US responsible for the Murder of Pakistani Troops - Pak Rejects NATO Probe

[chanikya]

Pakistan has rejected an investigation report by the US into last month's NATO airstrike that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers, a media report said Friday.
Geo News reported that Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR) rejected the findings of the US-NATO probe.
A statement termed the report as biased as well as lacking in key facts.
The Nov 26 airstrike on two border checkposts in Mohmand Agency left two dozen soldiers dead, sparking outrage in the country.
A probe by the Pentagon has concluded that the NATO attack was unintentional and stressed that "inadequate coordination" between the US and Pakistani security forces was to be blamed for the air strikes.
The alliance forces have "acted in self defence", the Pentagon said Thursday.
"The investigating officer found that US forces, given what information they had available to them at the time, acted in self defence and with appropriate force after being fired upon," Xinhua quoted a Pentagon statement as saying.

Pakistan rejects NATO strike probe report

 

[Don Jaguar]

U.S report about NATO strike was a joke.

 

[kawaraj]

we don't need a probe. we know what's happening.

we aren't fools. we learn.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

And has it been established that the NATO and Afghan forces were indeed within Pakistani borders?

The air-strikes were certainly within Pakistani borders.

There is, as of right now, not a single credible casualty figure from the alleged 'highly accurate machine gun fire and mortar rounds fired at US and Afghan forces' that 'forced them to retaliate in self-defence'.

 

[Mike2011]

Now lets see pakistan response. What else it can do? USA and NATO knows pakistan will stop supply.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Now lets see pakistan response. What else it can do? USA and NATO knows pakistan will stop supply.

And US and NATO claim that they don't need the Pakistani route, so good riddance to them ... both sides can live happily on that count.

 

[Mike2011]

And US and NATO claim that they don't need the Pakistani route, so good riddance to them ... both sides can live happily on that count.

But ... Pakistan can survive without USA help? What will happen to the infra and economy build around NATO supply?

 

[Devil Soul]

Pakistan rejects US air strike deaths report

Pakistan has rejected the findings of a US report into an air strike on the Afghan border last month that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.

The report concluded both sides had made mistakes, blaming poor information and inadequate co-ordination between US and Pakistani forces on the ground.

The Pakistani military said the report was "short on facts".

Pakistan closed its border with Afghanistan after the incident, cutting off vital Nato supply lines.

In a short statement, the Pakistani military said it did not agree with the findings of the report "as being reported in the media".

"The inquiry report is short on facts," it said.

The statement said the military would present a more detailed response "as and when the formal report is received".

Islamabad, a vital partner in the fight against militants in the region, has demanded a formal US apology.

It its report, the US military admitted it bore significant responsibility for the deaths in Mohmand tribal agency on 26 November, and expressed "deep regret" for the "tragic loss of life".

"Inadequate co-ordination by US and Pakistani military officers operating through the border co-ordination centre - including our reliance on incorrect mapping information shared with the Pakistani liaison officer - resulted in a misunderstanding about the true location of Pakistani military units," it said.

"This, coupled with other gaps in information about the activities and placement of units from both sides, contributed to the tragic result."

In a news briefing later at the Pentagon, spokesman George Little said: "For the loss of life and for the lack of proper co-ordination between US and Pakistani forces that contributed to those losses we express our deepest regret.

"We further express sincere condolences to the Pakistani people, to the Pakistani government and, most importantly, to the families of the Pakistani soldiers who were killed or wounded."

The Defence Department has said lessons must be learned and that it hopes Pakistan and the US can work together to improve their mutual level of trust.

The BBC's Caroline Wyatt in Kabul says it appears from the report that Nato officials did not inform Pakistan of the operation in advance, after fears that the Pakistani military were leaking information to insurgents.

Pakistan responded furiously to the killings of its soldiers.

As well as shutting its border with Afghanistan, which Nato relies on heavily for deliveries of fuel, ammunition and other supplies, it also refused to attend the Bonn conference on Afghanistan earlier this month

US-Pakistan downturn

30 Sept 2010: Nato helicopters kill two Pakistani soldiers, prompting nearly two-week border closure in protest
22 April 2011: Supplies to Nato forces in Afghanistan halted for three days in protest over drone attacks
2 May: US announces Bin Laden's death and says Pakistan not warned of raid
2 June: Top US military chief Adm Mike Mullen admits "significant" cut in US troops in Pakistan
10 July: US suspends $800m of military aid
22 Sept: Outgoing US Adm Mullen accuses Pakistan of supporting Haqqani militant group in Afghanistan; denied by Pakistan
BBC News - Pakistan rejects US air strike deaths report

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

But ... Pakistan can survive without USA help? What will happen to the infra and economy build around NATO supply?

They will shift to doing something else - as it is, the US has been withholding close to $3Billion in CSF reimbursements, which would cover expenses such as the transit, and has shown no intent on releasing those funds.

In any case, this 'NATO transit' is not going to exist forever - as the war winds down and NATO forces cutback, the 'trucking industry involved in NATO transit' will have to find alternate sources of business anyway.

 

[VelocuR]

There is nothing credible reports on December 23 but offer cheap regret and compensation. It is clearly they acknowledges deliberately their mistakes, not Pakistan.


NATO attack: US offers regret, compensation but no apology

WASHINGTON: Hours after the Department of Defence and Nato issued press releases on the findings into the Nato airstrike on November 26 on the Pak-Afghan border, State Department spokesperson Mark Toner was repeatedly pressed by journalists at the daily press briefing about why only a statement expressing regret had been issued as opposed to an apology.

Toner said: “The difference is that we have accepted responsibility for mistakes that we made. But as the report makes clear, there were miscommunications on both sides. There was misinformation that led to the results of that day. It’s a great tragedy. We’ve expressed our regret.”

Toner was also asked about the difference between “we’re sorry” and “we regret” by a journalist at the briefing.

The State Department spokesperson said: “I think ‘we regret’ refers to a sense of sympathy with the Pakistani people in this case, but more broadly with the people affected by any incident or tragedy.”

“We’re accepting responsibility for any of our actions that may have contributed to it. I don’t know about an apology – you can figure that out for your own. I can only say what we’re trying to express through this investigation.”

Earlier this month, a New York Times report said that US President Barack Obama will not issue a formal apology or condolences on the death of 24 Pakistani soldiers in a Nato attack on the Pak-Afghan border.

The report had stated that US Ambassador to Pakistan Cameron Munter, through a video conference, told White House officials that the anti-American sentiment has reached its peak in Pakistan stressing the need for a formal apology by the US. But the White House argued that condolences offered by senior US officials and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton were enough till the US completes its investigations into the matter, the report said.

“The US government has offered its deepest condolences for the loss of life, from the White House and from Secretary Clinton and Secretary Panetta,” said Tommy Vietor, spokesman for the National Security Council, referring to Defense Secretary Leon E Panetta, “and we are conducting an investigation into the incident. We cannot offer additional comment on the circumstances of the incident until we have the results.”

On the question of compensation, Toner on Friday said that while the Department of Defense would have more information, “my understanding is that we are prepared to offer some payments in recognition of the loss incurred by the family.”

Toner also added that while the State Department had expressed regret, the US had also accepted responsibility for the mistakes that were theirs.

 

[All-Green]

Who fired first?

I will make it real simple.

As per SOP, Pakistan should have fired first on any intruding party since these posts have been established in a hot zone where militants are active.

Let us assume that it was a militant group which was moving at night and we did not fire, had they crossed over we would have had the lovely Panetta sing like a canary about how we allow militants to cross over from this place and that place.

Regarding the rascals who crossed the border without informing us, they knew where they were and we did not...as simple as that.
They should have pulled back...instead they called in an airstrike!

Why did the US not inform us of any party operating in that area?
This is the only SOP i know, to inform the liaison officers prior to any operation along the border.

The US was in breach of the basic understanding governing land based operations along the border, anything it did afterwards cannot be labeled as a defensive maneuver as per defined SOPs.
The onus lied on US that once it violated the basic protocol, it should ensure that in case of a totally justified and understandable Pakistani reaction ... US should have pulled out even if it took casualties!

They really took no casualties and on the other hand what they did to us, unacceptable and shameless.

The entire operation reeks of arrogance and total disregard for life of so called "allied" soldiers who were actually doing their job in engaging an unknown group which may as well have been militants who were operating across the border and hurting our dear old American friends as well.

From SOP perspective, whether Pakistan fired first or not...it is a total fault of US forces and can only be termed a deliberate slaughter of our soldiers.

 

[All-Green]

But ... Pakistan can survive without USA help? What will happen to the infra and economy build around NATO supply?

The infra is actually damaged thanks to NATO supply, the high capacity vehicles played havoc with the highway due to wear and tear.
The reimbursements are non existent contrary to popular belief.
The volume of goods crossing into Afghanistan without local duty and taxation have resulted in tremendous losses to Pakistan.

US may try to spin everything as US aid, but there is no way in hell we have had a fair transaction even from a business point of view.

Pakistan is not chest thumping, we literally have been pushed into a corner by US thanks to its arrogance.
No other course of action left but to deny NATO supply route.

 

[GUNNER]

But ... Pakistan can survive without USA help? What will happen to the infra and economy build around NATO supply?

Going by the official version of the government, Pakistan has lost more than it has gained economically since 2001 despite US aid.

 

[All-Green]

Incorrect.. the F-15E was designed from the outset as a dedicated strike fighter based on the F-15C airframe.
Its primary mission in Afghanistan is close air support.. believe me. Its on the USAF site as well.
That does not mean that the F-15E cannot perform CAP's or fighter sweeps.
BUT IT IS PRIMARILY A STRIKE AIRCRAFT WHICH IS EQUALLY GOOD AT CLOSE AIR SUPPORT SORTIES.

Salaams

Yes it is a strike fighter but it has not lost anything when it comes to air to air capability and is the ideal strike aircraft to use in hostile territory where you may have to fight your way out.
I believe it was used keeping in mind the area of operation as Pakistan territory and a possible reaction by PAF.
After all there is no way all of this was not deliberate, downing a few PAF jets would have ensured a chaotic backlash in Pakistan affecting the morale and even the political landscape of Pakistan.
On the other hand shooting our jets across the border could also have been spun as something like Pakistani posts actively helping Taliban fighters against brave US and Afghan commandos and even PAF getting involved to protect them.
This would have further alienated Pakistan via a constant barrage by world media.

That this was a deliberate attack is beyond a doubt, the eventual aim is still not clear but maybe it was a trigger to start a new phase where Pakistan is declared a hostile state and globally isolated, then more pressure can be applied to Pakistan.
Not sending PAF may have given Pakistan an opportunity to avoid the eventual trap and adopt a more calculated approach.

Surely this approach is from a position of weakness, but if steel is shown now...this can become a real difficult nut to crack by US. The world at least knows that error was more on part of US... too much nonsense to convince otherwise.
Pakistan cannot be forced to open the NATO supply route that easily via global pressure since it is a wronged party here.

Pakistan must not open the supply route and avoid being seen as either friend or foe.
We do not give a damn any more what happens beyond our borders, let US deal with its problems.
God knows we have enough demons of our own.

Let us mine and fence the border to make it less porous... if US and Karzai again start talking about infiltrations.
If they and their allies again refuse over this offer, then it makes it clear what their intentions are.
In such a case we should highlight this open hypocrisy to the world.

We do not want to fight America, but we do not want them to use our territory for a war in which we are the collateral.
Sorry, but this cannot do.

 

[Patriot]

This time they may have used some bs like we were going after mullah omar etc if PAF acted but from now on they have set a precedent and PAF can act.