for Bugti's return are stonewalled by Karzai; Bugti is accused of kidnapping a senior UN official; and the Islamabad CIA station chief is roped into an initiative to move Bugti to Ireland that turns out to be based on a false promise.

Bugti's case was a "neuralgic" one for Pakistani generals, Americans believed. The Bugtis are at the forefront of a rebellion that seeks greater economic and political autonomy for Balochistan, Pakistan's largest but least developed province.

The 20-something rebel fled Pakistan in 2006 after surviving a military assault that killed his grandfather, Nawab Akbar Khan Bugti. Since then Pakistani generals have frequently accused Kabul of secretly sheltering the young rebel.

In 2007, General Pervez Musharraf said Bugti was "enjoying freedom of movement to commute between Kabul and Kandahar, raising money and planning operations against Pakistani security forces".

When the US assistant secretary of state, Richard Boucher, said Karzai had promised that nobody would be allowed to use Afghan territory to attack Pakistan, Musharraf replied: "That's bullshit."

The controversy touches on one of the Pakistani military's core fears: that India could use Afghan-based proxy forces to foment upheaval in Pakistan.

In 2007 Musharraf said he had "ample proof" of Indian and Afghan support for Bugti; the prime minister, Shaukat Aziz, said Bugti had travelled to Delhi on a fake Afghan passport. Note the indian connection , Bugti would not get travel documents wihtout Karzai's knowledge and also india's knoweldge to where he was heading

American analysis suggests the fear of Indian meddling helps explain Pakistan's support for militant proxies such as the Afghan Taliban; a view supported by a veiled threat Musharraf issued through a US diplomat. "If India wants to continue, let's see what our options will be," he reportedly said.

Karzai, meanwhile, has refused to bend to Pakistani demands to surrender Bugti, accusing Islamabad of using the issue to deflect attention from its support of the Taliban. "Fomenting uprising does not make one a terrorist," he said in one meeting before asking US officials to stop taking notes because the matter was "too sensitive".

In public, Afghan officials have consistently denied sheltering Bugti, but in a meeting with a senior UN official in February 2009, Karzai "finally admitted that Brahamdagh Bugti was in Kabul", the cables recorded.

The admission followed the kidnapping of a senior American UN official, John Solecki, in Balochistan. After Solecki was snatched from Quetta, Balochistan's capital, in early February, Pakistan's army chief, General Ashfaq Kayani, told the US he had phone intercepts that proved Bugti had orchestrated the kidnapping.

If we can reliably intercept Bugti's calls on kidnapping of the American then we surely must have other intercepts also regarding bugti getting support from india

On 15 February, the US asked the UN secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, to call Karzai , urging him to speak with Bugti and have Solecki released. Karzai agreed, but said he doubted Bugti was involved. US officials later complained that Karzai was blocking American contact with the rebel.

Solecki was released on 4 April in Balochistan. Speaking to the Guardian by phone later that year, Bugti denied any role in the kidnapping, but admitted he was leading the fight against Pakistan's army.

"We want ownership of our own resources, our land, our coastal belt – nothing else," he said. "We want to solve this problem politically; nobody wants to use the gun. But because of what is happening the armed struggle is necessary." Bugti declined to say where he was speaking from.

Bugti supporters say he is under tight Pakistani surveillance in Kabul and so, fearing for his life, they tried to move him to safer exile last December, the cables showed.

In Islamabad, one of Bugti's uncles told US and UN officials that the "deputy prime minister" of Ireland had unofficially agreed to grant Bugti asylum. This information triggered a meeting between a senior UN official and the US ambassador.

Subsequently the CIA station chief met with the head of Pakistan's intelligence service (ISI), General Shuja Pasha, to discuss the matter. But Pasha blocked the initiative, saying Bugti should be forced to "return to Pakistan to stand trial for his crimes", and the US and UN dropped the idea.

"While getting Bugti out of Afghanistan is still a good idea, we do not believe UNHCR should be involved," the cable noted, referring to the UN refugee agency.

However, the entire scheme may have been based on nothing. The uncle told the Guardian he had never claimed to have secured asylum for his nephew in Ireland. "This is news to me," he said. "I have no knowledge or information about this."

The substantial, if publicly underplayed, US strategic interest in Balochistan is reflected in the number of cables on the province. Balochistan contains vast and largely untapped mineral resources, Taliban training camps, and is a major route for US military supplies being trucked into Afghanistan, second only to the Khyber Pass. Balochistan is also home to a secretive desert airstrip used by the CIA to launch drone attacks on al-Qaida and Taliban targets in the tribal belt.

By removing Bugti from Afghanistan US officials believe they could remove an "irritant" in Pakistan-Afghanistan relations. They also fear he could be traded against other militants of greater interest.

Last February, after the arrest of the senior Taliban leader Mullah Barader in Karachi, US diplomats said to "watch out for consideration of some type of exchange of Barader with Bugti".

But Barader remains in Pakistani custody and Bugti may no longer be in Afghanistan. A senior western official in Islamabad said the rebel had applied for asylum in France, which was refused, and in Norway, where the application was pending. A senior UN official said Bugti was sheltering in the United Arab Emirates; a human rights official said he sometimes travels to Geneva. Also, the diplomats said, Pakistan's military chiefs – Kayani and Pasha – would be reluctant to lose a "huge potential propaganda pawn in Barader".

The cable said that while Bugti may be a core issue at some political level, the "truths Barader could tell about ISI not to mention a host of other Pakistani notables, likely outweigh any potential wins in bringing Bugti to Pakistani justice".

The allegations appear to be accurate. In a January 2007 meeting with assistant secretary of state Richard Boucher, Karzai said that more than 200 Bugtis had fled Pakistan into Afghanistan. He had advised them to seek asylum with the UN but many were frightened and had gone into hiding.


WikiLeaks cables reveal Afghan-Pakistani row over fugitive rebel | World news | The Guardian
 
In courts of law , 'precedent' is of huge value , and given that india has in the past used terrorists against Pakistan there is enough evidence in the public domain that proves wihtout any doubt that india is supporting terrorism in Balochistan and other parts of Pakistan
 
The fact that Karzai asks for no note-taking for the remainder of the meeting is very interesting. What could have possibly been so sensitive to discuss with respect to Pakistani accusations regarding Baluch terrorists being given sanctuary in Afghanistan, and alleged Indian support for them, that Karzai chose to go completely off the record?

Can you plzzzz give us the constitutional reference which says Pakistan has to meddle in the affairs of others, especially when it comes to Islam.

Becoz if you couldn't, you are history, as we don't need sarcastic people like you.

So waiting for your proof or pack your bags.

I sense double standards on speculation
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom