Pakistani army snubs US No new offensive on militants in 2010

A.V.

New Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
6,503
Likes
1,132
:twizt::twizt::twizt:

Pakistan's army has said it will launch no new offensives on militants in 2010, as the US defence secretary arrived for talks on combating Taliban fighters.

Army spokesman Athar Abbas told the BBC the "overstretched" military had no plans for any fresh anti-militant operations over the next 12 months.

Our correspondent says the comments are a clear snub to Washington.

The US would like Pakistan to expand an offensive against militants launching cross-border attacks in Afghanistan.

Defence Secretary Robert Gates arrived in Pakistan on Thursday for his first visit since US President Barack Obama took office last year



BBC News - Pakistan snubs US over new Taliban offensive
 

kuku

Respected Member
Regular Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
507
Likes
3
Wont say that if US military comes knocking at the door, seriously though they probably want more money, US should just keep throwing money at its problem.
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
25,388
Likes
24,947
Country flag
US should keep throwing money and all the wonderful results will happen ?? What has US been doing for the past 8-9 years after 35 billion zero results, if US does not realize this by now then this war will never be won.
 

kuku

Respected Member
Regular Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
507
Likes
3
In case you miss it, it seems the USA is going for a big push in Afghanistan, which according to their history (well that thing in Vietnam) is followed by a quick retreat after declaring victory.

So they should throw some money at pakistan, and get incredible reduction in insurgency with a promise to let pakistan dominate Afghanistan after they go away.

There is no point roaming around in those mountains forever.
 

Energon

DFI stars
Ambassador
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Messages
1,199
Likes
764
There's a discrepancy between the statements the Pakistani establishment (military and civilian) issues and what actually ends up happening. If something needs to be done the US will squeeze it out of Pakistan without a moment's hesitation. In a full blown active war zone it is impossible to project what will or will not happen on a day to day basis, let alone an entire year. Gates doesn't seem all too concerned about this, I think everyone has pretty much accepted that the Pakistani establishment has to issue statements showing "defiance" for internal consumption and to save face.

I think we'll have to wait and see what happens. Also, if the PA really had no intention to oblige the US they wouldn't be negotiating hard for UAVs and other hardware. It is naive to think that this technology and the continued assistance will be merely gifted away.
 

enlightened1

Member of The Month JANUARY 2010
Regular Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
880
Likes
59
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8472986.stmhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8472986.stm

With its announcement that it will launch no new offensives against the Taliban in 2010, Pakistan's army appears to have opened a new innings in its favourite game with the West, says the BBC's Syed Shoaib Hasan in Islamabad.

For the United States, the statement by the Pakistan army could not have come at a worse time.

Its main intelligence agency, the CIA, is still coming to terms with the death of seven personnel in a suicide attack in Afghanistan by an al-Qaeda "double agent".

That attack, the worst suffered by the agency in four decades, was apparently planned and carried out by Taliban militants in Pakistan's tribal areas.

Under pressure from the US, the Pakistan army launched an operation there in the main Taliban stronghold of South Waziristan in November 2009.

The army has since been able to secure that territory and push out the militants.
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
Hillary Clinton wants Pakistan to target militants in Baluchistan

While some have been captured, most senior Taliban and al-Qaeda leaders have fled the region.

Intelligence officials say they have now taken refuge either in other nearby tribal regions or the neighbouring Balochistan province.

Mission impossible

Top US officials, including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, have been calling for the military to go after the militants in these regions.

All this comes at a time when Pakistan's government is already under a great deal of domestic criticism.

This is mainly due to increased missile strikes by the US targeting Taliban and al-Qaeda leaders in the tribal areas.

These have turned a sometimes ambivalent tribal population against the Pakistan military.

Analysts say the tribesmen see the strikes, which have claimed more lives of civilians than of militants, as contiguous with the military operation.

But US officials have continued to press for more action, painting doomsday scenarios for Pakistan.

The latest such warning comes from US Defence Secretary Robert Gates, who said in India that al-Qaeda was planning to carry out attacks to provoke war with Pakistan.

But the Pakistan military appears to have its own views on the subject, and their say is likely to count the most.
Pakistani troops hold their positions at a hilltop post in Shingwari, an area in the troubled Pakistani tribal region of South Waziristan (Oct 2009)
Pakistani troops hold their positions on a hill top in South Waziristan.

Their latest decision is likely to sends shivers through all Western capitals which have a stake in Afghanistan.

For Washington, in particular, the military's U-turn will have far-reaching consequences.

Without Pakistani soldiers pressurising the Taliban in the tribal areas, it will be mission impossible for US forces in Afghanistan.

Diplomatic wrangling

Even with the additional 40,000 troops, it will not be possible to contain the insurgents.

With 2010 already being called a defining moment in the current conflict, the military has risked the all-out ire of the US with its decision.

But it appears to have thought out the move, given that it has gone public at a time when the US defence secretary is in Pakistan.

The military believes it has strong reasons not to move against the militants.

Many senior military officials have been angered by what they see are recent moves by the US and the UK to expand India's involvement in Afghanistan.

They see this as being specifically targeted against Pakistani interests.

There is also the matter of promised US aid to Pakistan, most of which has been delayed due to diplomatic wrangling.

US officials say much of the aid has been held up because of delays in processing visas for officials attached to the projects.
US army officer during exit a helicopter during an air assault operation on the town of Oshaky in Afghanistan
Without Pakistani offensives, will it be mission impossible for US forces?

But Pakistani intelligence officials say that many of these officials actually end up involved in activities "beyond their charter of duties".

In common parlance, its means the officials are seen as spies.

Extremely unhappy

The military's decision has also put the Pakistan government, with which it has been at odds of late, in an embarrassing position.

The military's unhappiness at the government stems from what it sees as its pandering to US demands at every turn.

One example which intelligence officials quote at liberty, is the manner in which US special forces personnel are allowed to enter and move around Pakistan without being documented by immigration.

Officials say the military is extremely unhappy with the interior ministry on this count.

The shaky PPP-led government, for its part, is too busy rolling from one political crisis to another to really take this matter in hand.

On a more direct note, Pakistan's military has also been demanding that the US give it more advanced helicopters and transfer its drone technology.

They say as the frontline state against the Taliban, such equipment is needed for greater success.

The US has, however, rejected these demands so far.
 

ajtr

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
12,038
Likes
720
VIEW: The price of pain —Andleeb Abbas

The government had merrily been declaring that all the terrorists have been nailed and had blown the horns for victory celebrations. The recent bomb blasts are a harsh reminder that dealing with just the symptoms and not the root causes of the problem will always have a short-term impact of a lull before the storm

You are better dead than alive. This is perhaps the most apt description of the state of affairs for many unfortunate people in this country. Whether it is bomb blasts by religious fanatics or extravagant abuse of official privileges by political ‘VIPs’, the mantra is that money is the best healer for all physical and emotional wounds. The competition is on. There is an auction of who pays the highest price of hushing up people screaming against injustice, oppression or corruption. There is a race between the media for revealing the unjust and for the politicians to buy the silence of victims. From the tragic death of the 12-year old maid in the house of an advocate to the birth of a child delivered in a rickshaw due to the VVIP blockage on roads, every leader thinks that money can buy anything. The rate of compensation depends on how bad the scandal is and how badly it affects the reputation of the concerned party. From one lac to five lac rupees, money is dished out from all parties in an attempt to express ‘their’ allegiance against the wrongdoers.

As the city of Lahore is still reeling from bomb blasts targeting prime areas of Model Town, R A Bazaar and Allama Iqbal Town, the complete inability of the government to provide any type of security to its citizens has once again been exposed. The government had merrily been declaring that all the terrorists have been nailed and had blown the horns for victory celebrations. The recent bomb blasts are a harsh reminder that dealing with just the symptoms and not the root causes of the problem will always have a short-term impact of a lull before the storm.

This attitude is reflective of the myopic thinking of the leadership in the country. This reactive approach is applied to deal with the multiple chronic problems facing this country. From shortage of energy to water, and from sugar to wheat, the story remains the same — disregard the root cause of problems; dismiss any attempt to discuss preventive planning, and disdain of proactive alternative identification of issues at hand; keep waiting till the disaster happens; deny the responsibility and pin it to the previous regimes and then go into the crisis management mode with short-term disastrous solutions rather than long-term development of viable and feasible strategies to ensure the removal of the root causes of the problem.

Terrorist attacks are dealt with predictable aplomb. The inability of the government to tackle this killing surge of terrorism is a combination of lack of sincerity and incompetence. While the government is fighting a war in the northern areas against extremism, the PML-N was collaborating with banned outfits in contesting by-elections in Punjab. It is an open secret that the PML-N collaborated with the so-called defunct organisations like the Sipah-e-Sahaba and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi to win elections. These double standards are typically reflective of self-interest being above national interest. It is this hypocrisy that has completely destroyed the faith of the public. The statements of the chief minister to tackle and eliminate terrorism thus ring a hollow bell both in the public’s ears and in the ears of the terrorists who know that when it comes to power and position, the enemy becomes the best friend.

Lip service days are over. The government must realise that they will be caught in their own trap of false promises and empty hopes. They must learn the art of dealing with the root cause of the problem and uprooting it to deliver sustainable results.

It is this short-term approach to anything and everything that eventually brings their downfall. History shows that both the ruling and the opposition party have hardly lasted more than a couple of years whenever in power. They come with an exaggerated list of promises, but get so entangled in covering up their own lack of competence and character that very soon they become victims of their own lack of vision and values.

As the government funds its own extravagances, the public suffers shortages of water, power, sugar, wheat, etc. As the list of casualties due to bomb blasts or public injustices increase and the government has to dole out public money to pay for the unfortunate human demises, the gap is filled by decreasing the development expenditure. The development expenditure, which is already one of the lowest in the world, has further been reduced by Rs 100 billion. The only development sponsorship strategy employed so far is to beg and borrow. Living on other people’s money is never a long-term sustenance solution. Thus, as expected, with hardly half the year gone, we have run out of resources as ‘Friends of Pakistan’ have not fulfilled their pledge to give us the money to support our burgeoning expenditures. A country ranked near bottom on human development index, with spending on health and education already negligible, cutting down the development budget is not just terrible but criminal. As the basic facilities to the ordinary man get more and more scarce, crime, terrorism and lawlessness are going to become a matter of routine.

With the media exposing these social and political injustices, it is just a matter of time before the government discovers the adverse impact of such a short-sighted approach. Power and money have never been sustainable strategies to rule and govern a country in the long run — a fact very obvious to all but those who know the price of everything but the value of nothing.

The writer is a consultant and CEO of FranklinCovey and can be reached at [email protected]
 

ajtr

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
12,038
Likes
720
De facto versus de jure

The other day I had a conversation with a man less than half my age, a well-educated democratic Pakistani, and on-the-ball as far as happenings are concerned in what is not Jinnah’s Pakistan but rather a mishmash of Ziaul Haq's theocracy and a corrupt, dysfunctional, governance-free autocracy.

A question I posed: who now is the most powerful man in Pakistan? Without pondering, his immediate response was: the chief of army staff. Now, this happens to be a de facto reality, no matter what anyone may say to the contrary. News items in the media, almost on a daily basis, tell us who Gen Ashfaq Kayani has met — from the US secretary of state and all other visiting US civilian or military fireman down to functionaries of our own government.

On March 16 ‘key federal secretaries’ met the general at GHQ to sort out our foreign policy, which the army runs. Such is the dominance of the army in the life of Pakistan — admittedly the sole organised fully functional institution we have that can still hold high its head despite the setbacks of the periods when it has wielded de jure power.

The army has no rivals. The ‘supremacy of parliament’ is but a myth. Not only is it not supreme when it comes to the Pakistan Army, but it is also subservient to the presidency over which reigns the de jure co-chairman of the party in power, who in turn has no option but to heed Kayani’s ‘advice’ on all vital policy matters.

Conspiracy theories concerning those who are, as it is known, ‘in power’ abound. As far as the army chief is concerned he has to do nothing but wait and deal competently with the menace of militant extremism that stalks the land, abundant in our western border areas and spreading fast downwards through the lush Punjabi plains.

The army is his and he can give extensions of service to whomsoever he may choose and there is little that the supreme commander or the supremacy of parliament can do about it. The press front-pages news of extensions of service given, of promotions made (even of brigadiers to major generals), then raises objections which are rightly ignored by the army.

The supreme commander, in his precarious position, put in place by Master USA can but acquiesce, for he is as sure as are we that whatever is done by Kayani is in consonance with the desires of Washington.

A rather nasty conspiracy theory doing the rounds is that the quickest way to bring Pakistan to its knees, literally, was to appoint the present president. Time will tell on that one, but as long as the army reigns supreme, de facto, as opposed to the supremacy of parliament, existence as we know it will carry on.

The army has for long been on top of it all, even prior to 1958. Pakistan’s first military attaché went to Washington in 1952.

He received instructions from the then commander-in-chief Gen Ayub Khan and defence secretary Iskander Mirza that his main task was to procure military equipment from the Pentagon and that there was no need to take on board either ambassador or foreign office as “these civilians cannot be trusted with such sensitive matters of national security”. Ayub Khan was appointed defence minister in a civilian government in 1954.

As to the right of Kayani to make his own appointments, readers are referred to a letter published in this newspaper on March 13, written by one man of integrity who has sustained respect over the years, his integrity amply proven by the fact that he has never been able to succeed in politics.

Air Marshal Asghar Khan has this to say on the “recent extension of service given to some generals”: “A service chief is within his rights to recommend to the government any such step which, in his opinion, is in the interests of the country or of the service he commands.”

There has been much of a kerfuffle over the extension given to the ISI head, Gen Ahmad Shuja Pasha. It is obvious that both the army chief and Washington have decided that at this stage of the operations being conducted against the Taliban a change in intelligence command would not be advisable. That is not difficult to comprehend.

Having mentioned Asghar Khan and the ISI, I am reminded that there still lingers in the Supreme Court of Pakistan Asghar’s human rights petition of 1996 concerning the disbursement by the ISI of state money to influence politics — the elections of 1990.

The ISI, which has within it a ‘politician cell’, has been at play meddling in the political field since the days of Ayub Khan when he was jostling with power and held his elections the result of which was a foregone conclusion.

It held its hand in the 1970 elections, the only completely free and fair elections we have had. Since then, in 1977, 1988, and throughout the 1990s it has been heavily involved in sorting out governments. Active involvement in the 2008 elections was not necessary as the sympathy vote took care of that one.

In 2006, soon after Chief Justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Chaudhry took office I had occasion to remind him of Asghar’s petition and requested that he hear and finally decide this pending matter of national importance. Events intervened. May I again, with all due respect, request that the petition be resurrected (judgment was reserved by the then chief justice of Pakistan at the last hearing in 1999, 11 years ago) and before the air marshal and some of those involved go to different place, it finally be decided.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top