What's new

Pakistan Rejected CIA Request for Drone Strike in January

VelocuR

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
6,188
Reaction score
5
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
The CIA asked Islamabad’s permission for a drone strike in North Waziristan but cancelled it when Pakistan declined.

322878-Drone-1326800448-971-640x480.jpg

The CIA asked Islamabad’s permission for a drone strike in North Waziristan but cancelled it when Pakistan declined.

US officials have admitted that after the November 24 border intrusion by Nato forces, a drone strike in the tribal areas was cancelled when Pakistan was asked but refused permission for it, American newspaper The Washington Post has reported.

After the border clash, the officials said, the Obama administration had decided to suspend its regular and hugely unpopular drone campaign inside Pakistan to avoid further unsettling relations. There was a 55-day hiatus.

Then, early this month, in a rare display of deference the Central Intelligence Agency informed the Pakistani government that it planned a drone strike against a terrorist target in the North Waziristan tribal region and asked Islamabad’s permission. When Pakistan declined, the strike was cancelled, officials said.


However, barely a week later when the US wanted to launch another drone strike in North Waziristan, officials said that Pakistan was notified in advance but permission was not sought. Another drone strike followed two days afterward.

Thanks, but no thanks: Pakistan tells Grossman

The paper also reports that Marc Grossman, the Obama administration’s top diplomat in charge of Afghanistan and Pakistan, had asked to visit Islamabad during his current trip to the region, but Pakistani officials responded that it was not convenient.

Grossman is due to visit regional capitals Ankara, Riyadh, Abu Dhabi, Doha and Kabul this week in what is being termed the US’ new push to engage the Taliban.

The move by Pakistani officials seems to imply that, in the aftermath of the November killings of Pakistani soldiers by Nato forces, the country is changing its attitude on US overtures towards the Taliban. But security officials and analysts who spoke to The Washington Post said that there were no significant changes in bilateral counterterrorism cooperation.

The “fundamentals” of mutual interest in destroying al Qaeda and safely managing Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal haven’t changed, said a senior Obama administration official, who, like several sources in this article, discussed sensitive diplomatic matters on condition of anonymity.

But, he said, the two countries are trying to find what he called “a new normal” — somewhere between the strategic alliance that US President Obama once proffered in exchange for Pakistan severing its ties with militants, and a more businesslike arrangement with few illusions.

“It’ll be much more realpolitik,” another US official said. “It’s getting away from the grandiose vision of what could be to focusing on what is.”

Pakistan seeks change


However, a senior Pakistani military official told the paper that the country wants some “significant changes” in the way Pakistan and the US do business. Speaking about past incidents of bilateral intelligence and military cooperation in pursuit of Pakistan-based al Qaeda and Taliban militants, he said, “We’ve had some glorious times.” But he spoke emotionally about the deaths of the 24 soldiers in November and said the incident would not soon be forgotten.

The same, he said, is true of what he called other “insults” in 2011, including the Raymond Davis killings, the May 2 Abbottabad raid and then US chairman of joint chiefs of staff Admiral Mike Mullen’s statement that the Haqqani group was a ‘veritable’ arm of Pakistan’s ISI.


Reviewing cooperation

A Pakistani parliamentary committee, with input from feuding military and civilian political factions, is conducting what Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani on Saturday called “a full review of the terms of cooperation” with America and the US-led international coalition in Afghanistan.

A senior Pakistani government official said the committee’s recommendations will probably include a demand for explicit US assurances that there will be no violation of sovereignty — no American boots on the ground, no more unilateral raids, no manned airstrikes. The official said there is likely to be some arrangement on drone attacks, with Pakistan calling for large reductions in their number and geographic scope, and demanding prior notification and approval of every strike.

Any explicit agreement on drones would be a major change from past practice.

Pakistan also wants more explicit compensation for US and Nato supplies transiting its ports and roads, perhaps in the form of taxes. And it wants more comprehensive information about CIA operations and personnel. “There are over 1,000 houses in Pakistan that have been hired by the US Embassy, and we don’t know who lives in them,” the Pakistani official said.

US peace talks with the Taliban are also a top issue for Pakistan.

:), good step indeed.



(Please fix title to remove star.)
 
.
However, barely a week later when the US wanted to launch another drone strike in North Waziristan, officials said that Pakistan was notified in advance but permission was not sought. Another drone strike followed two days afterward.
A very significant point ; This means that Pakistani military officials are in the know how of when the drones are going to be launched (and maybe the approximate area, not the exact lat-longs). This means that in spite of PA and PAF in the know-how, they do not act to bring the drones down, and lay the blame fair and square on the Government. The military and the Government is then deliberately lying to the people of their unawareness on drone strikes. Murkier times for the Government and the Military establishment ahead.
 
.
Pakistani forces will not act against the drones unless the Zardari regime is removed from power, because if they do the government will not support their action.
 
.
well in Pakistan the common man perception and perception of think tanks is that drones attack are done by the US with the green signal by GOP, as drones attack stops when govt wants them, this proves this fact.
the recent drone attack target hakimullah thus this exception makes sense.
lastly these US drones are not supposedly to be used against countries with any air power, if PAF wanted it could have intercepted thm but it doesnt want it as govt does allow PAF to do so.
 
.
hehehehe

what can one expect from this govt as well as the 8 anay generals

this is for the first time even Pakistani peoples are nt satisfied from army due to the generals
 
.
hehehehe

what can one expect from this govt as well as the 8 anay generals

this is for the first time even Pakistani peoples are nt satisfied from army due to the generals
well u cant blame generals in a democratic govt..had it been marshal law or musharraf era i would have agreed with u.

politicians know that no matter what they do marshal law wont come at this time.
 
.
well u cant blame generals in a democratic govt..had it been marshal law or musharraf era i would have agreed with u.

politicians know that no matter what they do marshal law wont come at this time.

I sort of used to think the same way, however the military takes an oath that they will defend the country and that's exactly what they should do......if they shoot down drones or intruding planes, can the civilian Government take any action against them?
 
.
. This means that in spite of PA and PAF in the know-how, they do not act to bring the drones down, and lay the blame fair and square on the Government. The military and the Government is then deliberately lying to the people of their unawareness on drone strikes. Murkier times for the Government and the Military establishment ahead.


Yaar this point is discussed to death already

both Military and Govt are aware and approve most of the drone strikes if not all. and the decesion to confront the Americans will be made by the Govt. not the military.

but there are definitely some that were done with intent to teach Pakistan a lesson like killing of dozens of people in an open air tribal gathering that happens regularly and has been happening for centuries during the time of British Raj.

US stopped where it thought it was crossing the line but went ahead where it was sure it can get away with it, and for the first time actually targeting the TTP leadership means that it wants to sell the good side of drone strikes to Pakistani decision makers.

Murky? Public perception? Accountability? All nice words but its war and war kills people and sadly the loss is more on the weaker side civilian or combatant is irrelevant to the killer. Specially when the enemy is not even defined and neither the ally. On one hand the ally is blamed for having haqqanis as veritable arm of ISI on the other hand ISI is requested to facilitate the secret dialog with the same veritable arm in the plush premises in UAE.

As a weaker partner Pakistan will do what it can and it has done already, stopping supplies and requesting Grossman not to grace us with his monologue.
 
.
Yaar this point is discussed to death already

both Military and Govt are aware and approve most of the drone strikes if not all. and the decesion to confront the Americans will be made by the Govt. not the military.

but there are definitely some that were done with intent to teach Pakistan a lesson like killing of dozens of people in an open air tribal gathering that happens regularly and has been happening for centuries during the time of British Raj.

US stopped where it thought it was crossing the line but went ahead where it was sure it can get away with it, and for the first time actually targeting the TTP leadership means that it wants to sell the good side of drone strikes to Pakistani decision makers.

Murky? Public perception? Accountability? All nice words but its war and war kills people and sadly the loss is more on the weaker side civilian or combatant is irrelevant to the killer. Specially when the enemy is not even defined and neither the ally. On one hand the ally is blamed for having haqqanis as veritable arm of ISI on the other hand ISI is requested to facilitate the secret dialog with the same veritable arm in the plush premises in UAE.

As a weaker partner Pakistan will do what it can and it has done already, stopping supplies and requesting Grossman not to grace us with his monologue.
I am going to address two concerns here. I know that the people of Pakistan know that drone strikes are conducted with the consent of the PA and GoP. And many a time the strike coords are not known. So it is with the dubious know-how and risk assessment of whether the HVT is the intended person to 'offed' is the key. Let me be more precise. The PA had no way of knowing that Hakimullah Mehsud was the intended target. Which means that you have a 50-50 chance of getting him once u get an inclination of him being in the vicinity by the drones. But what is really appalling to me is Imran Khan and the likes believe that they can reach a political settlement with these Mehsuds and do way with the strikes altogether, when both you and I know that the ground situation is altogether different, which means that these criminals will never settle for anything less than 'sharia' in Pakistan. Hence these strikes are a necessary evil for Pakistan. Who is going to put that point across to him (though i know he's playing cheap vote-bank politics here) ?

Secondly, collateral damage happens everywhere ; It happened in Swat when the Army moved in SW on a wide scale. But collateral damage does not mean INTENT. Now you can argue that there are trigger-happy guys out there in Creech or in Nellis, but doesn't it mean that trigger happy guys exist in PA too ?

This has to be put into perspective to the people in Pakistan, that the militant threat to the State is very real and hence drones are a necessary evil, and collateral damage does occur, because our inaction to act against these militants justifies their action and the consequences of their action.
 
.
Pakistani forces will not act against the drones unless the Zardari regime is removed from power, because if they do the government will not support their action.

And even if they want to do without the approval of government, they cannot do. The top heads of the army get part of their payrol from U$A in U$D in the same way as the politicians (whether in power or not) get also.

This is what is called hand in hand co-operation.
 
.
Secondly, collateral damage happens everywhere ; It happened in Swat when the Army moved in SW on a wide scale. But collateral damage does not mean INTENT. Now you can argue that there are trigger-happy guys out there in Creech or in Nellis, but doesn't it mean that trigger happy guys exist in PA too ?

big contrast here.

the collateral from PA strikes was when the place of impact was never the intteded target. whereas drones stikes have been done on purpose and intent on the tribal gatherings and funerals.

in Pakistan due to free media they get all the publicity but in Afghanistan you hardly hear what happens outside the cities.
the Afghans in the South where the US troops were deployed had to stop their funerals when Americans repeatedly attacked on the funerals of the locals and they only got the chance to raie it up with Gen Mc crystal who made a visit to different areas and said that he was thee to only listen to the locals not to give them sermons thats when they brought these inhumane and shocking actions by the American forces..


when the CIA contract killer Raymond was flown out of Pakistan, CIA attacked a tribal gathering which was being attended by the locals and was protected by the volunteer tribal militia and levies against the taliban. the attack was done on purpose and full intent with a lame excuse that it was Taliban leadership meeting. Whereas it was the local elders who were resolving their land disputes.
 
.
In a call to her Pakistani counterpart this month, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton reiterated the Obama administration’s counterterrorism “red line”: The United States reserved the right to attack anyone who it determined posed a direct threat to U.S. national security, anywhere in the world.

Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar responded in kind, telling Clinton that Pakistan’s red line was the violation of its sovereignty. Any unauthorized flight into its airspace, Khar bluntly told Clinton, risked being shot down.

An American drone strike killed 4 militants in Pakistan, the first such attack since errant U.S air strikes in November killed 2 dozen Pakistan troops and pushed strained ties between the countries close to collapse, Pakistani officials said. (Jan. 11)
Graphic

The conversation, recounted by U.S. officials, was one of the few high-level exchanges between the two governments in recent months, and it illustrated the depths to which U.S.-Pakistan relations have fallen after an inadvertent November border clash in which a U.S. air assault killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.


As U.S.-Pakistani relations sink, nations try to figure out ‘a new normal’ - The Washington Post

======================

The interesting part here is that the account of the conversation is being attributed to US officials - did I miss this in the Pakistani media? I would imagine the GoP would have been plastering this all over the Pakistani media to try and negate the image of the PPP being a US lackey.
 
.
Bad dog....bad dog! The U.S. would be telling our government...

Just a small sting towards its master, just to please the public in Pakistan.
As Agnostic Muslim rightly pointed out, they're trying to patch up their messed up image of being a US lackey, but i'm afraid that image will never dissapear, not untill huge political tsunami hits our country and removes the current puppets.

The bigger shame is that our people do not see through this and demand justice, who would tolerate such a messed up government with quite some scandals behind its name already? Not to mention the dire state our economy and important institutions are in.

I guess the people are more concerned with loadshedding and feeding themselves, which is also understandable.

Hmm....perhaps the PPP-led government is playing a smart game! Derive the people of Pakistan from basic needs, or give them very little so that they do not think of hitting the streets to protest!
Keep the people busy with their own lives....so that the governments incompetence is unnoticed..:sick:

Sigh....whatever it is, it's unacceptable, when will this sleeping giant of 180 million people wake up and see that a handful of idiots is ruining it for all of them.
 
.
Bad dog....bad dog! The U.S. would be telling our government...

Just a small sting towards its master, just to please the public in Pakistan.
As Agnostic Muslim rightly pointed out, they're trying to patch up their messed up image of being a US lackey, but i'm afraid that image will never dissapear, not untill huge political tsunami hits our country and removes the current puppets.

The bigger shame is that our people do not see through this and demand justice, who would tolerate such a messed up government with quite some scandals behind its name already? Not to mention the dire state our economy and important institutions are in.

I guess the people are more concerned with loadshedding and feeding themselves, which is also understandable.

Hmm....perhaps the PPP-led government is playing a smart game! Derive the people of Pakistan from basic needs, or give them very little so that they do not think of hitting the streets to protest!

Sigh....whatever it is, it's unacceptable, when will this sleeping giant of 180 million people wake up and see that a handful of idiots is ruining it for all of them.
Khar is not a 'PPP Jiyala', and therefore not your typical PPP politician. She was groomed under Musharraf after all.

Could it be that with the PPP leadership (the pair of incompetent clowns called Zardari and Gillani) has been too busy trying to become political martyrs (or paint themselves as such) and therefore not really been able to influence foreign policy direction, and Khar was therefore able to convey an unfiltered message.

The fact that the PPP leadership has not (AFAIK) spread word of this particular exchange might suggest that Zardari+Gillani did not support Khar's comments, and are trying to minimize the impact by ignoring them.
 
. .

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom