Taliban Military Chief Mullah Baradar captured by Pakistan

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

The 'official' version was that it was Egyptian forces who effectively took control of Kuwait City. The US never disputed the 'official' version.

Pakistan is not Egypt.

The 'official version' also had it that Saddam Hussein had WMD's - have you guys gotten around to 'disputing' that yet?

 

[seekers]

These men have never been "partners" of the USA. At most Omar and OBL were "partners" of Pakistan and Saddam a "partner" of the PLO. OBL and Saddam were enemies of our enemy, nothing more. Omar was nothing.

US was main financier in taliban war with New born Afghanistan Gov.
Pakistan agencies had provide this logistic and strategic support to mullah omer
OBL was also a US allies in Afghanistan-Russia war.

saddam is the one of the most important agent who fight 8 year with Iran with all logistic support of US,Kuwait and KSA.
He had used biological weapons against Iran provided by US.

 

[S-2]

"I do believe we have made more of these high profile arrests than most other nations"

You've more high profile targets on your lands to arrest than most countries.

"...so your skepticism just highlights my point about the inability of the West to move beyond that exaggerated sense of self-importance."

Nothing exaggerated about our importance to Pakistan othewise we wouldn't hear and read the incessant whining about being again abandoned.

"The rational explanation at this point is quite clearly that if the CIA had any role, it was likely limited to providing intelligence."

"intelligence"? You mean the foundation for such an arrest. Quite probable. It wouldn't be the first time we've provided Pakistan with such. Were we to also provide the muscle?

As to our involvement in other areas, I can't imagine how you're in a position to know limitations WRT to our contributions. In fact I'm certain you don't know such.

"We had no self-delusion"

Then you've been willfully deceitful.

As to failures in Afghanistan, there are none. The taliban aren't in power. That's been a victory for a very long time. Our military losses have been far less than your's over a greater period in a land that's very far from ours and alien to ourselves. Your excuse, sir? Progress would be faster if Pakistan didn't harbor an enemy of the U.N.'s effort but that also explains your own travails.

Hopefully that might change but there's no place to hide with respect to the issue of sanctuary. You've provided such at great costs to yourselves and little gain. That's quite likely the conclusion reached by Kiyani. We knew so. Only your own citizens swallowed the cheese fed by your government on that score. Nobody else.

"When you can provide concrete and credible evidence that the GoP/PA/ISI aided and abetted these Taliban leaders, let me know."

No longer necessary here at def.pk. Pakistan has provided such yourselves with Kiyani's turn-of-face.

All after-the-fact now. The afghan taliban have made quite the cozy locale out of your country. Funny you could care less about them tramping about your lands. Must mean they've been your allies, eh?

"...the US has this really bad reputation when it comes to accurate intelligence..."

Worked to bust Baradar otherwise the NYT wouldn't have had a clue. H. Mehsud certainly. B. Mehsud quite likely.

"BTW, that BBC article mentions that Baradar perhaps traveled to Kabul for meetings"

"perhaps" is a good place to start.

"Kabul is in Afghanistan, no?"

Your geography is adequate.

"Territory under US control?"

Last I checked Kabul is the capitol of a sovereign Afghanistan recognized by Pakistan. Your understanding of sovereignty is poor. Not surprising. Meeting with Baradar, however (if even true) would be an AFGHAN choice which might be upsetting to the ISI's craw.

Thanks.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

You've more high profile targets on your lands to arrest than most countries.

Irrelevant to the point made that Pakistan needed no US 'hand holding' to execute said arrests.

Nothing exaggerated about our importance to Pakistan othewise we wouldn't hear and read the incessant whining about being again abandoned.

Oh but there is plenty of exaggerated self-importance in the constant drone of 'jointness' and 'assisting Pakistan', with some even going so far as to suggest that the whole thing, from intel to capture, was done by the 'Mighty American CIA', and Pakistan allowed to feed off the scraps and claim the 'jointness credit' - Your pal Gambit was a recent example of this particular school of thought in his last post.

Spare us the hubris please.

"intelligence"? You mean the foundation for such an arrest. Quite probable. It wouldn't be the first time we've provided Pakistan with such. Were we to also provide the muscle?

As to our involvement in other areas, I can't imagine how you're in a position to know limitations WRT to our contributions. In fact I'm certain you don't know such.

IF you provided any intelligence at all that is, that 'if' should have been obvious enough in my last post. As it is, IF your intelligence was good enough to affect this arrest, you would have gotten these various leaders when they traveled back and forth from Afghanistan, so I don't really see any credible reason to believe the US provided even the intelligence.

Then you've been willfully deceitful.

No more than the US in allowing the Taliban leadership to travel back and forth between Afghanistan and Pakistan, an no more than ISAF has been in allowing Taliban sanctuaries to operate in places like Marja in territory ostensibly under its control.

As to failures in Afghanistan, there are none. The taliban aren't in power. That's been a victory for a very long time. Our military losses have been far less than your's over a greater period in a land that's very far from ours and alien to ourselves. Your excuse, sir? Progress would be faster if Pakistan didn't harbor an enemy of the U.N.'s effort but that also explains your own travails.

You have no failures in Afghanistan? Wonderful, then you have no room to complain then. So I'll consider your accusations of 'willful deceit and self-delusion' as irrelevant and uninformed.

We harbor an enemy of the UN no more than Afghanistan under the control of the US does, so when you have complete control over the enemy in Afghanistan, then you can lecture Pakistan over why it does not have complete control over actors on its territory that concern you.

Hopefully that might change but there's no place to hide with respect to the issue of sanctuary. You've provided such at great costs to yourselves and little gain. That's quite likely the conclusion reached by Kiyani. We knew so. Only your own citizens swallowed the cheese fed by your government on that score. Nobody else.

The greatest sanctuary for the Taliban exists in territory under US control - conducting the largest military operation since the invasion, nine years after the invasion, on territory supposedly under your control all that time says a lot about how the argument of a the Taliban insurgency being directed from Pakistan is nothing but poppycock and lies designed to hide US failures and deflect blame onto others for them.

And Marja is unlikely to be the last operation in Afghanistan either - so much for 'no failure' and 'an insurgency directed from Pakistani soil'. I think advice for ceasing the ingestion of curdled milk fed by government is better directed at Americans - the traditional Pakistani diet doesn't have much use for cheese.

No longer necessary here at def.pk. Pakistan has provided such yourselves with Kiyani's turn-of-face.

What turn of face? Hasn't ISAF arrested and killed several Taliban commanders and shadow governors? Does that imply a 'turn of face' on the part of ISAF after years of 'willful duplicity' and abetting those Taliban leaders?

It is the height of dishonesty to argue that because Pakistan made a high profile arrest, that the arrest somehow validates the unsubstantiated rumor mongering that Pakistan was supporting those it just arrested!

We repeatedly said that these people were not in Pakistan, and that if they were in Pakistan and we had intelligence about their whereabouts we would arrest them.

Well guess what - they decided to travel in Pakistan and we had enough information to arrest them. The arrest itself does not validate your unsubstantiated claims of 'aiding and abetting'. Under your rather strange logic any nation that was unable to catch a wanted criminal for any length of time would have to be accused of 'aiding and abetting' said criminal, even if it eventually managed to capture said criminal.

Worked to bust Baradar otherwise the NYT wouldn't have had a clue. H. Mehsud certainly. B. Mehsud quite likely.

Whether the US had any role in the bust remains to be seen - it now appears that Baradar was arrested earlier than the NYT thought, and once Pakistan had him and informed the US, the news would have filtered out through US officials to the media. Just because US officials delivered the news to the US media does not automatically mean the US had a role in the arrest.

"perhaps" is a good place to start.

Your geography is adequate.

Last I checked Kabul is the capitol of a sovereign Afghanistan recognized by Pakistan. Your understanding of sovereignty is poor. Not surprising. Meeting with Baradar, however (if even true) would be an AFGHAN choice which might be upsetting to the ISI's craw.

'Perhaps' and 'improbable' would also be a good place to start with outlandish claims of the CIA holding the ISI's finger to execute the arrest of Taliban leaders, especially given that Pakistan has been able to arrest more Taliban/AQ leaders than any other nation.

By the point about Baradar's visit to Afghanistan (perhaps) is to illustrate that he was apparently quite able to travel in territory under US control and engage in meetings with the Afghans. So was the US engaging in 'willfully duplicity', or is it actually possible that these leaders are able to stay underground and evade detection, in both Afghanistan and Pakistan?

 

[S-2]

"Irrelevant to the point made that Pakistan needed no US 'hand holding' to execute said arrests."

You're welcome to prove where I said you did. I'd be disappointed if so.

"Oh but there is plenty of exaggerated self-importance in the constant drone of 'jointness' and 'assisting Pakistan'"

Your perception. I've no doubt that we were involved in this arrest. You've decided to make this some cause celebre'. Not unlike the writer who suggested the resistance we face in Afghanistan is desultory and terrain easier. Evidently he'd not been to Nuristan or Konar in his life. I haven't either but that separates a professional from a crowing amateur. My eye is trained to evaluate terrain and it's very rugged indeed.

"Spare us the hubris please."

The only arrogance I see is yours...to be spared if you don't mind. You seem to believe that you single-handedly developed the intel on this and conducted the operation. Maybe. Maybe not. I don't think so but I know who broke the story and what they said. The NYT called it a joint operation and only you seem to insist otherwise.

"you would have gotten these various leaders when they traveled back and forth from Afghanistan"

If your intelligence was good enough to produce this arrest, you'd have busted the likes of Mehsud without others providing the kill. You know better than present childish strawmen I'd hope. Then again...

"No more than the US in allowing the Taliban leadership to travel back and forth between Afghanistan and Pakistan"

Not our borders to control. I made that clear to any not obstinately blind...that is even assuming that they've done so.

"So I'll consider your accusations of 'willful deceit and self-delusion' as irrelevant and uninformed."

Fully relevant to progess and, equally, fully informed. I made that clear also, you fork-tongued devil. There's a world of difference between failure and final victory-whatever that constitutes. You accused "failures". Not I. I'm far more circumspect and recognize the travails of raising forth a nation from the mess you sponsored.

"We harbor an enemy of the UN no more than Afghanistan..."

Afghanistan is at WAR with that enemy and the afghan taliban are viewed by too many in your national security and intelligence apparatus as a strategic asset. So too most of your country.

"...so when you have complete control over the enemy in Afghanistan, then you can lecture Pakistan over why it does not have complete control over actors on its territory that concern you."

Circular logic by one who willfully dissembles the value of sanctuary. That's why the taliban are called "PROXIES" and why sanctuary is so valuable to "PROXIES" and their masters.

"The greatest sanctuary for the Taliban exists in territory under US control..."

If it was under AFGHAN control then it would not be sanctuary. There is a war fought in Afghanistan and nobody makes distinction between taliban there. Nobody in the world accepts this spew you've raised forth and haven't for years.

Pakistan repeatedly signed treaties with the TTP. Afghanistan has not yet done so. If they do so, it'll have the hand of the whole world upon it as guarantors. Maybe even including Pakistan. God knows you've experience with such.

"And Marja is unlikely to be the last operation in Afghanistan either - so much for 'no failure' and 'an insurgency directed from Pakistani soil'".

It's neither a failure that Marjah may be the first of many such operations any more than the P.A. conducting operations from Bajaur through SWAT/Buner to S. Waziristan and now possibly Orakzai.

"directed", though, is salient. The rest of the world has no evidence that the TTP insurgency is anything but homegrown. Not so with the Afghan insurgency. Their leadership reside on your lands. Word has it that Marjah has gone so well that Abdullah Gulam Rasoul, the afghan field commander in the area, has now displaced permanently into Pakistan.

Perhaps you can arrest him too...with your intelligence and your muscle.

"What turn of face? Hasn't ISAF arrested and killed several Taliban commanders and shadow governors? Does that imply a 'turn of face' on the part of ISAF after years of 'willful duplicity' and abetting those Taliban leaders?"

Only if you can show me quotes from our political and military leaders, unattributed even, that define them as "strategic assets".

"It is the height of dishonesty to argue that because Pakistan made a high profile arrest, that the arrest somehow validates the unsubstantiated rumor mongering that Pakistan was supporting those it just arrested!"

Not at all. We don't know the nature or circumstances behind that arrest. It is unclear yet exactly why.

As to "unsubstantiated rumor mongering" don't act like you sit in briefings and know what intelligence is passed between the American and Pakistani governments validating our concerns. Denials here by you don't mean sh!t when Baradar is busted in Karachi and Haqqani sits on his azz in Miram Shah. That's plenty of proof in my book, especially when it's been asserted exactly as such by myself from beaucoup linked sources far better connected than you...in Michigan.

"Well guess what - they decided to travel in Pakistan and we had enough information to arrest them."

Correct. From where in Pakistan is irrelevant.

"Under your rather strange logic any nation that was unable to catch a wanted criminal for any length of time would have to be accused of 'aiding and abetting' said criminal, even if it eventually managed to capture said criminal."

The world's "...rather strange logic...". After eight years and many more than simply those arrested in the last few weeks. More conspiracies and paranoia.

"...managed..." is a different matter. We've no indication that you've an eight year on-going manhunt for these men. We've every indication, for instance, that you've ceded Miram Shah to the Haqqani network as a base for a "valued strategic asset".

Enjoy this article at your leisure-

U.S. Pressed Pakistan For Taliban Chief's Arrest-WSJ Feb. 17, 2010

"it now appears that Baradar was arrested earlier than the NYT thought, and once Pakistan had him and informed the US, the news would have filtered out through US officials to the media."

Possibly on every account. So? That doesn't suggest American intelligence or operational planning assistance didn't play a role.

"By the point about Baradar's visit to Afghanistan (perhaps) is to illustrate that he was apparently quite able to travel in territory under US control and engage in meetings with the Afghans."

I sense a drumbeat of "U.S. control" that's becoming as irritating as if I were to suggest the same about U.S. control of Pakistan. Afghanistan has a sovereign government recognized by your own. Deal with that and you'll begin to improve matters immediately. This snide insinuation of yours is an insult to UNITY, ZERO BRAVO and others whom are Afghan and deserve all the common courtesy that you expect of them. It is also an insult to all those of other nations giving of their blood and capital to assist Afghanistan becoming fully stabilized.

Tasteless.

As to conjecture, your premise would only be true if we were to presume the ISI in as nascent a state of formation as the Afghan NSD. As to an afghan crossing from Pakistan into Afghanistan, insurgents do so often enough. I see nothing there unusual.

Thanks.

 

[s90]

In Pakistan Raid, Taliban Chief Was an Extra Prize

WASHINGTON — When Pakistani security officers raided a house outside Karachi in late January, they had no idea that they had just made their most important capture in years.

American intelligence agencies had intercepted communications saying militants with a possible link to the Afghan Taliban’s top military commander, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, were meeting. Tipped off by the Americans, Pakistani counterterrorist officers took several men into custody, meeting no resistance.

Only after a careful process of identification did Pakistani and American officials realize they had captured Mullah Baradar himself, the man who had long overseen the Taliban insurgency against American, NATO and Afghan troops in Afghanistan.

New details of the raid indicate that the arrest of the No. 2 Taliban leader was not necessarily the result of a new determination by Pakistan to go after the Taliban, or a bid to improve its strategic position in the region. Rather, it may be something more prosaic: “a lucky accident,” as one American official called it. “No one knew what they were getting,” he said.

Now the full impact of Mullah Baradar’s arrest will play out only in the weeks to come.

Relations between the intelligence services of the United States and Pakistan have long been marred by suspicions that Pakistan has sheltered the Afghan Taliban. The Pakistanis have long denied it.

The capture of Mullah Baradar was followed by the arrests of two Taliban “shadow governors” elsewhere in Pakistan. While the arrests showed a degree of Pakistani cooperation, they also demonstrated how the Taliban leadership has depended on Pakistan as a rear base.

Jostling over the prize began as soon as Mullah Baradar was identified. Officials with the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, Pakistan’s military spy agency, limited American access to Mullah Baradar, not permitting direct questioning by Central Intelligence Agency officers until about two weeks after the raid, according to American officials who discussed the issue on the condition of anonymity.

“The Pakistanis are an independent partner, and sometimes they show it,” said one American official briefed on the matter. “We don’t always love what they do, but if it weren’t for them, Mullah Baradar and a lot of other terrorists would still be walking around killing people.”

Bruce Riedel, an expert on Afghanistan at the Brookings Institution, who advised the Obama administration on Afghan policy early last year, said the tensions surrounding Mullah Baradar were inevitable. “The Pakistanis have a delicate problem with Baradar,” Mr. Riedel said. “If I were in their shoes, I’d be worried that he might reveal something embarrassing about relations between the Afghan Taliban and the Pakistani government or Inter-Services Intelligence.”

A Pakistani official expressed impatience with questions about past conflicts over the Afghan Taliban, saying, “It’s high time now that we move beyond that.”

Mullah Baradar is talking a little, though he is viewed as a formidable, hard-line opponent whose interrogation will be a long-term effort, according to American and Pakistani officials.

Despite the tensions, interviews with Pakistani military and intelligence officials suggested that the Taliban leader’s capture could alter Pakistan’s calculus about the volatile region.

Taking him off the battlefield, and exploiting the information he might provide, could deal a blow to the Taliban’s military capacity. In the long run, in any discussions of the future governance of Afghanistan, Mullah Baradar could become a bargaining chip and, conceivably, a negotiator.

In interviews on Thursday, Pakistani officials said an aggressive strategy to weaken the Taliban’s leadership might cripple the movement enough to bring it to the negotiating table.

“Maybe Mullah Baradar’s capture gives us a breakthrough in terms of reconciliation,” said one Pakistani intelligence official in Islamabad, Pakistan’s capital, who spoke on condition that he not be named. But the official said such a strategy ran the risk of making the Taliban “more hostile” or possibly of giving a Taliban hard-liner too much influence in negotiations.

Mr. Riedel, of the Brookings Institution, said the tensions surrounding Mullah Baradar were minor compared with the value of having captured him. He said Pakistan’s cooperation could be a sign that official attitudes there, which have favored the Afghan Taliban while condemning the Pakistani Taliban, are changing.

“I believe the Pakistanis have finally concluded that the Afghan Taliban and Pakistan Taliban were cooperating against them in Waziristan and elsewhere,” Mr. Riedel said, referring to links among various militant groups in Pakistan’s tribal areas.

An Obama administration official sounded a more cautious note about the recent arrests. “All this is not necessarily related to a rational decision at the top of the Pakistani military to see things our way,” the official said. “I don’t see any big shift yet.”

The likely impact of Mullah Baradar’s detention on prospects for talks with the Taliban, which have been the subject of intense speculation in recent months, is in dispute.

Alex Strick van Linschoten, a Dutch researcher who has lived for several years in Kandahar in southern Afghanistan, said Taliban representatives reacted with fury to Mullah Baradar’s arrest and were unlikely to be amenable to political approaches any time soon.

“This ends all that,” said Mr. Strick van Linschoten, who helped a former Taliban official, Abdul Salam Zaeef, write a memoir published last month in English, “My Life With the Taliban.”

Mr. Strick van Linschoten said the killing and detention of an older generation of Taliban, including Mullah Baradar, who fought Soviet troops in the 1980s, might leave a younger, decentralized force of militants who were less interested in and less able to conduct negotiations.

“On a local level in Afghanistan, Taliban fighters operate fairly independently,” he said. “They’re self-sustaining, by taxing the drug trade or taxing construction projects, and they’ll just keep fighting.”

Mullah Baradar, who is in his early 40s and is said by most officials to belong to the same Popalzai tribe as Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, is believed to be one of a handful of Taliban leaders in periodic contact with Mullah Muhammad Omar, the reclusive, one-eyed founder of the Taliban.

Their leadership council is known as the Quetta shura, and they are believed to have operated around the Pakistani city of Quetta since the Taliban government in Kabul, the Afghan capital, fell in 2001. But Mr. Strick van Linschoten said he heard in Kandahar that Taliban leaders were feeling increasingly vulnerable in Quetta.

As a result, Afghan Taliban leaders are believed to have been spending more time in Karachi, Pakistan, a sprawling port city of more than 15 million, where they believed that they would be harder to find.

In Pakistan Raid, Taliban Chief Was an Extra Prize - NYTimes.com

 

[S-2]

Could this be the bust that nobody wanted? Did Kiyani want this to happen? Doesn't read like it. Did Baradar want this to happen? Nope. Did the Afghan government or taliban negotiating with them want this to happen? Haven't heard a word from the Afghans and it sounds like maybe some of the taliban are p!ssed.

Two weeks before the Americans could speak to him? Well, he is Pakistan's prisoner and busted on your land. We're just grateful to be able to have a chat.

Fascinating. Well there's a lot of intelligence still wrapped up in this guy so that's useful.

Thanks.

 

[All-Green]

I think that whatever the strategy might have been there is something which most parties have realized by now.
If the endless conflict has to be ended we need to talk soon and with those who can talk.

I will not say good Taliban or bad Taliban but i will try to present my own assessment as to why it is absolutely critical that Omar and his main commanders be talked to via any means, one of which maybe made possible by this landmark capture of Mullah Baradar.

The initial declared agenda of Omar and his Taliban was unification of Afghanistan. They got support from locals who also thought that it was an end to their misery and they were initially happy about it.
Indeed there was merit in unification under Taliban who offered much more stability than what the war lords were providing due to constant infighting.
This support was the reason for the rapid capitulation of the Mujahideen War lords in face of Talibanization, despite being equals in weaponry and tactics.

However absolute power corrupts and the strict system of Taliban left little room for independent thought and corrective feedback.
The alliance with Osama bin Laden, lack of understanding of Shariah and an iron will behind every step ensured that Taliban implemented draconian laws in the name of Islam and put the public in a different sort of misery, the very public they started out to rescue became their victim. A most unfortunate turn of events.

With the advent of USA and current ongoing conflict the Afghan Taliban Old Guard lost political power and have had to ally themselves with many new commanders and formations.
This has had a significant impact on how the Taliban movement has further deviated from its original goals.
These new commanders like the dead (hopefully in hell) Hakeemullah Mehsud are people who have minimal association with the Afghan Jihad and also have a different motivational factor for calling themselves the Taliban.
They have not participated in any higher cause other than themselves.
Their sole motivation is power and creating their own fiefdom, they are not agents of unification but actually strictly maintain their territories, their alliance is only to further this goal and is not anything to with Justice, Freedom or Islam.

Technically speaking therefore the Afghan Taliban and the current Taliban are poorly equipped from all accords to implement any form of sustainable system especially if it is Islamic law, of which they have little understanding of!
However the Afghan Taliban initially had a political goal of unification which the new Taliban do not have.
They also severely lack the stature of the previous Taliban who are known Mujahideen and have many contacts, connections and atleast are capable of talking.
The new Taliban are purely different breed as they are mostly composed of criminals, drug mafias and all sorts of thugs who have seen the enormous profit in using the name of Taliban to establish a stranglehold on the people.
These people do not have a political goal as such but merely exist as Taliban to gain stature.

Despite the announcements of Omar for TTP to stop its attacks on Pakistanis the call was unheeded; actually Omar had no direct control on the likes of Baitullah to begin with but the fact that he did nothing against Baitullah when the man began the worse terrorism in known history against Pakistanis is probably indicative of the inability of Omar and his oldguard to control these franchises...even if they want to...
I am not saying that they want to, i am not sure...my point is that even if they want to, they cannot restrain the countless new groups that have taken on the Taliban name and will continue to do so as it is a profitable franchise.

Fazlullah escaped to Afghanistan and is most likely amongst local Taliban, the butcher of innocent Pakistanis is harboured by the Afghan counterparts so there seems cooperation amongst the semi independant Taliban commanders no matter if they are killing innocent Muslims (something their agenda overtly forbids) or waging war against foreign forces.
These semi independent commanders will only gain more and more strength as the war drags on since the central command is in hiding.
That is a most dangerous scenario in the long run.

My point is that even the best of Taliban were eventually causing more suffering for the common man due to their crude understanding of Islam, however the new Taliban commanders are the worst and have had no moral obligation to the people to begin with and follow no cause of stability. They are mostly Al Qaeda like individuals and heavily resort to such tactics.
They will not add any political stability whatsoever even if they are talked to.

Omar and his oldguard may be averse to talks overtly but i think they also must have realized that the Taliban name has already been taken on by forces even they will never be able to subdue if they try to. Their movement (whatever its own dismerits) has practically been hijacked though they do not acknowledge it publically.

I think this arrest is something that is of utmost importance and will definitely be used to bring about some sort of arrangement with Omar's group whereby they will enter talks and seek a political formula.
Omar and his commanders entering into dialogue will not end the other new Taliban cells but the sustainability of such cells will be short term only in such a turn of events.

It may not be a bad thing for all parties including Omar, if this is indeed what comes to pass.

I wrote this twice and then deleted for fear of derailing the thread, however i felt i had to be this detailed in order to explain the change in dynamics over past few years and what is at stake.

 

[All-Green]

Could this be the bust that nobody wanted? Did Kiyani want this to happen? Doesn't read like it. Did Baradar want this to happen? Nope. Did the Afghan government or taliban negotiating with them want this to happen? Haven't heard a word from the Afghans and it sounds like maybe some of the taliban are p!ssed.

Two weeks before the Americans could speak to him? Well, he is Pakistan's prisoner and busted on your land. We're just grateful to be able to have a chat.

Fascinating. Well there's a lot of intelligence still wrapped up in this guy so that's useful.

Thanks.

I think there is more than meets the eye here but it seems to be part of a plan to ensure that this caputre still leaves room for negotiations open, maybe even Baradar knows this.
It probably is left vague to pretend that nobody wanted it to happen but i can bet that the ones going after him knew who he was.

 

[S-2]

"I think there is more than meets the eye here but it seems to be part of a plan to ensure that this caputre still leaves room for negotiations open..."

Possibly. I don't know if you read the NYT article that S90 provided but it indicates otherwise. That doesn't mean that the NYT aren't being used to create some space through disinformation. They may have part of the story (Baradar actually being an I.D.ed target) or all of it (sheer happenstance).

"...maybe even Baradar knows this."

He will certainly know so through the course of interrogations. I'd speculated that he engineered his own bust but that goes too far. Those discussions may morph beyond simply an intelligence discussion to other possibilities depending upon his amenability and whether his interrogators can gain any level of trust. NYT and others have said he's a "hard-liner". That might simply mean he's old school but not necessarily unapproachable or incapable of strategic thinking. Clearly no grand bargain or even a road-map to such will be cut from an interrogation room but it could serve as a point-of-departure.

"...i can bet that the ones going after him knew who he was."

Perhaps. I won't take your bet but I wouldn't be certain that it isn't as described and nothing more than picking up miscreants aligned with him and...lo and behold! Stranger things have happened. How it is capitalized upon if the latter will be interesting because smart guys had to put their thinking hats on very quickly to decide their interrogation plan.

The other issue is the alleged two week gap between Pakistani officials and U.S. officials chatting with him. It may have taken that long to uncover his I.D. or it could have been determined quickly. Finally, there's the matter of the others busted with him. They, no doubt, aren't foot soldiers. If gathered for a meeting they too may be of considerable import.

We've been told that the shadow governors of Kunduz and Baghlan provinces were popped in Faisalabad. Maybe they were on their way to meet him in Karachi. Maybe he was with other governors who were heading to Faisalabad. Maybe the other two's location was disinformation.

"These semi independent commanders will only gain more and more strength as the war drags on since the central command is in hiding. That is a most dangerous scenario in the long run."

Agreed. There are suggestions of a fragmented and decentralized command and control. Local units are supposedly self-sustaining in funds to various degrees (drugs, taxation, cash-skimming off construction projects, arms) despite other indications that Baradar heads a considerable global financial network. In any case, they are younger men with little or no memories reaching back to the Afghan-Soviet war and only have mythology and folklore sustaining that portion of their credibility. Their actions likely speak as loud or louder than any legacy.

Great points all.

Thanks.

 

[seekers]

Pakistan Will Not Hand Taliban Suspects to US

19/02/2010
ISLAMABAD, (AP)– Pakistan will not turn over the Afghan Taliban's No. 2 leader and two other high-value militants captured this month to the United States, but may deport them to Afghanistan, a senior minister said Friday.

Interior Minister Rahman Malik said Pakistani authorities were still questioning Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, the most senior Taliban figure arrested since the start of the Afghan war in 2001, and two other senior militants arrested with U.S. assistance in separate operations this month.

If it is determined that the militants have not committed any crimes in Pakistan, they will not remain in the country, he said.

"First we will see whether they have violated any law," Malik told reporters in Islamabad. "If they have done it, then the law will take its own course against them.

"But at the most if they have not done anything, then they will go back to the country of origin, not to USA," Malik said.

Pakistani authorities working with the CIA arrested Baradar about two weeks ago in the southern city of Karachi, Pakistani and U.S. officials have said. At about the same time, Pakistani security forces picked up Taliban "shadow governors" for two Afghan provinces, Afghan officials said.

A series of raids by Pakistani forces have followed, netting at least nine al-Qaeda-linked militants who were sheltering in Pakistan. Missiles fired from a U.S. unmanned drone aircraft on Thursday killed the brother of Afghan Taliban commander Siraj Haqqani, Pakistani intelligence officials said.

Taken together, the crackdown could be the most significant blow to the militants since U.S.-led forces invaded Afghanistan in 2001 to oust the hard-line Islamist Taliban regime for sheltering Osama bin Laden and the al-Qaeda network responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks in the United States.

Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said the U.S. was pleased with the recent arrests. He declined to say whether they were the result of better intelligence or an increased willingness by Pakistan to go after suspected militants.

"What I will say to you, yet again, is that we are enormously heartened by the fact that the Pakistani government and their military intelligence services increasingly recognize the threat within their midst and are doing something about it," Morrell said.

Some of those caught in the recent operations are key figures in the Afghan insurgency, while others are members of militant groups that operate just across the border in Pakistan.

Among those arrested were Ameer Muawiya, a bin Laden associate who was in charge of foreign al-Qaeda militants in Pakistan's border areas, and Akhunzada Popalzai, also known as Mohammad Younis, a one-time Taliban shadow governor in Zabul province and former police chief in Kabul, according to Mullah Mamamood, a tribal leader in Ghazni province.

Others captured in Karachi included Hamza, a former Afghan army commander in Helmand province during Taliban rule, and Abu Riyad al Zarqawi, a liaison with Chechen and Tajik militants in Pakistan's border area, Pakistani officials said.

The Taliban shadow governors — Mullah Abdul Salam of Kunduz province and Mullah Mohammad in Baghlan province — were instrumental in expanding Taliban influence in Afghanistan's north, raising fears the insurgency was spreading beyond its base in the south.

Taliban spokesmen have denied the arrests, accusing NATO of spreading propaganda to undermine the morale of Taliban fighters holding out in Marjah against the biggest NATO military operation of the eight-year war. Thousands of U.S., British and Afghan troops are battling militants in the Taliban stronghold in southern Helmand province, a center of the militants' supply and drug-smuggling network.

Baradar is considered a pragmatic Taliban leader, prompting some experts to speculate that he was captured so he could liaise with the Taliban leadership. Other theories include that Pakistan arrested him to thwart attempts to exclude Islamabad from any negotiations between the Afghan government and the Taliban.

Richard Holbrooke, President Barack Obama's special envoy to the region, swatted off attempts to link its timing with efforts to negotiate with the Taliban or an ongoing U.S.-led offensive in southern Afghanistan's Helmand province.

"He was picked up because the information was developed. It had nothing to do with anything else," Holbrooke told reporters in Islamabad.

Loading...

Not to hand over US. nor self court trial,simply handover to mullah omer with courtesy.

 

[gambit]

Pakistan is not Egypt.

The 'official version' also had it that Saddam Hussein had WMD's - have you guys gotten around to 'disputing' that yet?

From the UN's IAEA whose team leaders were non-Americans. You might want to take it up with them on how they view 'WMD'.

 

[S-2]

"Not to hand over US. nor self court trial,simply handover to mullah omer with courtesy."

The same Rehman Malik that was screaming "Propaganda!" the other day? We'll see if the next face Baradar sees is Mullah Omar's. It would seem that the same determination of charges might apply to all the others as well. At a minimum, most should likely be guilty of charges under your immigration statutes but, perhaps, all Pakstan wishes to do is facilitate their return to their former activities. Anything's possible in the land of the pure.

Wouldn't that be an interesting turn of events?

Thanks.

 

[EvoluXon]

Another twist in the story::: Famous FATA analyst Rahimullah Yousufzai said in his interview that There were disagreements between Mullah Umar and Mullah Baradar on the ongoing peace talks.Mullah Baradar refused to fight against Occupied forces in afghanistan due to which Mullah Umar sacked him as vice cheif of Taliban and appointed new leader in place of him. So guyz i think Mullah Baradar isolated himself from Taliban thts why he was enjoying his days in Karachi.It was cunning move by ISI to captured Mullah Baradar and smoothen relationship between US pak.According to me Mullah Baradar could hve been key fogure if he had been captured much earlier.

 

[seekers]

Another twist in the story::: Famous FATA analyst Rahimullah Yousufzai said in his interview that There were disagreements between Mullah Umar and Mullah Baradar on the ongoing peace talks.Mullah Baradar refused to fight against Occupied forces in afghanistan due to which Mullah Umar sacked him as vice cheif of Taliban and appointed new leader in place of him. So guyz i think Mullah Baradar isolated himself from Taliban thts why he was enjoying his days in Karachi.It was cunning move by ISI to captured Mullah Baradar and smoothen relationship between US pak.According to me Mullah Baradar could hve been key fogure if he had been captured much earlier.

Good Attempt to raise Moral of taliban's lovers.

wait for yousafzai statement when mulah omer would catch from same spot.

kisyani billi khamba nocheay!