What's new

U.S. wants to widen area in Pakistan where it can operate drones

Vimana1

BANNED
Joined
Nov 11, 2010
Messages
207
Reaction score
0
ISLAMABAD - The United States has renewed pressure on Pakistan to expand the areas where CIA drones can operate inside the country, reflecting concern that the U.S. war effort in Afghanistan is being undermined by insurgents' continued ability to take sanctuary across the border, U.S. and Pakistani officials said.

The U.S. appeal has focused on the area surrounding the Pakistani city of Quetta, where the Afghan Taliban leadership is thought to be based. But the request also seeks to expand the boundaries for drone strikes in the tribal areas, which have been targeted in 101 attacks this year, the officials said.

Pakistan has rejected the request, officials said. Instead, the country has agreed to more modest measures, including an expanded CIA presence in Quetta, where the agency and Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) directorate have established teams seeking to locate and capture senior members of the Taliban.

The disagreement over the scope of the drone program underscores broader tensions between the United States and Pakistan, wary allies that are increasingly pointing fingers at one another over the rising levels of insurgent violence on both sides of the Afghan-Pakistan border.

Senior Pakistani officials expressed resentment over what they described as misplaced U.S. pressure to do more, saying the United States has not controlled the Afghan side of the border, is preoccupied by arbitrary military deadlines and has little regard for Pakistan's internal security problems.

"You expect us to open the skies for anything that you can fly," said a high-ranking Pakistani intelligence official, who described the Quetta request as an affront to Pakistani sovereignty. "In which country can you do that?"

U.S. officials confirmed the request for expanded drone flights. They cited concern that Quetta functions not only as a sanctuary for Taliban leaders but also as a base for sending money, recruits and explosives to Taliban forces inside Afghanistan.

"If they understand our side, they know the patience is running out," a senior NATO military official said.

The CIA's drone campaign in Pakistan has accelerated dramatically in recent months, with 47 attacks recorded since the beginning of September, according to The Long War Journal, a Web site that tracks the strikes. By contrast, there were 45 strikes in the first five years of the drone program.

But Pakistan places strict boundaries on where CIA drones can fly. The unmanned aircraft may patrol designated flight "boxes" over the country's tribal belt but not other provinces, including Baluchistan, which encompasses Quetta.

"They want to increase the size of the boxes, they want to relocate the boxes," a second Pakistani intelligence official said of the latest U.S. requests. "I don't think we are going to go any further."

He and others spoke on condition of anonymity, citing the clandestine nature of a program that neither government will publicly acknowledge.


Pakistani officials stressed that Quetta is a densely populated city where an errant strike is more likely to kill innocent civilians, potentially provoking a backlash. Unlike the semi-autonomous tribal territories, Baluchistan is considered a core part of Pakistan.

U.S. officials have long suspected there are other reasons for Islamabad's aversion, including concern that the drones might be used to conduct surveillance of Pakistani nuclear weapons facilities in Baluchistan.

In interviews in Islamabad, senior Pakistani officials voiced a mix of appreciation and apprehension over the U.S. role in the region.

The high-ranking Pakistani intelligence official said the CIA-ISI relationship is stronger than at any times since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, and that the two spy services carry out joint operations "almost on a daily basis."

"I wish [our] countries understood each other the way the CIA and ISI understand each other," the official said. But he also traced Pakistan's most acute problems, including an epidemic of militant violence, to two decisions by the government to collaborate with the United States.

Using the ISI to funnel CIA money and arms to mujaheddin fighters in the 1980s helped oust the Soviets from Afghanistan, the official said, but also made Pakistan a breeding ground for militant groups.

Similarly, Pakistan's cooperation since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks has been key to the capture of al-Qaeda operatives and the success of the drone campaign. But it has inflamed radical elements in the country and made Islamabad a target of terrorrist attacks.

"We'd not have been here if we had not supported the Afghan jihad, if we had not supported [the response to] 9/11," the official said, adding that it was "our fault. We should have stood up."

Barring the CIA from flying drones over Quetta, the official said, is one area in which Pakistan is now taking a stand.

In other areas, CIA-ISI cooperation has deepened. The agencies have carried out more than 100 joint operations in the past 18 months, including raids that have led to the capture of high-ranking figures including Mullah Barader, the Taliban's former military chief.

The Pakistani intelligence official said the operations have been "mainly focused on Quetta." Teams based there rely on sophisticated surveillance technology and eavesdropping equipment provided by the CIA. When a raid or capture is attempted, the ISI is in the lead.

The aim is "to capture or arrest people based on intel primarily provided by Americans," the Pakistani intelligence official said. The effort has been underway for a year, the official said, but "now the intensity is much higher."


Nevertheless, U.S. and Pakistani officials acknowledged that they have no high-profile arrests or other successes to show for their efforts. The NATO military official said there had been "intelligence-led" operations against Taliban targets in Quetta in recent months but described them as "small scale" in nature.

The two sides disagree sharply over the importance of the Quetta Shura, the leadership council led by Mullah Mohammed Omar that presides over the Afghan Taliban. Some senior Pakistani officials refuse to use the term "Quetta shura," calling it a U.S. construct designed to embarrass Pakistan.

"I'm not denying the individual presence of members" of the Taliban in or near Quetta, a senior Pakistani military official said. "But to create the impression there is a body micromanaging the affairs of the Afghan Taliban . . . is very far-fetched."

The push to expand the drone strikes has come up repeatedly in recent months, Pakistani officials said. The United States has also urged Pakistan to launch a military offensive in North Waziristan, a redoubt for militant groups including al-Qaeda, the Pakistani Taliban and the Haqqani network, considered the most lethal foe of U.S. forces in Afghanistan.

Pakistani officials ruled out a sweep anytime soon, saying the country's military is still consolidating its hold on territory in Swat and South Waziristan, where tens of thousands of residents were displaced during operations to oust militants last year.

The senior Pakistani military official said U.S. expectations have little to do with Islamabad's own national security calculations.

"You have timelines of November elections and July x'11 drawdowns -you're looking for short-term gains," the official said, referring to President Obama's pledge to begin withdrawing U.S. troops from Afghanistan in July. "Your short-term gains should not be our long-term pain."

Correspondents Karin Brulliard in Islamabad and Joshua Partlow in Kabul contributed to this report.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/19/AR2010111906268.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2010111905681
 
.
Knowing Zardari, he'll let them expand for more aid.

And in the end, the recession hit American people will be forced to pay with their cash and the Pakistani will be forced to pay with their blood.
 
.
U.S. is asking too much from Pakistan.

This war is not worth it, too much Pakistani blood has been spilled in this war OF terror. No more Pakistani blood should be spilled.

The Government and Military of Pakistan should not allow this to happen.

Pakistani blood is not that cheap, Zardari.

Unfortunately, all I'm seeing these days are conflicts of interests between Pakistan and the United States.
 
.
Whatever be the reason, the balme only goes to Zardari and credit is always given to Gillani. I don't understand techincally it's the PM who calls shots in Pakistan, so why blame the poor chap who is just making some money for himself.
 
.
yara i don't understand this whole mess.Yanks say there are save heavens for taliban in Pakistan.They attack on us and then go back and hide in Pakistan.(Does they have some kind of ram jet on their @ss that they come to Pakistan in 20 min.NATO planes only able to chase them when they are crossing border).
We also say Americans and indians are funding and arming ttp scum.
but questions is why we or yanks can't mine the pak afghan border?
 
.
No offense, intended. But what's the point in spending so much money on your military and then letting some country treat your land like a hunting ground. No self respectable Nation would allow her sovereignty to be violated in such a senseless manner. What do the citizens who have to live in fear of a drone strike every day think of the Government that was supposed to protect them?

But then again,the entire purpose of your armed forces is to protect you from Big Bad India. Any other party can treat you like a helpless country as long as the Indians stay away. Be this trigger happy American soldiers sitting comfortable somewhere and hunting Pakistanis like animals with a drone, or Taliban fighters blowing up places all over Pakistan without any care.
 
Last edited:
.
Seems like Pakistan is caught between a rock and a hard place whether to further agtonise the general population or seek the wrath of US who are getting impatient and Obama needs a result by the looks of things. How this plays out is going to get very intresting and who will win the battle of wills.
 
Last edited:
.
Give up the al Qaeda and Taliban leaders and all this would go away. Pakistan is paying a frightful price for allowing al Qaeda and Mullah Omar to be safe and comfortable in their country. Pakistanis should ask their Government why Zawahiri, bin Laden and Omar are worth so much of their blood? The only possible answers are: (1) India/Kashmir and (2) love for Islamic Jihad.
 
.
Give up the al Qaeda and Taliban leaders and all this would go away. Pakistan is paying a frightful price for allowing al Qaeda and Mullah Omar to be safe and comfortable in their country. Pakistanis should ask their Government why Zawahiri, bin Laden and Omar are worth so much of their blood? The only possible answers are: (1) India/Kashmir and (2) love for Islamic Jihad.

Could be a chip to play with if Bin ladin or Ayman al-Zawahiri were captured or killed could it mean no more war on terror? and no more $$ for the Pakistani military and ISI as they could be surplus to requirements? Seems like both countries are looking out for no1 and their own strategic interest at this point in time.
 
.
Give up the al Qaeda and Taliban leaders and all this would go away. Pakistan is paying a frightful price for allowing al Qaeda and Mullah Omar to be safe and comfortable in their country. Pakistanis should ask their Government why Zawahiri, bin Laden and Omar are worth so much of their blood? The only possible answers are: (1) India/Kashmir and (2) love for Islamic Jihad.

I don't know , with US tax payers money showering on Afghans and Pakistani corrupt politicians why would they end the WOT.
They want the reasons to be kept alive , so US keep on paying them with fear that bad guys will come in power.
 
.
Could be a chip to play with if Bin ladin or Ayman al-Zawahiri were captured or killed could it mean no more war on terror? and no more $$ for the Pakistani military and ISI as they could be surplus to requirements? Seems like both countries are looking out for no1 and their own strategic interest at this point in time.

I think Afghans got 100 billion from US taxpayers pocket which they keep in Indian banks . easy money ha
 
.
I think Afghans got 100 billion from US taxpayers pocket which they keep in Indian banks . easy money ha


lol I would tell the afganis not to put it in Indian banks with the level of corruption going on right now or they might find the money has been deposited to swiss bank accounts no wonder it's the most popular bolly film destination.
 
.
Give up the al Qaeda and Taliban leaders and all this would go away. Pakistan is paying a frightful price for allowing al Qaeda and Mullah Omar to be safe and comfortable in their country. Pakistanis should ask their Government why Zawahiri, bin Laden and Omar are worth so much of their blood? The only possible answers are: (1) India/Kashmir and (2) love for Islamic Jihad.

Wheres the proof that Pakistan is shielding Mullah Omar and other Al Qaeda members? Considering what these bastards have done to our country, i find it hard to believe that GOP will be shielding these animals. Besides, whats the point of hiding in Pakistan when almost half of Afghanistan is under Taliban's control. I am quite sure they can live a cosy life over their considering how big of a failure NATO's military campaign has been; Operation Khanjar and other operations in Helmand, how were they? At least i can claim that PA launched a campaign against the TTP with their meagre resources and wiped them off in Swat and South Waziristan. Easy to blame your problems on others before acknowledging your own short comings good sir :rolleyes:
 
.
Give up the al Qaeda and Taliban leaders and all this would go away. Pakistan is paying a frightful price for allowing al Qaeda and Mullah Omar to be safe and comfortable in their country. Pakistanis should ask their Government why Zawahiri, bin Laden and Omar are worth so much of their blood? The only possible answers are: (1) India/Kashmir and (2) love for Islamic Jihad.

Any evidence to support these claims?
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom