Since the suicide bombing that took the lives of seven Americans in Afghanistan on Dec. 30, the Central Intelligence Agency has struck back against militants in Pakistan with the most intensive series of missile strikes from drone aircraft since the covert program began.

Beginning the day after the attack on a C.I.A. base in Khost, Afghanistan, the agency has carried out 11 strikes that have killed about 90 people suspected of being militants, according to Pakistani news reports, which make almost no mention of civilian casualties. The assault has included strikes on a mud fortress in North Waziristan on Jan. 6 that killed 17 people and a volley of missiles on a compound in South Waziristan last Sunday that killed at least 20.

“For the C.I.A., there is certainly an element of wanting to show that they can hit back,” said Bill Roggio, editor of The Long War Journal, an online publication that tracks the C.I.A.’s drone campaign. Mr. Roggio, as well as Pakistani and American intelligence officials, said many of the recent strikes had focused on the Pakistani Taliban and its leader, Hakimullah Mehsud, who claimed responsibility for the Khost bombing.

The Khost attack cost the agency dearly, taking the lives of the most experienced analysts of Al Qaeda whose intelligence helped guide the drone attacks. Yet the agency has responded by redoubling its assault. Drone strikes have come roughly every other day this month, up from about once a week last year and the most furious pace since the drone campaign began in earnest in the summer of 2008.

Pakistan’s announcement on Thursday that its army would delay any new offensives against militants in North Waziristan for 6 to 12 months is likely to increase American reliance on the drone strikes, administration and counterterrorism officials said. By next year, the C.I.A. is expected to more than double its fleet of the latest Reaper aircraft — bigger, faster and more heavily armed than the older Predators — to 14 from 6, an Obama administration official said.

Even before the Khost attack, White House officials had made it clear to Dennis C. Blair, the director of national intelligence, and Leon E. Panetta, the C.I.A. director, that they expected significant results from the drone strikes in reducing the threat from Al Qaeda and the Pakistani Taliban, according to an administration official and a former senior C.I.A. official with close ties to the White House.

These concerns only heightened after the attempted Dec. 25 bombing of a Detroit-bound airliner. While that plot involved a Nigerian man sent by a Qaeda offshoot in Yemen, intelligence officials say they believe that Al Qaeda’s top leaders in Pakistan have called on affiliates to carry out attacks against the West. “There’s huge pressure from the White House on Blair and Panetta,” said the former C.I.A. official, who spoke on condition of anonymity out of concern about angering the White House. “The feeling is, the clock is ticking.”

After the Khost bombing, intelligence officials vowed that they would retaliate. One angry senior American intelligence official said the C.I.A. would “avenge” the Khost attack. “Some very bad people will eventually have a very bad day,” the official said at the time, speaking on the condition he not be identified describing a classified program.

Today, officials deny that vengeance is driving the increased attacks, though one called the drone strikes “the purest form of self-defense.”

Officials point to other factors. For one, Pakistan recently dropped restrictions on the drone program it had requested last fall to accompany a ground offensive against militants in South Waziristan. And tips on the whereabouts of extremists ebb and flow unpredictably.

A C.I.A. spokesman, Paul Gimigliano, declined to comment on the drone strikes. But he said, “The agency’s counterterrorism operations — lawful, aggressive, precise and effective — continue without pause.”

The strikes, carried out from a secret base in Pakistan and controlled by satellite link from C.I.A. headquarters in Virginia, have been expanded by President Obama and praised by both parties in Congress as a potent weapon against terrorism that puts no American lives at risk. That calculation must be revised in light of the Khost bombing, which revealed the critical presence of C.I.A. officers in dangerous territory to direct the strikes.

Some legal scholars have questioned the legitimacy under international law of killings by a civilian agency in a country where the United States is not officially at war. This month, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a request under the Freedom of Information Act for government documents revealing procedures for approving targets and legal justifications for the killings.

Critics have contended that collateral civilian deaths are too high a price to pay. Pakistani officials have periodically denounced the strikes as a violation of their nation’s sovereignty, even as they have provided a launching base for the drones.

The increase in drone attacks has caused panic among rank-and-file militants, particularly in North Waziristan, where some now avoid using private vehicles, according to Pakistani intelligence and security officials. Fewer foreign extremists are now in Miram Shah, North Waziristan’s capital, which was previously awash with them, said local tribesmen and security officials.

Despite the consensus in Washington behind the drone program, some experts are dissenters. John Arquilla, a professor of defense analysis at the Naval Postgraduate School who frequently advises the military, said, “The more the drone campaign works, the more it fails — as increased attacks only make the Pakistanis angrier at the collateral damage and sustained violation of their sovereignty.”

If the United States expands the drone strikes beyond the lawless tribal areas to neighboring Baluchistan, as is under discussion, the backlash “might even spark a social revolution in Pakistan,” Mr. Arquilla said.

So far the reaction in Pakistan to the increased drone strikes has been muted. Last week, Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani of Pakistan told Richard C. Holbrooke, the administration’s senior diplomat for Afghanistan and Pakistan, that the drones undermined the larger war effort. But the issue was not at the top of the agenda as it was a year ago.

Hasan Askari Rizvi, a military analyst in Lahore, said public opposition had been declining because the campaign was viewed as a success. Yet one Pakistani general, who supports the drone strikes as a tactic for keeping militants off balance, questioned the long-term impact.

“Has the situation stabilized in the past two years?” asked the general, speaking on condition of anonymity. “Are the tribal areas more stable?” Yes, he said, Baitullah Mehsud, founder of the Pakistani Taliban, was killed by a missile last August. “But he’s been replaced and the number of fighters is increasing,” the general said. (New York Times)

American boots on ground and intensified U.S. drone attacks against militants inside Pakistan could endanger relations between the two allies, foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi said on Wednesday.

Qureshi said after meeting U.S. Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke that some very clear “red lines” were discussed.

“I said despite the partnership that we enjoy, Pakistan cannot, and Pakistan feels that it will undermine our relationship, if there’s expansion of drones and if there are operations on ground,” he told a news conference jointly addressed by United States envoy for Pakistan and Afghanistan Richard Holbrooke.

The United States has stepped up its drone attacks inside Pakistan since the Jordanian double agent al-Balawi blew himself up at a U.S. base in Khost, Afghanistan on December 30, killing seven CIA agents and his Jordanian intel official handler.

American officials say the drones are an effective weapon against militants, and are carried out under an agreement with Islamabad that allows Pakistani leaders to criticize them in public. Pakistan denies any such agreement, Reuters reported.

Islamabad has pushed Washington to provide it with the drones to allow it to carry out its own attacks on Taliban insurgents, a move that could ease anti-American sentiment in Pakistan. But Washingotn has not publicly commented on such a request.

What Pakistan worries most about is a possible expansion of drone attacks to the southwestern province of Baluchistan, where the government already faces a low-level insurgency from nationalists seeking autonomy.

Washington believes Afghan Taliban leaders called “Quetta Shura” are hiding there.  Islamabad has asked for actionable intelligence if such a group exists.

PESHAWAR (Agencies) – America’s B-52 heavy bomber aircraft, which can carry nuclear and conventional ordnance with worldwide precision navigation capability, was again seen hovering over Pakistan’s tribal areas on Sunday.

The flights of US B-52 bomber, along other spy planes, continued over Fata for last several weeks, causing panic among the locals.

Quoting sources, a private TV channel reported that the US drones and B-52 warplanes were hovering over areas of North and South Waziristan and Kurram Agency for the last several weeks.

Monitoring Desk adds: US Air Combat Command’s B-52 is a long-range, heavy bomber that can perform a variety of missions. The bomber is capable of flying at high subsonic speeds at altitudes up to 50,000 feet.

In a conventional conflict, the B-52 can perform air interdiction, offensive counter-air and maritime operations. During Desert Storm, B-52s delivered 40 per cent of all the weapons dropped by coalition forces. It is highly effective when used for ocean surveillance, and can assist the US Navy in anti-ship and mine-laying operations. Two B-52s, in two hours, can monitor 364,000 square kilometres of ocean surface.

All B-52s are equipped with an electro-optical viewing system that uses platinum silicide forward-looking infrared and high resolution low-light-level television sensors to augment the targeting, battle assessment, flight safety and terrain-avoidance system, thus further improving its combat ability and low-level flight capability.

Pilots wear night vision goggles (NVGs) to enhance their night visual, low-level terrain-following operations.

Night vision goggles provide greater safety during night operations by increasing the pilot’s ability to visually clear terrain and avoid enemy radar.

In September 2007, a B-52 bomber had been mistakenly loaded with nuclear weapons and flown over American sky. As a result of the incident a thorough review was done by the US Air Force and a commander was dismissed.

US House Armed Services Committee Chairman Rep. Ike Skeleton described the weapon mishandling ‘deeply disturbing’ and called for more details to ensure that Defence Department would address it appropriately. (News sourced from:www.nation.com)

By Bill Van Auken

Amid a deepening political crisis in Pakistan and growing popular unrest over US missile strikes and mercenaries, it has been revealed that over the past five years US special operations troops have conducted a number of clandestine cross-border raids into the country’s tribal areas.

These raids involved “helicopter-borne elite soldiers stealing across the border at night, and were never declared to the Pakistani government,” according to a “former NATO officer” cited in an article published Monday by the British daily Guardian.

The only publicly acknowledged incursion by US forces took place on September 3, 2008, when US Navy Seals were flown by helicopter into a village in South Waziristan, where they raided three compounds and slaughtered some 20 people. While Washington claimed those killed were Al Qaeda fighters, the Pakistani government said that the victims were all villagers and included six women and two children.

The incident provoked widespread outrage in Pakistan, with the government denouncing the attack as a “grave provocation” and the country’s parliament demanding that the military use force to repel any further violations of the country’s sovereignty. Unnamed US officials told the media that the Pakistani regime had acquiesced to the raid, something Islamabad vehemently denied.

According to the Guardian account, however, the raid was the fourth such incursion to take place between 2003 and 2008. Two of the previous assaults had been similar assassination or “snatch and grab” missions against alleged Al Qaeda members, while a third was launched to recover a downed Predator drone, which the US military feared would fall into the hands of the Afghan resistance.

Bush’s Secret Order for Cross-Border Attacks

It was reported following the 2008 raid that President George W. Bush had issued a secret order allowing the US military to carry out cross-border attacks into Pakistan on the theory that the country, together with Afghanistan, were all part of the same theater in the “global war on terrorism.”

This policy has apparently been continued by President Barack Obama and is about to be intensified as part of the administration’s military escalation, which is sending at least 30,000 more troops into Afghanistan.

Obama & Company Continue and Expand the Killing

Since Obama took office, the CIA and US military have doubled the number of missile attacks from pilotless Predator drones, killing hundreds of Pakistani civilians. Now the US administration is demanding that the Pakistani government acquiesce in a further expansion of the drone campaign and that it undertake its own military offensive against Afghan resistance forces operating out of northwest Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas, near the Afghanistan border.

A steady stream of top US officials, including CIA Director Leon Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen, have flown to Islamabad to pressure the government of President Asif Ali Zardari and the Pakistani military to fall into line with the Obama administration’s military escalation.

US officials have demanded that the Pakistani military launch an attack against alleged sanctuaries of the so-called Haqqani network in North Waziristan. The group is led by Sirajuddin Haqqani and his father Jalaluddin. In the 1980s, the latter was one of the principal recipients of US arms and money during the CIA-backed war against the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul.

Washington is also pressing the Pakistani government to give it a green light for expanding the drone missile strikes from the tribal areas to Baluchistan, Pakistan’s largest province. Baluchistan borders Helmand province in Afghanistan, where much of the US and British counterinsurgency operation has been concentrated.

Press reports in both the US and Pakistan indicate that US officials have gone so far as to propose drone attacks on Quetta, a crowded city of nearly 600,000. The Pentagon and US intelligence agencies claim that Taliban leaders, including Mullah Omar, the founder of the movement, plan and direct military operations in Afghanistan from a safe haven in the city.

The Pakistani daily Dawn reported Wednesday that “Diplomatic sources say Pakistani leadership had been unequivocally cautioned by various official visitors from the US that if Pakistan failed to act, the Americans could take direct action, including expansion of drone strikes in Baluchistan.”

U.S., Corrupt Zardari Regime and Pakistan Military Triangulated

Tensions have mounted between Islamabad and Washington. While the Pakistani government and military have long done US imperialism’s bidding in the region, the war in neighboring Afghanistan and the US incursions into Pakistan are threatening to destabilize the entire country. Out of self-preservation, the Pakistani ruling elite appears to be balking at the latest US demands.

This was reflected in an appearance Tuesday by Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi before the foreign affairs committee of Pakistan’s National Assembly, where he criticized the Obama administration’s escalation strategy.

According to a statement issued by the Foreign Ministry, he told legislators that the Zardari government would not allow either the entry of US and NATO troops into Pakistan in so-called “hot pursuit” or the expansion of the drone missile campaign.

“There are serious implications of the new US Afghanistan strategy for Pakistan,” Qureshi was quoted as saying in the ministry statement. “As a result of the military surge, there could be more violence in Afghanistan which could, in turn, result in further influx of militants and refugees from Afghanistan into Pakistan.”

The minister described the drone attacks as “counter-productive and unhelpful.” This formal position of the Pakistani government is belied by the fact that the CIA is launching these strikes from an airfield in Baluchistan, with the evident knowledge and consent of Islamabad.

The Associated Press, meanwhile, cited an unnamed “senior US diplomat” as stating that “more US action is expected against the Haqqani network,” and that it “would come with Pakistani support.”

Pakistan Military Reject US Demands but Pushed to Their Limit

Thus far, the Pakistani military has rejected US demands that it launch a new offensive in North Waziristan to go after Haqqani’s forces. It has maintained that its troops are already committed to an offensive in South Waziristan and that it cannot carry out the two campaigns simultaneously.

“We cannot fight on so many fronts,” a Pakistani security official told the Times of London.

This approach has angered Washington, which maintains that the Pakistani government is willing to use force against Pakistani Taliban militants carrying out attacks within its borders, but not against elements using Pakistan to launch attacks on US occupation forces in neighboring Afghanistan.

Underlying the Pakistani position, according to many analysts, are the longstanding ties between the Haqqanis and the Pakistan military intelligence agency, Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI.

Pakistan’s influence over the Taliban and resistance elements allied with it is seen as a means of securing Pakistani interests in Afghanistan once the US is forced to withdraw from the country. Islamabad is particularly fearful of a growing Indian presence in Afghanistan.

“If America walks away, Pakistan is very worried that it will have India on its eastern border and India on its western border in Afghanistan,” Tariq Fatemi, a former Pakistani ambassador to the US, told the New York Times.

Contributing to the growing US-Pakistani tensions is the political crisis of the Pakistani regime, which has been shaken by a high court ruling striking down an amnesty brokered by the Bush administration with the country’s former military dictator, General Pervez Musharraf. The deal protected politicians of Zardari’s Pakistani People’s Party (PPP) from corruption charges.

Now, Defense Minister Ahmed Muktar and Interior Minister Rehman Malik, two of the key figures in coordinating military policy with Washington, are facing criminal indictments and have been barred from leaving the country. The opposition parties have demanded that the government resign.

Richard Holbrooke, Zionist US Envoy to Pakistan Defends the Drone Attacks

The Obama administration’s special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, Richard Holbrooke, commented on what he called “the major political drama unfolding in Islamabad” in an appearance on the US Public Broadcasting System interview program hosted by Charlie Rose.

“How it’s going to come out remains to be seen,” said Holbrooke, adding, “It’s something that we are watching very carefully.”

In the same interview, Holbrooke described as a “dilemma” that “the leadership of both Al Qaeda and Taliban are in a neighboring country where our troops cannot fight.” He said that the US would “have to find other means” to deal with the issue. He defended the US drone missile attacks, described by human rights agencies as extra-judicial executions. “Some of the most dangerous people in the world…are not alive today,” because of the strikes, he said.

But the missile strikes, combined with the growing US presence in Pakistan, are provoking mounting popular opposition.

Demonstrations Against Blackwater in Pakistan

This has taken the form in recent weeks of demonstrations in several Pakistani cities against the reported presence in the country of US mercenaries from the infamous military contracting firm, Blackwater-Xe.

Thousands of people attended an anti-Blackwater rally Sunday in Rawalpindi, Pakistan’s fourth-largest city and the headquarters of its military. Called by Jamaat-e-Islami, Pakistan’s largest Islamist party, under the slogan “Go America, Go,” the rally’s speakers denounced Blackwater as “US terrorists” and charged that Washington was undermining Pakistan’s sovereignty and deliberately seeking to destabilize the country in order to seize control of its nuclear weapons.

Last weekend, hundreds of lawyers from the Islamabad Bar Association staged another anti-Blackwater rally outside the Police Training College in Sihala, demanding that the government expel foreign instructors, who, the demonstrators charged, were Blackwater operatives. The lawyers and others have also charged that the training operation is being used as a cover for US spying on Pakistan’s nearby Kahuta nuclear facility. Following the protest, the Pakistani government announced that it was moving the training college to a police headquarters in Islamabad.

Blackwater changed its name to Xe Services because of the company’s gruesome reputation following a 2007 massacre of 17 Iraqi civilians by its gunmen.

Both Washington and Blackwater executives deny that any of its personnel are deployed in Pakistan. Multiple press reports in both the US and Britain, however, have cited current and former US officials as saying that the mercenary outfit is indeed active in Pakistan.

Jeremy Scahill, author of the book Blackwater: the Rise of the World’s Most Powerful Mercenary Army, reported in the Nation magazine last month that Blackwater is playing a leading role in gathering intelligence for and executing the drone attacks, and that it is “at the center of a secret program in which they plan targeted assassinations of suspected Taliban and Al Qaeda operatives.”

US Mercenaries, Special Op Troops, Drone Attacks Threaten Wider War

The drone attacks, the cross-border raids by Special Operations troops and the use of American mercenaries, combined with the escalating pressure from Washington for an expansion of Pakistani military offensives in the Afghanistan border region, are all contributing to the political destabilization of this nuclear-armed country of 180 million people.

Carried out in secret and behind the backs of the American people, this crucial element of the Obama administration’s military escalation threatens to unleash a far wider war.

(The article first appeared at the World Socialist Website)

A report in the Guardian UK suggests that US special forces repeatedly put “boots on the ground” inside Pakistan as part of the war against insurgents. US forces also regularly use unmanned drones to attack terrorist targets in the northeast tribal areas where militants have safe haven. But it is an activity highly unpopular among the Pakistanis.

Citing a “former NATO officer” with “detailed knowledge of the operations,” the Guardian reported late Monday evening that the US launched “multiple clandestine raids” into Pakistan between 2003 and 2008, and that the Pakistani government was not informed of the raids.

The unnamed NATO source details four separate incidents in which US troops landed on Pakistani soil, including the only previously reported raid: A September, 2008, operation which targeted three houses inside Pakistan, near the Afghanistan border, which reportedly killed 15 people.

Of the other three operations, two were attacks on suspected militants (one of which failed), and the third was a rescue operation to retrieve a Predator drone. The fact the US military would send in a clandestine force to extract the drone, rather than ask the Pakistani military for help, shows how uneasy the alliance between the US and Pakistan is, the Guardian reports.

Citing a “former NATO officer” with “detailed knowledge of the operations,” the Guardian reported late Monday evening that the US launched “multiple clandestine raids” into Pakistan between 2003 and 2008, and that the Pakistani government was not informed of the raids.

The unnamed NATO source details four separate incidents in which US troops landed on Pakistani soil, including the only previously reported raid: A September, 2008, operation which targeted three houses inside Pakistan, near the Afghanistan border, which reportedly killed 15 people.

Of the other three operations, two were attacks on suspected militants (one of which failed), and the third was a rescue operation to retrieve a Predator drone. The fact the US military would send in a clandestine force to extract the drone, rather than ask the Pakistani military for help, shows how uneasy the alliance between the US and Pakistan is, the Guardian reports.

Such operations are a matter of sensitivity in Pakistan. While public opinion has grudgingly tolerated CIA-led drone strikes in the tribal areas, any hint of American “boots on the ground” is greeted with virulent condemnation.

In recent months, news has been coming out about the extent of the US’s military involvement in Pakistan. Last month, The Nation reported that the Obama administration is using the controversial security contractor Blackwater to kidnap or kill “high-value targets” in Pakistan.

Erik Prince, the CEO and founder of the security firm, appeared to confirm his own deep involvement in the CIA’s role in the war on terrorism, telling Vanity Fair that he had been recruited as a CIA “asset.”

Read the complete Guardian report here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/21/us-forces-secret-pakistan-raids

Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari and his ruling party have thrown down the gauntlet in the face of calls for him to resign, condemning what they called a witch-hunt and vowing to foil conspiracies again them.

Opposition politicians and hostile sections of the media have called for Zardari to resign since the Supreme Court on Wednesday struck down an amnesty that protected him and others from corruption charges.

The tension comes as the United States has been stepping up pressure on Pakistan to go after Afghan Taliban factions in enclaves on the Afghan border, while homegrown militants have been unleashing carnage with a series of bomb attacks.

Here are some scenarios for how the trouble might play out:

MILITARY INTERVENTION

The chance of military intervention at this stage is seen as extremely remote. There is no speculation in Pakistan about a military coup despite rumours in foreign exchange markets in Asia early on Friday, apparently sparked when the defence minister was not allowed to leave the country on the orders of the state anti-graft agency. The minister was on a list of people protected by the 2007 amnesty which the Supreme Court struck down.

The army has had its differences with Zardari, in particular over a U.S. aid bill critics said violated Pakistani sovereignty. But the differences are not seen as serious enough to justify a coup by an army wary of getting involved in politics so soon after the restoration of civilian rule. Army chief General Ashfaq Kayani has vowed to stay out of politics and he played an important role in March in the restoration of a Supreme Court chief whom former president Pervez Musharraf sacked in 2007.

That same chief justice will now oversee proceedings against politicians and bureaucrats who could face prosecution. The judiciary has wide public support while investors have been encouraged by the Supreme Court’s rejection of the amnesty, which is seen as improving transparency.

ZARDARI RESIGNS

Zardari is not expected to step down any time soon. He has always struggled to match the popularity of his charismatic late wife, Benazir Bhutto, and has been dogged by accusations of corruption stemming from her terms in power in the 1990s. He says the charges were politically motivated and he has never been convicted. He is also safe from prosecution because of presidential immunity.

Some opposition politicians, mostly from the party of former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, and sections of the media have been calling on him to resign but he has dismissed the calls. He met top leaders of his party on Saturday and they vowed to fight enemies and foil conspiracies with “democracy and constitutionalism” as their weapons.

Even if Zardari were eventually to resign, his ruling Pakistan People’s Party would remain in control of the government and would likely determine who would become the new president, who is elected by parliament and provincial assemblies.

SO WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?

Pakistan’s latest political troubles will play out in the courts, not on the streets. Four ministers, including the defence and interior ministers, were on a list of people covered by the now defunct amnesty and could face legal proceedings. They could eventually resign but their departure would not have a big impact on the war on militancy, which is led by the army.

The danger for Zardari is that the legitimacy of his 2008 election as president could be challenged now that old cases against him have been revived. Much will depend on how aggressive the courts are in going after him. Opposition leader Sharif could call protests against Zardari although he has said he does not want to “derail” the democratic system. He has not called for an early general election but his party is expected to do well in the next polls, due by 2013.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE WAR ON THE TALIBAN

Political turmoil will divert government attention from the fight against militants, to the dismay of the United States. Pakistan’s effort to tackle the Afghan Taliban is critical to U.S. aims in Afghanistan. Ties have been strained by Pakistan’s reluctance to heed U.S. pressure to crack down harder, with Pakistan officials saying they cannot move too fast without provoking a backlash against Zardari. The militants can be expected to capitalise on the uncertainty and step up attacks. (REUTERS)

By Syed Talat Hussain

The American road-ahead policy presents Pakistan with a unique all-round policy opportunity to shape the strategic environment in Afghanistan, close festering sources of terrorism in tribal areas, and most crucially, regain broad-based clout with Washington. In other words, the ambitious multiple agenda the US has set for itself in Afghanistan, and partly also in the borders areas of Pakistan, provides exceptional room for Pakistan to make strong purposeful manoeuvres to earn solid diplomatic gains.

Take Afghanistan’s internal challenges first. Even though the US has lowered the bar for its nation-building stride, still it is committed to a tall order. In just under two years, endemic corruption has to be rooted out, drug lords’ formidable empire has to be torn down, and the economy has to be built-up and made self-sufficient. This is not all. In this tight time-frame, administrative efficiency has to reach a level where all of Afghanistan’s nearly 400 districts must have, in the words of General James Jones, the national security advisor, “economic development, good governance, and security”. Also included in the dreamland of benchmarks are “good and competent governors” for all the 34 provinces of the country.

It would be a miracle if even a fraction of this wish list comes true, especially by a weak and politically emaciated president whose second term election President Obama believes was marred by fraud. But Pakistan should resist the temptation of being the Jeremiah, the prophet of doom. Nor prepare to dance with vicarious joy in the event that the situation in Afghanistan defies Washington’s hopefulness. Instead it should, and seriously, partner in these efforts regardless of whether these are doomed to failure or destined for success. It is obvious that to make the first review of the progress in Afghanistan — in the middle of next year perhaps — a worthwhile exercise, the Obama administration will pull every stop to bring about visible change in all these indicators. Therefore, Washington is likely to be far more receptive to productive suggestions on pursuing its development agenda from other countries than it has been so far. Pakistan can step in with plans that enhance Afghans’ capacity to move in the right direction — infrastructure, education, agriculture, irrigation, basic science, technology, water management or many of the dozens of areas where it has expertise to proffer.

Much of Pakistan’s soft clout in Afghanistan in the coming months would be shaped by its ability to tag along with the world’s nation-building efforts. If Islamabad baulks at becoming a strong and willing partner in these, others would fill the gap.

Helping rebuild the Afghan National Security Force, the army and the Afghan National Police, is another area Pakistan ought to eye for gaining goodwill and diplomatic ground in Afghanistan. Many of Islamabad’s objections to the conduct of the Afghan National Army (ANA) deployed on the border with Pakistan are sound. The ANA has lived up to its reputation of being a force viscerally hostile to Pakistan. Elements from the erstwhile Northern Alliance dominate the ANA. Its members are mostly Darri and Persian speaking. They have been trained over the past many years to mistreat Pashtuns, which is part of the problem in Afghanistan.
While this history makes them structurally inimical to Pakistan, the fact remains that for the Obama administration to build a truly national army, the institution’s ethnic imbalance shall have to be rectified.

Pashtuns, former Taliban, even the personal armies of warlords, have to be integrated into the national army to become viable and take over responsibility of stabilising Afghanistan and paving the way for the start of the pull out of US troops. It is not known yet how much Washington would be willing to allow the Pakistan army to team up in efforts to train the ANA. However, for an Afghan force to be functional and effective in the south and the east of Afghanistan, its ethnic composition has to be such that Pakistan’s contribution to its training must be welcomed in any serious effort in building it up along strong durable lines. At any rate, Pakistan must make a solid gesture on this project: ditto should be done on Afghan police reforms. Remember, Pakistan cannot afford to be left out of the efforts to create institutions that would play a critical role in defining Afghanistan’s trajectory in the coming months. Also, international confidence that an Afghan national security force has come of age will help endorse Pakistan’s long-standing argument that the prospects of durable peace are inversely related to foreign troop level in Afghanistan. They will have to leave for peace to be fully restored and the Afghan resistance to be neutralised politically. Then there is the issue of safe havens inside North Waziristan and the presence of the Quetta Shura in Balochistan. On the face of it, the room for agreement between Washington and Islamabad is the least on this benchmark. US officials believe removing these sanctuaries is the first and foremost task to bring about a strategic shift in violence in Afghanistan. Members of Pakistan’s military and intelligence establishment see the ‘safe havens’ refrain a stratagem Washington and its allies use to hide their long and spectacular military failure inside Afghanistan to stem the rising tide of the resistance. Beneath this mutual recrimination, however, lies the hard fact that Pakistan and the US have consistently cooperated with each other in combating cross-border movement of the Taliban. Their military operations, not always conceived in perfect harmony, have seen both parties alternately play the hammer and the anvil to smash and squeeze the militants moving across. In the last surge-related operation in Helmand, Pakistan ended up sealing a long stretch of the border with Afghanistan to disallow any spillover effect. A much deeper and wider cooperation will be required to manage far bigger and bloodier operations in the coming weeks.

It is in Pakistan’s core national interest to ensure that safe havens do not become Washington’s excuse for pinning the blame for poor performance in the battles with the Taliban on us. It also serves Pakistan’s paramount security concerns that the wild militant groups in the tribal belt are brought under the heel. The new and vicious wave of urban terrorism has rendered useless the distinction between North and South Waziristan militancy. Government officials themselves admit that much of this terrorism is now flowing out of Mir Ali. This is where Wali ur Rehman, Hakeemullah Mehsud and the other big fish are. Cleaning up this area is critical to making operation Rah-e-Nijat relevant to securing the people from the game of death the terrorists are playing. A hard hit at these safe havens will also take the US pressure off Pakistan and give Islamabad and Washington time to plan about the Quetta Shura.

Pakistani policy makers have a substantial window of opportunity to make wise choices — something they did not do when George W Bush and his neo-con cabal were sending forces into Afghanistan. Pervez Musharraf’s thoughtlessness landed the country in a heap of unintended problems. This nation cannot afford a repeat of a similar mistake now that Washington is seriously thinking about going home.
 

(The article first appeared in the Daily Times)

PKonweb Monitor

The Taliban can rejoin the “social and political fabric of Afghanistan” if they renounce al-Qaeda, US special envoy Richard Holbrooke said on Tuesday.

Holbrooke, a close ally of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who was appointed taskmaster for Afghanistan and Pakistan (AF-PAK) affairs, said it is a major part of the Unites States policies.

In an interview with SPIEGEL, Holbrooke said: “Majority of the Taliban do not support Mulla Omar’s extreme views and that there is room for them to rejoin the social and political fabric of Afghanistan if they renounce al-Qaeda and reintegrate peacefully into Afghanistan. This is a major part of the Unites States policies. Washington is not seeking to destroy every person who supports the Taliban. Our goal is to destroy al-Qaeda, a terrorist organization with global reach, which attacked the United States, which conducted attacks in London, Madrid and Bali, and Mumbai and Islamabad, which supports attacks in Afghanistan through other groups.”

Holbrooke’s statement comes as President Obama prepares to announce his decision after the Thanksgiving holidays on sending more US troops to Afghanistan. Gen McCrystal, commander of US forces in Afghanistan has said he needed around 40,000 more soldiers to fight the Al Qaeda, the Taliban and their supporters.

The US special envoy said Washington was not in Afghanistan to build a perfect democracy there but to help the Afghans strengthen their own capabilities. “We are not there to take over the country, we are there to help the Afghans build their own capacity so that their security forces can replace the international forces over an acceptable period of time,” he said.

Asked if Afghan President Hamid Karzai was still Washington’s partner in the war, Holbrooke said: “Yes, he is our partner.” The US respected Karzai and looked forward to working with him closely, he added. (MAMOSA)

Whither socio-economic reconstruction of FATA and Swat after anti-Taliban operation in the region. Talat analyzes the situation live from the region…

DERA ISMAIL KHAN: Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani has said that the President is ready to transfer power of 58-2(b) to the prime minister, saying that the Indian interference in Balochistan and FATA will be raised in talks with India, while changing of the Governor NWFP is not possible.

Addressing a press conference and talking to media men here after inspection of the registration process of the IDPs at Ratta Kulachi Stadium and meeting with a Jirga, the prime minister said that President Asif Ali Zardari has offered him power of 58-2 (b) and to appoint service chiefs as he (PM) is the Chief Executive of the country.

Talking about the Indian interference in Waziristan and Balochistan, the prime minister said that the proofs in this regard have been found but India is not ready to talk and the matter will be raised in talks with India. He said that the terrorists have the latest weapons through drugs’ money and the international community has been asked to control smuggling of weapons.

When asked about changing of the NWFP Governor, Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani said that the changing of the NWFP Governor would be tantamount to the changing of General during a war, adding that under the prevailing situation, it is not possible.

Talking about Operation Rah-e-Nijat, the prime minister said that the required targets are being achieved in the operation, saying that the security forces are taking control over the strongholds of terrorists and terrorists are on the run.

(News sourced from: Regional Times)

Intelligence information and investigation has revealed that the explosives used in Peshawar blasts were similar to the RDX used in the ‘Samjhota Express’ incident in India.

The explosive material – Vehicle Born Improvised Explosive Device (VBIED) – was used in Khyber Bazaar bomb blast.

Sources confirmed to TheNation that texplosive material used in the deadly bomb blast which took place at Khyber Bazaar Peshawar last month, was identical to what had been used in exploding Samjhota Express in India.

Sources say the Pakistani security agencies have found concrete evidences to prove Indian involvement in Khyber Bazaar blast in which VBIED was used.

Sources close the development revealed that the Indian intelligence agency Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) was behind the terrible blast which left more than 42 innocent people dead and 100 others wounded, including women and children.

“Lt Col Prohit of the Indian Army who is the prime accused in the Samjhota Express explosion case, was the expert and qualified to handle VBIED and its manufacturing process,” sources said.

Sources further disclosed that the security agencies had nabbed several suspects in connection with the Peshawar blast during the recent crackdown from different parts of the country.

“Investigations are underway as the arrested suspects are being grilled. The investigators have found some important leads during the interrogation,” a source privy to the investigators said, but did not mention any further details due to the sensitivity of the matter.

The recent revelations have strengthened the contention that Col Prohit and his team was also responsible for the Samjhauta blast.

Last year, the prosecutor had told an Indian court that Prohit had procured RDX from Jammu and Kashmir while used part of it in Samjhauta blasts. However, the prosecutor retracted the claim the next day under duress.

The Indian government had promised after the Samjhota Express tragedy that it would share its findings with Pakistan. However, little has been shared with Pakistan, sources maintained adding, in the Joint Anti Terror Mechanism (JATM) meetings, India had also admitted that it had “run against a wall” in the investigation.

With the involvement of Hindu extremist groups resurfacing in the wake of the blasts, it has been reported that a team comprising police and CBI officials had zeroed in on Hindu extremist groups in Indore in connection with the Samjhauta Express blasts in 2007 in which 68 people, mostly Pakistanis, were killed. Investigators have found that certain items such as suitcases, bottles and batteries used in the blasts were purchased from Indore.

Interestingly, while most Muslim suspects in terror cases are charged under the stringent Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA), Prohit and his co-accused were not booked under it according to a court decision on 31 July.

Ironically, the Indian spy agencies are secretly patronising Hindu hardliners to destabilise Pakistan by setting up training camps in several parts of India. On the other hand Indian government and agencies have launched malicious campaign against Pakistan and its security agencies alleging that Pakistani intelligence agencies are using Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) for conducting attacks on Indian economic hubs by pumping money to terrorist network as part of its propaganda campaign. Recently, the Indian prime minister proclaimed that tumultuous situation in Pakistan raised the possibility of terrorist attacks in India. Such an attempt is aimed at detracting the world opinion against Pakistan.

It is worth mentioning that the India is tarnishing Pakistan’s image abroad by trumpeting and whipping up Mumbai firing incident.

The Khyber Bazaar suicide blast was the most devastating as according to the experts the explosives used in the explosion were not more than 50 kg but it went off amid one of the busiest markets functioning in provincial capital, causing the worst damage.

At least 100 kg explosive material was used in another suicide attack on Syed Fakhr-e-Alam Road on September 28, the less destructive one, which killed 18 people, experts said.

A MUST WATCH: Discussion on South Waziristan Ops: Guests: Ayaz Wazir (Former diplomat who belongs to So Waziristan); Prof. A. H. Nayyar (Analyst), Siraj ul Haq (NWFP Ameer of Jamaat Islami)..