US & Pakistan Dispute and Tensions over Haqqani group

[muse]

I think that time is over and past, US is serious enough it will do all it can to swiftly empower and damage the image of Pakistan (already done alot) and create a legitimate case to take on further precision surgical strikes inside Pakistan. This is a warning Pakistani Armed Forces and Government must counter the accusations strongly. If Pakistan has any and credible evidences against CIA it needs to show them internationally to make its case strong enough for US to not engage in such a verbal accusations any more. Would Pakistanis be happy if B-2/B-52s are sent over.

So you have no confidence i the Pakistan army? Is it really a powder and puff army ? If yes, then lets be rid of it, honestly, if the pakistan army in your estimation will not protect Pakistan, why do we need it then??

But I think you are reading events wrong -- there will be no US action, there will be threats, the US will kill Karzai, but if it attacks Pakistan, either the army will die or the US policy will -- and the army must come to this realization - if it has honor it will defend Pakistan and Pakistani policy.

See Lutfwaffe, reality is that the US DoD has now hijacked the agenda of the US for the last 10 years, and it has even conspire to to force Obama to remain in Afghanistan for longer than he wished, with greater numbers than he wished, the same DoD now threatens civil-military relations in the US by involving the US on multiple fronts -- just consider, if the US project fails in Afghanistan, to where will they go??? Where is there left for them in Asia?? or the middle East, in Iraq? in Arabia? or will they play the new age vikings raiders??

 

[VCheng]

That's right. Whatever dirt they've found on CIA, as claimed due to Raymond Davis capture, must be brought out in public or must be hinted at bringing out. This accusation is no ordinary, it comes straight from the right command of the US armed forces and towards Pak army, its intelligence agency and the govt. They have planned somethin big for them to say such big words.

ISI have nothing of substance such as what you hope. Mullen's words are correct.

---------- Post added at 11:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:41 PM ----------

So you have no confidence i the Pakistan army? Is it really a powder and puff army ? If yes, then lets be rid of it, honestly, if the pakistan army in your estimation will not protect Pakistan, why do we need it then??

....................

1. Yes.

2. Yes.

3. Good question!

 

[Luftwaffe]

So you have no confidence i the Pakistan army? Is it really a powder and puff army ? If yes, then lets be rid of it, honestly, if the pakistan army in your estimation will not protect Pakistan, why do we need it then??

But I think you are reading events wrong -- there will be no US action, there will be threats, the US will kill Karzai, but if it attacks Pakistan, either the army will die or the US policy will -- and the army must come to this realization - if it has honor it will defend Pakistan and Pakistani policy.

See Lutfwaffe, reality is that the US DoD has now hijacked the agenda of the US for the last 10 years, and it has even conspire to to force Obama to remain in Afghanistan for longer than he wished, with greater numbers than he wished, the same DoD now threatens civil-military relations in the US by involving the US on multiple fronts -- just consider, if the US project fails in Afghanistan, to where will they go??? Where is there left for them in Asia?? or the middle East, in Iraq? in Arabia? or will they play the new age vikings raiders??

When did I say I have no confidence in Pakistani Army. The point is US and NATO has accused Pakistan long enough, see what has Pakistan replied back with, is our stance strong enough, is Pakistan doing enough diplomatically to keep US's mouth shut.

That time is gone, we are made fools that keeping silent is our strategy that usually our Government says, that strategy has failed!, you have evidence against CIA/MI6/ANA come out and present it to internationally community.

 

[iPhone]

ISI have nothing of substance such as what you hope. Mullen's words are correct.

Well, you are only speculating, but what if they (isi) do?

 

[muse]

Ok now another Editorial, this one from Dawn, and though clever and nuanced, it's fair to say that it's advice is the same as that of the Tribune, and DailyTimes :

US allegations
From the Newspaper
(6 hours ago) Today

RELATIONS between the US and Pakistan are plummeting — again. This time, the attack on the US embassy compound in Kabul and the bombing of a US base in Wardak appear to have driven American officials to a concerted verbal assault against Pakistan. What is highly unusual, though, is the directness of the accusations and the seniority of the officials making the allegations. Adm Mike Mullen may be on the verge of retirement, but he is still the senior-most armed forces official in the US. And yet, the American allegations raise at least two important questions. One, to what extent does Pakistan influence the behaviour of the Haqqani network? Two, even if Pakistan does have serious influence with the Haqqani group, why would it urge them to attack the US embassy compound? Surely, the furious response of American authorities could have been predicted and there would be little to gain by poking the Americans in the eye at this juncture.

Perhaps if the US were to bring into the public domain the `credible intelligence` it has gathered on Haqqani involvement and Pakistani complicity, the issue could be moved forward some. As long as these issues are argued over in private, the possibility of either side accepting the other`s point of view appears to be very slim. At the moment, the army here appears content to thrust the civilians into the foreground to argue Pakistan`s case and the civilians are doing it in the only way they know how: matching rhetoric for rhetoric. However, the allegations are too serious to go unanswered directly and, were evidence to be brought into the public domain, the army would need to explicitly state what it will do to address the problem. Pakistan should not want to and simply cannot afford to have its territory used for attacks in this manner; the price in global and regional isolation that this country will have to pay is simply not worth it.

For now, though, the US appears to still understand the need to ultimately keep Pakistan engaged. Adm Mullen may have been direct in his criticism, but his full statement shows signs of understanding the bargain that the US must strike: remain engaged with Pakistan and the US can address some of its interests; disengage and the cost of protecting or pursuing its interests will go up significantly. For Pakistan, too, a similar realisation must come into play: if Pakistan`s interests, as defined by the army, and US interests don`t always mesh, a rupture in relations would leave Pakistan, as the smaller power, significantly worse off.

 

[VCheng]

Well, you are only speculating, but what if they (isi) do?

Sure, what are they waiting for, if they have anything? Let's see a coherent, well thought out counter-response to what the US is presenting, and I will be the first one to applaud it.

 

[muse]

When did I say I have no confidence in Pakistani Army. The point is US and NATO has accused Pakistan long enough, see what has Pakistan replied back with, is our stance strong enough, is Pakistan doing enough diplomatically to keep US's mouth shut.

That time is gone, we are made fools that keeping silent is our strategy that usually our Government says, that strategy has failed!, you have evidence against CIA/MI6/ANA come out and present it to internationally community.

But if it had evidence it would have presented it to the Pakistani people, so we can safely assume that the army has no such evidence - and since it will not come clean publicly either way, whether it will capitulate or stand it's ground, one can agan safely assume that it is not sure which way it will go.

But it's not like it's holding a weak hand, much depends of the kinds of player they are.

 

[VCheng]

..................................

But it's not like it's holding a weak hand, much depends of the kinds of player they are.

This is not poker, and they have nothing in one hand and their own genitals in the other, nothing more, proverbially speaking of course.

 

[VelocuR]

Hitting back: Kayani scoffs, Khar cautions, Gilani muses

ISLAMABAD: The crescendo of discontent emanating from Washington has not been taken lightly by Pakistan.

The country’s top civil and military leadership spoke in unison on Friday, urging the United States to stop publicly accusing Islamabad of playing a double game in the war against militancy – and even going as far as warning Washington that it could suffer consequences if it continued to do so.

“You will lose an ally,” Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar told a news channel in New York in remarks broadcast on Friday – a day that also saw the White House calling for Pakistan to cut ties with the Haqqani network.

“You cannot afford to alienate Pakistan, you cannot afford to alienate the Pakistani people. If you are choosing to do so, and if they are choosing to do so, it will be at their own cost,” Khar added. Pressed to break his silence on Friday, Army chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani also dismissed allegations that the ISI had helped Afghan militants attack the US embassy in Kabul, insisting that the charges were baseless and part of a “public blame game” – which was detrimental to peace in Afghanistan.

Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani also joined the chorus on Friday, saying “The message for America is: ‘They can’t live with us… they can’t live without us’.”

In a hard-hitting statement before a Senate panel on Thursday, US Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen openly accused Inter-Services Intelligence agency of supporting Haqqani insurgents in planning and executing a 22-hour assault on the US Embassy in Afghanistan last week and a truck bomb that wounded 77 American soldiers days earlier.


In a statement issued by the Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR), Kayani termed US Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen’s claims ‘very unfortunate and not based on facts.’

Responding to scathing criticism by the US military’s top officer, Kayani denied allegations that his country is “exporting” terror to neighbouring Afghanistan.

“While taking note of the recent statements made by Admiral Mullen… Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani termed these as very unfortunate and not based on facts,” read an Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR).

“This is especially disturbing in view of a rather constructive meeting with Admiral Mullen,” it added referring to a recent meeting between the pair in Spain.

Interestingly, General Kayani’s terse statement suggested Islamabad had no immediate intention of acting on renewed American demands that it attack the Haqqani militant faction in North Waziristan. Nor did the Army go as far as to deny it maintains contact with the feared Afghan insurgent group. However the Army chief felt ‘singling out’ Pakistan for contact with the group wasn’t ‘fair or productive’.

“On the specific question of contacts with Haqqanis, the (chief of army staff) said that Admiral Mullen knows fully well which all countries are in contact with the Haqqanis. Singling out Pakistan is neither fair nor productive.”

The statement left the media buzzing about the name of the country the army chief was hinting at, but there was no confirmation. However, a military official said the army chief was referring to US attempts to reach out to the Haqqanis for reconciliation in Afghanistan.

Categorically denying the accusations of waging a proxy war and ISI support to Haqqanis, the army chief said: “the blame game in public statements should give way to a constructive and meaningful engagement for a stable and peaceful Afghanistan, an objective to which Pakistan is fully committed.”

Renewed demands

Meanwhile, White House spokesman Jay Carney on Friday called on Pakistan to “break any link they have” with the Haqqani terror network.

“It is critical that the government of Pakistan break any links they have and take strong and immediate action against this network so that they are no longer a threat to the United States or to the people of Pakistan, because this network is a threat to both,” Carney said.

In fresh attacks made by Captain John Kirby, spokesperson of Admiral Mike Mullen, the US official claimed the ISI not only supported but also encouraged terrorist outfits, particularly the Haqqani militant network.

“All I can tell you that we are confident that the ISI continues to support and even encourage the Haqqanis to launch these attacks. I am not going into specifics of the intelligence that we have about the support,” Kirby told Pentagon reporters during an off-camera interaction.

When asked about the denial being issued by the Pakistani leadership on the allegations, Kirby said that he and the Chairman stand by those comments.

“The chairman stands by what he testified before the US Senate,” he said.

Military sources say despite US pressure, there is no possibility of an imminent operation in North Waziristan Agency.

“Pakistan must avoid opening another front merely on the behest of the US,” said Defense Analyst Lt General Abdul Qayum. “Any operation in North Waziristan will have huge implications for Pakistan,” he argued.

However, the issue of the Haqqani network has seemingly become the main stumbling block to normalise ties between the two countries. Earlier this week, the US Senate Committee linked all US economic and security assistance to Pakistan with its progress towards fighting militant groups, including the Haqqani network.

Communication lines open

However, despite the heightened acrimony, the Pentagon said on Friday that communication lines with Pakistan’s military remain open. Despite serious disagreement, the US military had no intention of cutting off dialogue with Pakistan, press secretary George Little told reporters.

“The lines of communication with our Pakistani counterparts remain open,” Little said. “This is a relationship that’s complicated but essential.”

Published in The Express Tribune, September 24th, 2011.


-------------------
MastanKhan, do you feel enough the strong response by Kiyani?

 

[VCheng]

This is the key para:

“On the specific question of contacts with Haqqanis, the (chief of army staff) said that Admiral Mullen knows fully well which all countries are in contact with the Haqqanis. Singling out Pakistan is neither fair nor productive.”

since it is an admission of Pakistan's links with the Haqqani Network, and a pathetic attempt to justify them by saying other countries have them too.

 

[muse]

This is not poker, and they have nothing in one hand and their own genitals in the other, nothing more.

Actually you are wrong o both counts -- the US is using media to it's full effect in a information and psyops effort and it is a test of nerves -- if the Us actually intended, it would have acted by now, it has been threatening to do so for 10 years - and if it does, it loses it's communication route, it galvanizes the Pakistani people, it enables certain actors to push through polices which can strengthen the state and it allow the Pakistan to draw this out till their objectives inside Pakistan are met and of course the situation in Afghanistan for the Americans will become terribly dangerous -- but American friends are in a fighting mood, I wish their mood is turned to reality.
Good for US and good for Pakistan

 

[President Camacho]

Actually you are wrong o both counts -- the US is using media to it's full effect in a information and psyops effort and it is a test of nerves -- if the Us actually intended, it would have acted by now, it has been threatening to do so for 10 years - and if it does, it loses it's communication route, it galvanizes the Pakistani people, it enables certain actors to push through polices which can strengthen the state and it allow the Pakistan to draw this out till their objectives inside Pakistan are met and of course the situation in Afghanistan for the Americans will become terribly dangerous -- but American friends are in a fighting mood, I wish their mood is turned to reality.
Good for US and good for Pakistan

On that bold part... which of these do you think is more a testing of nerves...

1) May 2 - Choppers fly in almost to the capital and conduct a raid to kill Osama.

Army says it is intrusion and will not be tolerated again.

2) June 11 - F-15 and B-1 drop bombs on FC check post killing 11 soldiers.

Army says it is an act of aggression and does not serve the common cause of fighting terrorism.

3) September 22 - Mullen and Panetta, while briefing a committee, call Haqqani Network a veritable arm of the Pakistan Army.

Gen. Kiyani responds these allegations are sad, and also baseless.

4) The next day - Funding of Faisal Shahzad is reported to have taken place with full knowledge of the ISI.

No reaction.


I feel the relationship is past the testing of nerves and brinkmanship. And certainly, the actions may be way less direct than people might expect, but effective enough.

 

[muse]

I feel the relationship is past the testing of nerves and brinkmanship. And certainly, the actions may be way less direct than people might expect, but effective enough.

That's certainly one interpretation of these behaviors but I would challenge the "effective enough" bit -- See, if US policy is to deny Pakistan the ability to assert interests in Afghanistan, then clearly there is little need for cooperation on anything, alternately, if US policy is to have Pakistan act in concert with the US, then such behavior and comments are less than productive.

To my thinking, the US understands that it's position is now very tenuous and ISAF has no mandate in Pakistan, and NATO has no mandate in Pakistan, which basically leaves the US the coalition of the unwilling.

All the points you have highlighted have created the impression in the minds of Pakistanis, regardless of the patriotic expression, that either the Pakistan army is part of the problem or that the Pakistan army is the problem, either way, the Pakistan army, if not Pakistan, cannot avoid their moment of truth - whatever their decision, it will be good for Pakistan. Do you see that?

 

[Al Bhatti]

On that bold part... which of these do you think is more a testing of nerves...

1) May 2 - Choppers fly in almost to the capital and conduct a raid to kill Osama.

Army says it is intrusion and will not be tolerated again.

2) June 11 - F-15 and B-1 drop bombs on FC check post killing 11 soldiers.

Army says it is an act of aggression and does not serve the common cause of fighting terrorism.

3) September 22 - Mullen and Panetta, while briefing a committee, call Haqqani Network a veritable arm of the Pakistan Army.

Gen. Kiyani responds these allegations are sad, and also baseless.

4) The next day - Funding of Faisal Shahzad is reported to have taken place with full knowledge of the ISI.

No reaction.


I feel the relationship is past the testing of nerves and brinkmanship. And certainly, the actions may be way less direct than people might expect, but effective enough.

The government + the army making the public numb slowly and steadily towards the feeling of the trespassing of Pakistan territory by the US, and very soon reading about frequent trespassing of Pakistani territory by the US will be like reading an uninteresting news of no value what so ever.

 

[President Camacho]

That's certainly one interpretation of these behaviors but I would challenge the "effective enough" bit -- See, if US policy is to deny Pakistan the ability to assert interests in Afghanistan, then clearly there is little need for cooperation on anything, alternately, if US policy is to have Pakistan act in concert with the US, then such behavior and comments are less than productive.


To my thinking, the US understands that it's position is now very tenuous and ISAF has no mandate in Pakistan, and NATO has no mandate in Pakistan, which basically leaves the US the coalition of the unwilling.

All the points you have highlighted have created the impression in the minds of Pakistanis, regardless of the patriotic expression, that either the Pakistan army is part of the problem or that the Pakistan army is the problem, either way, the Pakistan army, if not Pakistan, cannot avoid their moment of truth - whatever their decision, it will be good for Pakistan. Do you see that?

I feel those two parts marked in bold compliment each other. The US clearly does not want a strong or influential presence of Pakistan in Afghanistan. But at the same time, it also recognizes the power and sway of the Pakistan Army in that region.

So what happens with OBL raid, all the name calling to cow down the PA generals, and asking them to go after Haqqanis? - On one hand the Pakistani people, esp those who matter here (from northern areas), lose their trust in the Army. On the other, the Army is made even more unpopular (among the local militia) by forcing it to go after the Haqqanis (and others), resulting in complete loss of influence over the region.

A lot of Army's control in that area is through the local militia backed by the Army (at least that's what I have read), once that is gone, the Army will be forced to go in and will be overstretched beyond the degree of feasibility.

Such a weakened and unpopular army may have to pave way for the next civilian government to hold the power, and that can more easily be controlled by the Americans.

To your last question, of course yes - When truth prevails even a small nation can take the longest of strides, but this one may cost the influence in Afghanistan. However, with all the stuff going on in Pakistan at the moment, perhaps this moment of truth is the only straw to hang on.