Taliban Military Chief Mullah Baradar captured by Pakistan

[TruthSeeker]

Do you think US planning to attack Iran in few months ?

Fundie, you are taking the thread too far off-topic with this question. My answer is simply NO to your question above. No way Obama gonna do that!!! Not a chance in 1,000,000,000,000.

 

[H2O3C4Nitrogen]

Is it just yellow journalism or ppl are realy pissed at the Fact that it was Pakistan which caught this high value target..
I wonder why some US officials deny the great efforts made by Pakistan to catch these maniancs , is it for face saving , is it to appease some specific audiances with whome they do buisness with , is it to scapegoat Pakistan for US failures , or is it the pressure tactics which they think is workable ..or may be all of them ..?

I suspect that , people in US are comfortable in bashing Pakistan for their own stake instead of recognizing its role and importance in this whole fiasco..!

 

[S-2]

"I think the chances that the US was involved are high too - where I disagree is the extent of that involvement and whether the involvement was critical."

As we didn't provide the muscle, we can assume there's only a few areas of our possible involvement-target intelligence and operational planning. I discount the latter but others suggest the former. Target intelligence is without question critical.

"The US media, backed by the usual 'anonymous sources' loves to crow about US 'pressure' and this and that, as if the rest of the world are dumb amateurs sitting with their fingers up their noses until the 'Mighty Americans' show up to make sure things get done right."

Dissembling strawman. Finding anonymous sources isn't an American media specialty. Common enough in your own media.

"The NYT broke the story based on US sources, and the [sic] played up the US angle (see my comments above). As I said, at most the US might have provided intelligence."

"at most" the intelligence serves as the basis for the arrest. Nothing happens otherwise. Our role was critical if true and it appears almost certainly true.

"Given that Mehsud was targeted based on Pakistani intel (finally - remember we had intel on his location a few times before as well, when the US did not divert resources to target him), I fail to see what your comment above serves to establish."

I'll ask for your sources on what did happen and avoid your speculation on what you purport previous. I can provide one link that suggests B. Mehsud killing came following meetings between Leon Panetta and Pasha and include considerable communications intercepts and satelliate imagery-both areas of U.S. intelligence expertise.

You?

H. Mehsud, OTOH, was almost certainly ours and I've seen no indication whatsoever that Pakistani intelligence developed that target.

"We don't have the technology of the Predator, beyond pulling the trigger on the target once Pakistani intel provided his location the US likely had little to offer."

Bull. Our satelliate communications intercepts are integral. How do you think Baradar was popped? Imagrey? Ours.

"That is a duplicitous argument - whether the Afghan government is sovereign or not is irrelevant to the fact that the security of the country is largely in the hands of ISAF."

The security of Afghan borders is the responsibility of the Afghan government. No other. That's plain as day. ISAF involvement extends only to the training and equipping of Afghan Border Police and customs officials. Our ground troops don't guard border crossings nor do our advisors.

"Not a mess 'we sponsored' - Taliban rule actually brought around stability and some uniformity in areas under its control."

Taliban rule provided the sanctuary of Al Qaeda bases and the subsequent attack upon America. That was indeed a mess which transcended national boundaries and had global implications reaching beyond simply America. We don't know what would have happened had you not sponsored the Taliban but we do know of Al Qaeda's return to Afghanistan in 1995 and their alignment with the taliban then.

Beyond the preference of some here, including you, for the stability offered by the taliban- I see none. The brutality manifested upon civil society no better and possibly worse. Certainly catastrophically worse for the prospects of women. Ask UNITY how he enjoyed taliban rule.

"What they may or may not be viewed as does not change the fact that there has been no physical support of them, and that the entity Afghanistan and ISAF is at war with resides primarily on Afghan soil."

Too many disagree. We fight their soldiers and ground commanders. That's why it's called WAR. Physical support? I consider Haqqani owning Miram Shah as pretty damned "physical". That very much appears by agreement. At least one Haqqani will say so. See Rohde/NYT and call him a liar. I won't.

"Last I checked the largest offensive on Afghan soil since the 2001 invasion was taking place in order to route out a 'sanctuary' of the Taliban in Marja, a town on Afghan soil, not Pakistani. And it is but only the beginning of such offensives by the US (after 9 years of 'controlling' Afghanistan), again all on Afghan soil, not Pakistani."

Dissemblance. The largest offensive hardly constitutes the ONLY offensive. You know too well that ISAF has been engaged in continuous combat with taliban forces since 2002 and INTENSIVE combat since 2006.

"I think it is obvious which side is engaging in willful duplicity, dissemblance and blame deflection to hide failures."

Virtually all outside of Pakistan disagree. Not obvious, therefore, to the rest of mankind.

"This is an Afghan insurgency directed at Afghanistan from Afghan soil, not Pakistani."

Not if the leadership direction, supply, R&R, and serious medical support is found in Pakistan it isn't.

"As for peace treaties - you had your approach to deal with the problem and we had ours." Just because the US doesn't like the way we chose to deal with the Taliban does not mean we not try it our way, based on our domestic political compulsions and constraints."

They failed, over and over again, as amply warned against and predicted by the rest of us. Afghanistan, IMHO, will learn the same should Karzai attempt serious negotiations and the insurgency isn't sufficiently crushed first. That will require your cooperation which has heretofore until two weeks ago been missing.

"Perhaps not, but it clearly points out the duplicity of the US position that the insurgency in Afghanistan is externally directed, when it is clear that the Taliban were running the insurgency in Afghanistan from Afghan soil."

Quetta shura, Haqqani, Baradar, etc...Nobody believe you.

"Perhaps he has displaced into Pakistan, but as you yourself accepted there, the field commander of the insurgency was in Afghanistan."

That's why he's a field commander-one who isn't safe just now on his operational battlefield.

"The reports from Marja, according to the locals, indicate that the Taliban imposed a ten percent tax on the poppy production, which would indicate the resource generation for the Taliban is also largely Afghan based (along with whatever Hundi and Hawala bring)."

Some, no doubt. Hardly all finances though. Donations from many in Karachi, the rest of Pakistan and the Gulf States/KSA is assured. Criminal enterprises inside Pakistan augment those resources as well.

"This is an Afghan insurgency directed largely from Afghanistan, not from Pakistan, and there remains no evidence their leadership resides on Pakistani soil."

Haqqani, Miram Shah? That's assured. Quetta Shura? Assured.

"Perhaps we will, if indeed he is in Pakistan."

He is. Look harder. DO MORE.

"Strawman argument - can you show me hard evidence of Kiyani and the GoP calling Baradar, Omar or the arrested shadow governors 'strategic assets'?"

"unattributed" will suffice, remember? Do you have any from American officials. ONE unattributed source by an American official will be fine, A.M.

"Rhetorical question of course, I know you don't have any evidence."

The day I do, he'll be shot.

"Again - ludicrous logic. Using your logic no country should ever arrest foreign suspects on their soil lest they get accused of 'harboring' those individuals."

Hardly. No country should HARBOR foreign suspects on their soil lest they be accused of providing sanctuary and fostering proxy war. The accusations by the world against Pakistan on this matter are longer than my very long arm and exceed simply your western front.

"As for knowing what evidence got passed or didn't, you have no clue either, yet you insist that the US had some sort of critical role to play here."

We do.

"You are correct, we had no eight year man hunt going on for these individuals since our resources were prioritized elsewhere."

Where would that be with your western sovereignty ostensibly challenged and the deep concern held for this man by your Afghan and ISAF allies?

"That we were focussed on other issues critical to Pakistani national security does not indicate 'willful duplicity', it means the issue was not a major concern to us till recently."

Haqqani? Not a major concern, eh? No kidding!

Recently will be a welcome change, if in fact it changes at all as he's been a PARAMOUNT concern of ours for years. Fascinating exercise in dissemblance there.

"It doesn't automatically suggest that they did either, or that it was a critical role."

We've discussed this. It was the basis for the arrest.

There's no other role we needed to play except to assure you acted upon that information. Assuring such consumes a lot of our time, btw.

"I don't care how you ...illustrate 'Afghan sovereignty' - the reality, obvious to most, is that Afghanistan is under US/ISAF control (on the military and security front at least), and Baradar managed to travel through the country undetected, likely several times."

There's no serious proof of that but, if so, it wouldn't be because we desired such any more than the insurgents passing daily to and from Afghanistan. It would confirm that it is to Pakistan where he returns however.

"My premise is not based on any calculus that includes the Afghan security and intelligence apparatus"

It should. They've their own border police and intelligence apparatus that is trying to establish now what Pakistan has had sixty plus years to do. Huge difference.

Thanks.

 

[Thomas]

​

Suspected Taliban commander Abdullah, alias Abu Waqas outside a local court in Karachi on February 18, 2010. – AFP

Get used to this scene all you Taliban lovers. A combination of Hatred, despair, and fear.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

As we didn't provide the muscle, we can assume there's only a few areas of our possible involvement-target intelligence and operational planning. I discount the latter but others suggest the former. Target intelligence is without question critical.

Provision of intelligence, whether specific or not, I have little issue with. However, what sparked of the latest exchange was the insinuation in the original NYT article that the raid itself was some sort of a joint operation between CIA and ISI officers.

What kind of intelligence was provided, whether it was critical or not, I will reiterate remains to be seen.

Dissembling strawman. Finding anonymous sources isn't an American media specialty. Common enough in your own media.

Finding anonymous sources is common enough, using them to continuously push lies and malign and/or belittle the other side is an art perfected by the US establishment, one I have long pointed out, and you can see both 'belittling and maligning' in the reports out of the NYT and the WSJ respectively.

"at most" the intelligence serves as the basis for the arrest. Nothing happens otherwise. Our role was critical if true and it appears almost certainly true.

Again, whether the intelligence provided, and therefore the US role, was critical or not remains to be seen. The first NYT article quoted US sources as suggesting a joint raid was carried out, a day or so later that was toned down to something implying intelligence cooperation. The WaPo story from this morning suggests a CIA listening center in Karachi, but then again suggests a joint operation. And then there are the dozen theories and speculation about what actually happened - luck, coincidence, or deliberate target.

Carlotta Gall quotes a Pakistani intel officer as stating that they were after Baradar 3 weeks ago, and she has been in Pakistan a long time. Other say Pakistan had no clue who they were arresting. From all of this it is apparent that the various sources these people are being fed from have differing views on the details of the Operation and the kind of cooperation involved, and therefore I see no reason to simply accept your POV without credible evidence that the US role was critical in these arrests.

Some more Pakistani sources might come to light in the next few days in the Pakistani press, or we might get more information through our own contacts, substantiating one of these accounts, in which case I'll gladly accept that to be the case - but not till then.

I'll ask for your sources on what did happen and avoid your speculation on what you purport previous. I can provide one link that suggests B. Mehsud killing came following meetings between Leon Panetta and Pasha and include considerable communications intercepts and satelliate imagery-both areas of U.S. intelligence expertise.

My sources are multiple links in the Pakistani media quoting Pakistani military and intelligence sources, that have been provided to you time and time again when we have had this argument in the past. Your source is likely an American one - I do not doubt that there were meetings between the CIA and ISI that led to Mehsud finally being targeted, after multiple Pakistani requests to target him (when Pakistan forces had intelligence on his location) during Bush's last year were not taken up. Based on those accounts, Pakistani intelligence pin pointed B Mehsud's location multiple times without relying on US technology, so there is nothing to suggest that the strike that took out Mehsud was not directed to that particular compound by Pakistan intelligence once again.

H. Mehsud, OTOH, was almost certainly ours and I've seen no indication whatsoever that Pakistani intelligence developed that target.

I have seen no indication that US intelligence developed H Mehsud as a target on its own. Pakistan has on multiple occasions managed to almost take out both Falzullah and Faqir Mohammed, all without relying on US technology. That alone points to the effectiveness of Pakistani intelligence in locating targets.

Bull. Our satelliate communications intercepts are integral. How do you think Baradar was popped? Imagrey? Ours.

The extent of your contribution remains clouded given the multitude of different accounts presented in your own media and even by one news organization.

The security of Afghan borders is the responsibility of the Afghan government. No other. That's plain as day. ISAF involvement extends only to the training and equipping of Afghan Border Police and customs officials. Our ground troops don't guard border crossings nor do our advisors.

Don't guard the crossings then, but unless Baradar and various other Afghan Taliban commanders managed to teleport themselves to their final destination in Afghanistan, they traveled, ate, slept and lived in territory that was under the control of ISAF, and you failed to detect them - so before accusing Pakistan of 'willful duplicity', get your own act together.

Taliban rule provided the sanctuary of Al Qaeda bases and the subsequent attack upon America. That was indeed a mess which transcended national boundaries and had global implications reaching beyond simply America. We don't know what would have happened had you not sponsored the Taliban but we do know of Al Qaeda's return to Afghanistan in 1995 and their alignment with the taliban then.

Taliban rule did not provide sanctuary to AQ to conduct terrorist attacks on foreign targets, nor were the Taliban aware of OBL's plans. The Taliban did in fact offer two choices after 911 - a trial in Afghanistan or a trial in a third country. The US chose to not even provide the Taliban with evidence and build a case for deportation, let along explore the options of trial in a third country. Hence the subsequent mess is one of YOUR making.

What would have happened had Pakistan not supported the Taliban would be that the Taliban would have ruled a smaller chunk of Afghanistan, and OBL would have managed to stay in Afghanistan as he had been, either by calling in favors with the Taliban or whichever local warlord held sway in the region in which he was based, and OBL would have likely gone ahead with all his plans.

The Taliban had little to provide OBL - but OBL had plenty of money to win favor, whether from the Taliban or XYZ warlord.

Beyond the preference of some here, including you, for the stability offered by the taliban- I see none. The brutality manifested upon civil society no better and possibly worse. Certainly catastrophically worse for the prospects of women. Ask UNITY how he enjoyed taliban rule.

Ask some of villagers whose boys are raped by Afghan police, and whose livelihood is then extorted from them by these same rapists whether they enjoy the current Karzai regime.

Too many disagree. We fight their soldiers and ground commanders. That's why it's called WAR. Physical support? I consider Haqqani owning Miram Shah as pretty damned "physical". That very much appears by agreement. At least one Haqqani will say so. See Rohde/NYT and call him a liar. I won't.

Well by that yardstick I would have to consider the fact that Mullah Fazlullah decamped to North Eastern Afghanistan and Qari Zia-ur-Rehman's repeated forays into FATA to attack Pakistani positions and their threats to reignite the Taliban insurgency in Bajaur, Mohmand and Swat as evidence of 'material support' by the US to terrorists attacking Pakistan.

You cannot have it both ways S-2. For the umpteenth time, get your own house in order before making spurious allegations against Pakistan. You are a smart enough fellow, yet your proclivity to swallow the blatantly obvious propaganda pushed by the US establishment is breathtaking.

Dissemblance. The largest offensive hardly constitutes the ONLY offensive. You know too well that ISAF has been engaged in continuous combat with taliban forces since 2002 and INTENSIVE combat since 2006.

Yet the Taliban continue to maintain 'sanctuary' bases, training camps and entire parallel governments on Afghan soil ostensibly under your control. The same on Pakistani soil you claim is evidence of Pakistani duplicity, so why should the US not be judged by the same yardstick? You point to peace deals by Pakistan - i say they were/are an unsuccessful policy to bring about a resolution to the insurgency, but your own 'military' solutions have quite obviously been just as ineffective.

So in terms of results, I see little difference between peace deals and whatever ISAF has done in the past 9 years that has allowed the Taliban to maintain sanctuary in Afghanistan.

Virtually all outside of Pakistan disagree. Not obvious, therefore, to the rest of mankind.

I can see the bias in the reporting first hand - remember the suspicion and poisonous commentary in the West that greeted Pakistani Operations in Swat and SW. Similar tactics employed by NATO have the same commentators in rapture, praising the glorious Fuhrers MChrystal and Petraeus. When Pakistan announce the SW ops in advance we were allowing the Taliban leadership to escape, us deceitful Pakistanis, whereas the US announcement in advance of the assault on Marja is because of whatever Mchrystal says it is.

Yes, the double standards have been pointed out quite clearly in the comments immediately above and preceding that.

Not if the leadership direction, supply, R&R, and serious medical support is found in Pakistan it isn't.

Oh, I must have missed the ambulance service from Marja, Kunar and Nuristan to Peshawar. The fact is that the Taliban governors and commanders involved in the actual implementation of policy and execution of the insurgency are based in Afghanistan. That many have been arrested and killed by ISAF bears testimony to that. So to the reports that the Taliban imposed taxes on the poppy crop to raise resources, and Hawala and Hundi don't suddenly stop at the Afghan-Pakistan border.

You have nothing.

They failed, over and over again, as amply warned against and predicted by the rest of us. Afghanistan, IMHO, will learn the same should Karzai attempt serious negotiations and the insurgency isn't sufficiently crushed first. That will require your cooperation which has heretofore until two weeks ago been missing.

Obviously whatever ISAF tried for 9 years did not work either, so spare me the 'failed over and over again' spiel, given that you did no better. The constraints that made peace deals, often from a position of weakness, in FATA an attractive policy option for Pakistan did not really lift until the Swat deal collapsed in 2009.

Quetta shura, Haqqani, Baradar, etc...Nobody believe you.

Nobody has provided evidence to even prove the existence of a Quetta Shura.

Some, no doubt. Hardly all finances though. Donations from many in Karachi, the rest of Pakistan and the Gulf States/KSA is assured. Criminal enterprises inside Pakistan augment those resources as well.

Again, Hundi and Hawala do not stop at the Afghan-Pakistan border.

Haqqani, Miram Shah? That's assured. Quetta Shura? Assured.

Marja, Kandahar, Nuristan, Konar .... yep, all assured. Far more than one town in Pakistan.

And please do find some time to actually find evidence establishing this mythical Quetta Shura - try the library under Tolkien perhaps.

He is. Look harder. DO MORE.

And would you mind providing the evidence, or do I have to go find a gypsy to look in a crystal ball after getting high to be able to see this man.

Let us know when you actually have evidence.

He is likely in the other parts of Afghanistan where ISAF has yet to run operations to eliminate sanctuaries and parallel taliban governments that don't exist according to you.

"unattributed" will suffice, remember? Do you have any from American officials. ONE unattributed source by an American official will be fine, A.M.

Do you have ONE concrete piece of evidence from Pakistani officials calling those characters 'strategic assets' - this was your strawman, don't deflect it on me.

The day I do, he'll be shot.

i.e. you have no evidence and are making nonsensical and unsubstantiated allegations.

Hardly. No country should HARBOR foreign suspects on their soil lest they be accused of providing sanctuary and fostering proxy war. The accusations by the world against Pakistan on this matter are longer than my very long arm and exceed simply your western front.

Argumentum ad numerum - a logical fallacy. You have fallen rather low to resort to childish argument of 'the world blah blah blah'. Allegations without substantiation are nothing but drivel and slander.

Again, since there is no evidence of Pakistan deliberately providing safe haven to these individuals, and they appear to have lived very active lives crossing back and forth between Afghanistan and Pakistan, traveling and living in territory under ISAF control, your argument that the arrest of these individuals in Pakistan somehow establishes that Pakistan was 'harboring' them is just ludicrous and fallacious.

We do.

I have yet to see any evidence indicating you do. What we do have is a myriad accounts of the same event. Again, don't let that exaggerated sense of self-importance get to your head too much,

Where would that be with your western sovereignty ostensibly challenged and the deep concern held for this man by your Afghan and ISAF allies?

That would be on holding off a military twice our size on our Eastern Front, that mounted the largest mobilization in decades in 2001, and has played the role of aggressor without cause in the past. but you already know that of course - its just that that exxagerated sense of self-importance doesn't let you acknowledge any but your own issues, the rest of the world be damned.

Like a spoiled brat - ME! ME! ME! ME! ME!

Haqqani? Not a major concern, eh? No kidding!

No kidding, see above.

Recently will be a welcome change, if in fact it changes at all as he's been a PARAMOUNT concern of ours for years. Fascinating exercise in dissemblance there.

Yet more ME! ME! ME! ME! ME!

Get in line and wait your turn - we'll get to it when we get to it, and you'll know when we do.

We've discussed this. It was the basis for the arrest.

There's no other role we needed to play except to assure you acted upon that information. Assuring such consumes a lot of our time, btw.

If US provided intelligence played a critical role, we'll find out, as of now there isn't anything credible suggesting that.

There's no serious proof of that but, if so, it wouldn't be because we desired such any more than the insurgents passing daily to and from Afghanistan. It would confirm that it is to Pakistan where he returns however.

Fascinating exercise in hypocrisy and dissemblance - the Taliban insurgents, leaders commanders and foot soldiers livel and travel through territory under ISAF control and its 'par for the course' - the same on the Pakistani side and it is duplicity and willful deceit.

Can you really stick your foot in your mouth any further?

It should. They've their own border police and intelligence apparatus that is trying to establish now what Pakistan has had sixty plus years to do. Huge difference.

Sidestepping the question again I see - Unless they have mastered the art of teleportation, Taliban commanders, leaders and foot soldiers live and travel through territory under ISAF control, and your militaries and intelligence agencies are responsible, yet the same on the Pakistani side is somehow indicative of deceit and duplicity.

Again, the hypocrisy is breathtaking.

 

[fatman17]

Mullah Baradar... a journey from Kandahar to Karachi

* Captured Taliban commander masterminded burqa-clad Mullah Omar’s escape on motorbike
* Elusive Taliban leader married burqa owner ‘out of respect, honour’

By Owais Tohid

I waited in the courtyard for news from inside, sipping endless cups of qahwa and watching young soldiers – sporting turbans, beards and uniform long hair – parade with submachine guns and rocket launchers. There was nothing else to peer at: Mullah Omar’s enormous house in Kandahar had no windows.

The top Taliban leadership was engaged in a closed-door session with a UN delegation, headed by Lakhdar Ibrahimi, as the group desperately vied for membership of the international body.

Next to me, then information minister Maulvi Mutameen strained at some invisible signal, and suddenly shouts of “Allah-o-Akbar” echoed through the surroundings, marking the arrival of the person all had been waiting for – Mullah Baradar. The armed warriors jubilantly announced the arrival. Mullah Baradar had recently conquered Bamiyan, and Mullah Omar had summoned him to Kandahar for consultations ahead of the talks with the UN delegation.

Surrounded by armed guards, Baradar strode confidently, sporting a black turban and a waistcoat of the same colour. The athletic built, prominent cheekbones and deep-set eyes commanded attention. As we embraced and shook hands in the traditional Pushto way, he was told I was a Pakistani Muslim working for a “farangi” organisation.

“No harm in working for goras as long as Muslims serve the cause of the Ummah,” he said to me in Urdu. I made an attempt drawing him into conversation for the story I had to write for AFP. “The West doesn’t recognise us because they want us to live like them,” he said.

Almost a fortnight ago, Baradar’s cage got smaller. His arrest by Pakistan’s intelligence agents collaborating with the US CIA – apparently from a house in the labyrinthine neighbourhood of Baldia on the outskirts of Karachi – shattered the ranks of the Taliban.

Sources say he had been on the intelligence radar for several weeks. Constant monitoring of his movements, coupled with human intelligence, interception of numerous mobile and satellite phone conversations of jihadis and images, finally trapped him while holding what he believed to be a secret meeting, ending a two-decade journey – from Kandahar to Karachi. Baradar hails from Uruzgan – Mullah Omar’s native province in southern Afghanistan – and belongs to the respected Pashtun Popalzai tribe occupying both sides of the Pak-Afghan border. Afghan President Hamid Karazai is also a son of the same tribe.

Baradar was amongst the first ones to take bait – or oath of allegiance – to Mullah Omar when the Taliban movement was out into motion from Kandahar in 1994. When the Taliban took over Kabul, he was appointed governor of Herat following the defeat of Governor Ismail.

His rank within the Taliban hierarchy rose after he gave Mullah Omar a new lease of life when the elusive Taliban leader was on the run post-9/11. “The Americans were bombing the surroundings of Kandahar after the 9/11 attacks. Mullah Omar and his mujahids were almost trapped ... it was commander Baradar who came up with the idea to make an escape on motorbikes,” a Pakistani jihadi, who has fought in Afghanistan, quoted an Afghan Talib as saying. “Mullah Baradar gave the burqa to Mullah Omar, who – after initially refusing but later putting it on – mounted a motorbike like an Afghan woman. Baradar himself rode the bike and dodged the Americans.” The burqa was borrowed from the family which sheltered the Taliban leaders, and in return, Mullah Omar married the owner of the burqa “out of respect and honour”.

“He is very brave. He has the brains of a tactician and the soul of a mujahid,” says a source familiar with the Taliban working, referring to Baradar. “It was he who introduced the maximum use of explosives in the battlefield against the Americans.”

It is said that shadow governments of the Taliban in various parts of southern Afghanistan were also his brainchild. He also introduced a code of conduct outlining ethics and morals for “holy warriors”.

He apparently took the reigns as the military commander of the Taliban after the killing of Mullah Dadullah, the one-legged Taliban commander, in 2007 and the subsequent arrest of important Taliban shura member Mullah Obaidullah Akhund. But the new assignment, some believe, did not allow him to shadow Mullah Omar like he did earlier. Baradar himself has had narrow escapes. In July 2002, he barely escaped when the US bombed a wedding in Uruzgan province, instead killing Afghan civilians. Sources say it was the wedding of Baradar’s niece. The brother-in-law was apparently paid off by the Americans, and he told them that Baradar had been invited. However, his nephew overheard the conversation over the phone and tipped off Baradar, allowing him to set up a trap for the Americans instead, say the sources, adding that his comrades opened fire at the soldiers who were later rescued by the bombing of a US plane.

But for Baradar, luck seems to have run out. He is now being interrogated by Pakistani and US intelligence officials. His capture has earned high praises for Pakistan’s intelligence agencies. His arrest signals what many believe is an increase in cooperation between Islamabad and Washington.

Baradar’s arrest has also set off several theories. Some say that as of recently, he had distanced himself from his spiritual leader and shown flexibility to the idea of talks with the Americans. The Western media reported that Baradar facilitated a meeting last month in Dubai between mid-level Taliban commanders and Kai Eide, a top UN official in Kabul. For others, these seem to be rumours spread to keep the Taliban ranks intact by suggesting Baradar was “softening”.

Meanwhile, the Taliban are looking for a replacement for Baradar. Taliban sources say Mullah Omar has sent a message to the shura members and commanders to be “united against enemies and their conspiracies”.

But while some are encouraged and believe Baradar’s arrest has dealt a serious blow to the Taliban, others are more wary. The removal of a centralised leadership usually results in parallel, decentralised forms of decision-making by the followers. This would translate into an escalation of violence and attacks against international NGOs, aid workers and “softer” targets as “revenge” in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

 

[fatman17]

Editorial: Big game, easy pickings

The arrest of key members of both al Qaeda and the Afghan Taliban from Karachi is indeed a mix of both good news and bad news. Good news because it shows that the cooperation between the Pakistani intelligence agencies and the CIA has resulted in a crackdown that was long overdue. Bad news because it is indeed alarming to see the top leadership of terrorist outfits huddled up in Karachi, the largest city of Pakistan.

Before going into the details of the arrests and further crackdowns, one word of advice for Interior Minister Rehman Malik: kindly, for your own benefit and the greater good of this nation, stop talking so much! With all due respect, Mr Malik keeps contradicting himself morning, noon and night. If only he exercised a bit of restraint, he would cause less embarrassment to an already mortified government. He dubbed the New York Times report about Mullah Baradar’s arrest in a joint Pakistani-US spy operation as “propaganda”. Later on he ended up eating his words when the ISPR confirmed reports of this arrest. The same is the case with the recent arrests. Up until now Mr Malik pretended to be totally ‘clueless’ as to the existence of al Qaeda’s and the Afghan Taliban’s leadership in Karachi. There is no room for denial anymore. It is high time that the government takes the nation into confidence and comes clean regarding the arrest of Mullah Baradar. Shrouding his arrest in mystery will lead to further confusion, which should be avoided at all costs.

The death of Muhammad Haqqani, who had close links with the Afghan Taliban and al Qaeda, in a drone strike, is the result of good intelligence work. The arrest of Abu Reyan Al-Zarkazi, a top aide of Osama bin Laden, is another great success for the intelligence agencies, both Pakistani and US. A joint intelligence mechanism is far more effective than separate operations when the stakes are as high as countering al Qaeda’s plans for global terrorism. The arrest of two Taliban ‘shadow governors’, Mullah Abdul Salam of Kunduz province and Mullah Mohammad in Baghlan province is another feather in the intelligence agencies’ cap. At a time when the South Asian region is facing the worst wave of terrorist activity, these arrests will prove to be a blow for the terrorists. It is a relief to know that our intelligence agencies have finally woken up to the grim reality that the Afghan Taliban and al Qaeda leadership is hiding in Pakistan in order to avoid being captured by the US-led NATO troops in Afghanistan. The West, especially the US, had been stressing this for a long time but the country’s military establishment remained in denial. Whether these joint operations were carried out due to US pressure or not is beside the point. What matters most is that in order to rid the country and the region of this malaise, more operations of this sort are required.

What is worrisome though is the logical presence of more al Qaeda members and the Afghan Taliban in Pakistan. The army is already fighting a fierce battle with the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) in the northern areas. To deal with the local Taliban along with other local terrorist outfits is an uphill task. The recent sectarian attacks in Karachi and elsewhere in the country pointed to a growing nexus between the local terrorist outfits and al Qaeda. The recent arrests prove that not only is al Qaeda backing the terrorist groups in Pakistan but that its nexus with the Afghan Taliban is still going strong. This would affect the revised policy of the West vis-à-vis holding talks with the Afghan Taliban.

Terrorism knows no boundaries, which is why Pakistan must not let its guard down because of the arrest of a few important terrorists. The military operations against the local Taliban must continue. A crackdown against local sectarian outfits should also be carried out if we are to eradicate terrorism from our soil. There should be more joint intelligence operations, as they have proved their effectiveness.

http://thedailytimes.com.pk

 

[s90]

Pakistan is winning its risky games

Mullah Baradar's capture fits into Pakistan's complex strategy – but it must be careful not to push its luck

By Eric Randolph

There has been plenty of tub-thumping over this week's capture of Taliban commander Mullah Baradar, but all it really signifies is that Pakistan holds all the cards in the strategic game being played out across central and southern Asia.

President Barack Obama is well-known for his love of poker. It is a comforting image for the rest of the world: the stony-faced thinker, calculating the odds, in the game for the long haul. But when it comes to the bluff, no one can touch Pakistan's military establishment. Consider the complexity of the game it is playing.

America's enemies are based in their country, but they can still wring $7.5bn in aid from Washington. Their population hates the idea of colluding with the Americans, but Pakistan quietly allows US drones, platoons of marines and CIA agents to operate in its territory. It fights its own insurgency with some parts of the Pakistani Taliban while doing deals with its affiliates. Known terrorists are free to hold public rallies in broad daylight calling for attacks on India, and yet India still finds itself pressured into holding a new round of peace talks.

While India spends billions of dollars in development aid and construction projects in Afghanistan, Pakistan bides its time and then demands that India pack its bags and head home as the price of its cooperation with the US. And who can blame it? After all the bloodshed Pakistan has suffered in the past nine years, should it really have to stomach its sworn enemy setting up camp on the western flank?

Meanwhile, the west has one priority – getting out of Afghanistan before it drags all their governments into the gutter. In its obsessive focus on every detail of Operation Moshtarak and the Afghan surge, Mullah Baradar's arrest looks like a big tactical victory. But for Pakistan it will barely muster a footnote in the much broader narrative.

There are a tonne of theories as to what motivated Pakistan's shadowy Inter-Services Intelligence agency to suddenly co-operate in handing over an old ally. Were they making sure he did not make a deal behind their back? Were they buying some influence with the Americans? Or was it a stern warning to the Afghan Taliban to stay in line?

In the end, the truth is unimportant. Baradar was dispensable and he was dispensed with. The Pakistani establishment can sell his arrest to the Americans as a sign they are co-operating, sell it to Mullah Omar and Kabul as a reminder of who's boss, and it can brush the whole thing under the carpet to its own citizens. Is it a change of strategy, or just a bluff? We are unlikely to ever know for sure.

Compare that with the game being played by the Americans. They, too, know that everything comes down to perceptions. That has been the mantra ever since Stan McChrystal took over as US commander in Afghanistan last summer. But look at the task he faces: selling to voters back home that an end is in sight (while President Hamid Karzai says he needs another 10-15 years to finish the job), selling to civilians in the war zone that they can be protected (despite the inevitable civilian casualties), selling to the Taliban that their ***** will be kicked (if only we knew where they were).

Is anyone buying? No. It is not the fault of the troops on the ground, who are now thoroughly versed in the intricacies of counter-insurgency. But playing the game of perceptions is difficult in a country shot through with "ethnic paranoia, national self-doubt and conspiracy theories".

And if you are trying to play a tense game of high-stakes poker, it is probably best if you don't show everyone your cards before you start. By telling the world that the troops would start shipping out in mid-2011, that is exactly what Obama did.

It is not his fault, of course. He had to offer a sop to the anti-war contingent. Plus, the US has none of the advantages available to the Pakistanis. They have known all the players in this game for decades. They know how they think, what they are planning, who can be trusted and who needs to be kicked off the table.

At the same time, they are also engaged in a game with India, one which is ultimately far more important to them. If you want a clear statement of the futility of America's current surge in Afghanistan, take this line from a recent editorial: "The war on the western front will not be solved if Pakistan's army continues to regard India's army on the eastern front as the major threat." If that is true, then the west might as well pack up and go home today.

Sure, there are talks planned between India and Pakistan next week. But you would be hard-pressed to find a single person on this side of the world who thinks any progress whatsoever is going to be made. It has been 63 years since they started arguing and fighting over Kashmir, and so far neither side has shown any interest in budging from its original stance.

Whatever glimmers of hope might have existed when the talks were announced earlier this month evaporated when the explosion ripped through the German Bakery in Pune at the weekend. Now all the Indians want to talk about is terrorism, and Pakistan can stick to the line that it does not the support the jihadists in its midst.

There is huge risk in the games Pakistan plays. It has lost of hundreds of lives to its own Taliban insurgency and its intelligence agencies could easily lose control of a jihadist front in Kashmir that has its own agenda and its own momentum. India has the fortitude to withstand only so much, and another series of terrorist strikes like it experienced in 2007 and 2008 may well prove more than it can stand.

While Pakistan remains in some semblance of control, there is hope that some form of compromised stability might be achieved across the region. But if its handle on the situation slips even slightly, the whole pack of cards could very quickly collapse.

Pakistan is winning its risky games | Eric Randolph | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

 

[fatman17]

ASIA PACIFIC
Date Posted: 19-Feb-2010


Jane's Defence Weekly

Taliban arrests highlight fruits of US-Pakistani co-operation

Farhan Bokhari JDW Correspondent - Islamabad

Key Points
Taliban military chief Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar was captured in Karachi in mid-February

The capture of Mullah Baradar and other militants is indicative of greater US-Pakistani intelligence co-operation


Pakistan's increasing co-operation with the United States in tracking down high-profile Taliban militants has begun to yield new and unprecedented arrests.

On 16 February US and Pakistani officials confirmed the arrest of Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, the Taliban military chief, apparently captured at an Islamic 'madrassah' seminary outside the southern port city of Karachi.

Two days later, on 18 February, Pakistani intelligence officials speaking to Jane's confirmed the arrest of nine Al-Qaeda militants, also from Karachi. Additionally, two senior Taliban militants functioning as 'shadow' governors of two of Afghanistan's provinces were also arrested in Pakistan; one arrest took place in the Punjab province while the other was made near Karachi.

On 19 February Pakistani officials said a close family member - either a son or a brother - of Taliban militant Sirajuddin Haqqani had been killed in a missile attack carried out by a US unmanned aerial vehicle. The attack targeted a remote village in the north Waziristan region along Pakistan's border with Afghanistan.

In the past year, US officials have repeatedly urged Pakistani officials in private to tighten the noose around Haqqani and his militant followers, after they were found to be responsible for a number of armed attacks on US and NATO troops in Afghanistan.

"These arrests are indicative of a changing trend. Basically, the Taliban are increasingly on the run," a senior Pakistani intelligence official told Jane's . "Pakistan has always been willing to step up its efforts and we are now acting because these militants are coming on our radar screen," he added.

However, Western diplomats said Pakistan was responding to Washington's pressure by furthering co-operation with the US in the hunt for key Taliban militants. These events also coincide with growing indications that the administration of US President Barack Obama is seeking Pakistan's help in building a comprehensive new security regime for Afghanistan. "These arrests indicate evidence of US pressure but also US interest in enrolling Pakistan for Washington's cause. The idea is that no security arrangement for Afghanistan will work without Pakistan's co-operation," one Western diplomat told Jane's .

During a visit to Islamabad on 18 February Richard Holbrooke, Obama's special envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, praised the capture of Mullah Baradar. However, speaking to a select group of news organisations, including Jane's , he cautioned: "The capture of Mullah Baradar is a major event, but there's more that can be done and I hope it will be."

The Western diplomat said the US was keen to see Pakistan move more aggressively in targeting networks such as the one functioning under Haqqani. "Ultimately," he said, "the real catch will be if Mullah Omar [leader of the Afghan Taliban] gets captured some day."

 

[seekers]

FAtman17! These "Braves" always flee in the field and leave ignorants (Pakistani jihadis who had came to fight in Afghanistan) to be killed.
But poor ummat have never learned even from history.

 

[waraich66]

FAtman17! These "Braves" always flee in the field and leave ignorants (Pakistani jihadis who had came to fight in Afghanistan) to be killed.
But poor ummat have never learned even from history.

Do you forget when Britisher captured Ulema Deen during Rashme Rumal Tehrek in India and tortured them , What happened to British Empire?

US Imperialism will have same end .

 

[seekers]

Do you forget when Britisher captured Ulema Deen during Rashme Rumal Tehrek in India and tortured them , What happened to British Empire?

US Imperialism will have same end .

Yes! I know they had planned to captured over Mecca through wahab with help of "lawrence of arabia" and direct the muslims as per their will.

Their is no doubt in loyalty of Aal-e-saud with US and British Empire

 

[waraich66]

Yes! I know they had planned to captured over Mecca through wahab with help of "lawrence of arabia" and direct the muslims as per their will.

Their is no doubt in loyalty of Aal-e-saud with US and British Empire

Wrong ,Rashme Rumal movement was started by Ulema Hind against Bristish Rulers after first world war because they disintegrated Sultanate Usmania and then Israel was created which is illegal state.

Reshmi Rumal Movement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Reshmi Rumal Movement was an Indian armed movement that planned to declare war against the British empire in the early 20th century.

During British rule in second decade of the 20th century, Maulana Mehmood ul Hasan and his team planned to bring a revolution against the British Empire. Their plan was to motivate Indian youth and train them. A large number of youth and his students joined this movement. The key leaders of that movement were Maulana Husain Ahmad Madni, Maulana Shah Raheem Raipuri, Maulana Ubaidullah Sindhi and Maulana Muhammad Mian Mansoor Ansari.

It was an armed movement so they needed arms and ammunition. Therefore, they needed support from countries outside India especially anti-British countries, such as Turkey, Afghanistan, and Russia. Shaikhul Hind sent Maulana Ubaidullah Sindhi to Afghanistan for special task and Maulana Ansari to the tribes of the Frontier area to get their support for a war against the British Raj, he with Maulana Husain Ahmad Madni set off to Hijaz (current Kingdom of Saudi Arabia) in 1915 to get Turkish support. He met with Ghalib Pasha and obtained his signature on a declaration of war. He then planned to visit the Frontier area via Baghdad and Baluchistan, but his plan was exposed and he was arrested with Maulana Madniat Makkah and detained at Malta where he remained for over three years till his release in 1920.

This movement is known as Tehreek-e Reshmi Rumal (Silken Kerchief movement) because the letters exchanged between Shaikhul Hind and his colleagues containing the outlines of the plan to recruit the volunteers for the army and to establish a national government(soraj) were written on silk piece of cloth.

 

[S-2]

"I see no reason to simply accept your POV without credible evidence that the US role was critical in these arrests."

Nor I to believe it was an operation solely developed and conducted by Pakistani security elements.

"...substantiating one of these accounts, in which case I'll gladly accept that to be the case - but not till then."

No reason to think that you shall anymore then than now. It would require a definitive explanation from a touted, attributable and credible Pakistani source who's substantiated by an equally touted, attributable, and credible American source to meet both sides.

I'm satisfied that we played an integral role in developing the intelligence necessary to make this arrest.

"...I do not doubt that there were meetings between the CIA and ISI that led to Mehsud finally being targeted..."

And imagrey. And intercepts.

"(when Pakistan forces had intelligence on his location) during Bush's last year were not taken up. Based on those accounts, Pakistani intelligence pin pointed B Mehsud's location multiple times without relying on US technology"

Speculative and not accounting for WHY we didn't even if true (although I can imagine the conspiracies arising from you on this one).

"I have seen no indication that US intelligence developed H Mehsud as a target on its own. Pakistan has on multiple occasions managed to almost take out both Falzullah and Faqir Mohammed, all without relying on US technology. That alone points to the effectiveness of Pakistani intelligence in locating targets."

Only dead bodies points to that effectiveness. Anecdotal "almosts" waft in thin Pakistani air.

"The extent of your contribution remains clouded given the multitude of different accounts presented in your own media and even by one news organization."

Twice in both WAPO and NYT they've referenced comms intercepts. There's no cloud except lingering over the top of you.

"...before accusing Pakistan of 'willful duplicity', get your own act together."

Sorry, external sanctuary is critical to this insurgency's persistence and it's established upon Pakistani lands.

Taliban rule did not provide sanctuary to AQ to conduct terrorist attacks on foreign targets"

Utterly false.

"...nor were the Taliban aware of OBL's plans."

Irrelevant and you'd not know with assurance in any case.

"The Taliban did in fact offer two choices after 911 - a trial in Afghanistan or a trial in a third country."

OBL wasn't the reason that Afghanistan was attacked. He'd warrants from Libya, America, and INTERPOL already for his arrest and the taliban knew it. We made war upon the government whom harbored him and brooked no tolerance of a dissembling, dragged-out discussion regarding his surrender. The taliban had one chance to avoid war and they threw it away.

'Hence the subsequent mess is one of YOUR making."

War was of our making and entirely justified to those that matter. You don't matter.

"What would have happened had Pakistan not supported the Taliban would be that the Taliban would have ruled a smaller chunk of Afghanistan, and OBL would have managed to stay in Afghanistan as he had been"

Speculative nonsense.

"The Taliban had little to provide OBL - but OBL had plenty of money to win favor, whether from the Taliban or XYZ warlord."

The taliban had plenty to provide the ISI and were the horse that was ridden to the finish line. OBL could see that and aligned himself with the winner.

"Ask some of villagers whose boys are raped by Afghan police, and whose livelihood is then extorted from them by these same rapists whether they enjoy the current Karzai regime."

You mean like those girls raped by J. Haqqani's doctor, brother, and nephew in FATA? "current" is salient. There shall be no possible alternative to change under taliban rule.

"Well by that yardstick I would have to consider the fact that Mullah Fazlullah decamped to North Eastern Afghanistan and Qari Zia-ur-Rehman's repeated forays into FATA to attack Pakistani positions and their threats to reignite the Taliban insurgency in Bajaur, Mohmand and Swat as evidence of 'material support' by the US to terrorists attacking Pakistan."

Sure. Just as soon as they occupy Asadabad by agreement of the Afghan government you can.

"You are a smart enough fellow, yet your proclivity to swallow the blatantly obvious propaganda pushed by the US establishment is breathtaking."

Care that you don't engage in ad hominem assaults please.

"Yet the Taliban continue to maintain 'sanctuary' bases, training camps and entire parallel governments on Afghan soil ostensibly under your control."

A war is fought for that control and has been since 2002. They face the immediate threat of death by a variety of means in Afghanistan. Not so in Pakistan.

Until April 2009, any such question about Pakistan's desires was entirely fair. Given the selective nature of the offensives thus far and your pressing matters keeping you from the likes of Haqqani calls to question Pakistan's complete commitment.

"...i say they were/are an unsuccessful policy to bring about a resolution to the insurgency, but your own 'military' solutions have quite obviously been just as ineffective."

Such is the nature of war when two sides are engaged.

"So in terms of results, I see little difference between peace deals and whatever ISAF has done in the past 9 years that has allowed the Taliban to maintain sanctuary in Afghanistan."

You see war in Afghanistan and the absence of peace deals. You see lands that are in-country sanctuary only so long as can't reach them. You see an Afghan army, police and government that is only now being raised and not benefiting from 7th largest army with sixty years of history.

"Similar tactics employed by NATO have the same commentators in rapture, praising the glorious Fuhrers MChrystal and Petraeus."

I don't see a wholesale adoption of PA TTPs. I've been told of the adoption of one-forewarning. We don't know the battlefield tactics inside SWAT, Buner, Bajaur, and S. Waziristan. Your ISPR has not ever afforded the coverage provided in Afghanistan but UNITY has provided commentary elsewhere which suggests your forces aren't pursuing battlefield ROEs remotely as restrictive as ISAF. We know of Loe Sam in Bajaur. Read some about SWAT.

Return To The SWAT Valley-Al Jazerra Blogs- Dec. 29, 2009

"When Pakistan announce the SW ops in advance we were allowing the Taliban leadership to escape, us deceitful Pakistanis, whereas the US announcement in advance of the assault on Marja is because of whatever Mchrystal says it is."

And you read that criticism from myself where, exactly?

"The fact is that the Taliban governors and commanders involved in the actual implementation of policy and execution of the insurgency are based in Afghanistan."

Yes. That is what battlefield commanders do-they implement the policies and directives of others above them elsewhere. In this case Pakistan.

"So to the reports that the Taliban imposed taxes on the poppy crop to raise resources, and Hawala and Hundi don't suddenly stop at the Afghan-Pakistan border."

What's that to do with the gathering of resources from without to augment that from within?

"You have nothing."

I have, as usual, more than enough.

"Obviously whatever ISAF tried for 9 years did not work either, so spare me the 'failed over and over again' spiel, given that you did no better."

No doubt externally-directed insurgencies are difficult to combat. Combatting them though is far different from making treaty with them.

"The constraints that made peace deals, often from a position of weakness, in FATA an attractive policy option for Pakistan did not really lift until the Swat deal collapsed in 2009."

Constraints for the world's seventh largest army whose sole purpose is defending the integrity of the land of the pure? What constraints are these? You actually mean the POLITICAL constraints which made accomodation with those whom you've sold to your public as holy warriors, don't you?

Had they been Indian irregulars there'd been no problem with such. As it turns out, that IS in fact how this fight on your lands is now packaged despite the fact that Nek Mohammad, Sufi Mohammad, Faizullah and others fought beside the taliban against the Indian supported N.A. and ourselves in Afghanistan.

"Nobody has provided evidence to even prove the existence of a Quetta Shura."

Ahmed Mukhtar has and he's your defense minister. That evidence awaits refutation by his staff. Robert Gates has made constant reference to it and I fully trust him and there's no refutation of such from HIS staff on that matter. So too others in the American and other governments engaged in this fight. So too battlefield commanders in the south. So too Dutch journalist Alex Strick Van Linschoten. So too Elizabeth Rubin. The list is VERY long.

"Marja, Kandahar, Nuristan, Konar .... yep, all assured. Far more than one town in Pakistan."

These are battlefields and represent no assured foreign sanctuary. You might check the dead taliban at Wanat or COP Keating to see how life in Konar might be. I doubt you've ever heard of the Korengal valley. The taliban call it the valley of death. If so, it's not because of the vast numbers of Americans dying there

"And please do find some time to actually find evidence establishing this mythical Quetta Shura - try the library under Tolkien perhaps."

Won't matter what's found. See list above and read Ms. Rubin's In The Land Of The Taliban.

"Let us know when you actually have evidence."

I worry that you're not reading your own press that makes plenty of reference to Haqqani in the Miram Shah area-

Jalaluddin Haqqani's Son Killed In Drone Attack-DAWN Feb. 20, 2010

"Official sources said here on Friday that Mohammad Haqqani, 22, was killed along with three other militants in the missile strike on a house and a vehicle in Derga Mendai, five kilometres west of Miramshah."

"He is likely in the other parts of Afghanistan where ISAF has yet to run operations to eliminate sanctuaries and parallel taliban governments that don't exist according to you."

Likely not. See above.

"Again, the hypocrisy is breathtaking."

Indeed it is.

"Can you really stick your foot in your mouth any further?"

Not remotely as far as you, my friend. Don't let it choke you...again.

Thanks.

 

[DaRk WaVe]

Wrong ,Rashme Rumal movement was started by Ulema Hind against Bristish Rulers after first world war because they disintegrated Sultanate Usmania and then Israel was created which is illegal state.

Reshmi Rumal Movement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[/COLOR][/B]

Do you know what this movement was not supported by any Major Political Muslim & same was the case with Khilafat Movement guess who 'used' Khilafat movement 'Gandhi', & these are same Maulana's who declared Sir Syed Ahmed Khan 'infidel', so better keep this discussion out of this thread
Thanks