-- The New York Times --
April 20, 2008
U.S. Commanders Seeking to Widen Pakistan Attacks
By MARK MAZZETTI and ERIC SCHMITT
WA****NGTON =97 American commanders in Afghanistan have in recent months
urged a widening of the war that could include American attacks on
indigenous Pakistani militants in the tribal areas inside Pakistan,
according to United States officials.
The requests have been rebuffed for now, the officials said, after
deliberations in Wa****ngton among senior Bush administration officials
who fear that attacking Pakistani radicals may anger Pakistan=92s new
government, which is negotiating with the militants, and destabilize
an already fragile security situation.
American commanders would prefer that Pakistani forces attack the
militants, but Pakistani military operations in the tribal areas have
slowed recently to avoid upsetting the negotiations.
Pakistan=92s government has given the Central Intelligence Agency
limited authority to kill Arab and other foreign operatives in the
tribal areas, using remotely piloted Predator aircraft. But
administration officials say the Pakistani government has put far
greater restrictions on American operations against indigenous
Pakistani militant groups, including one thought to have been behind
the assassination of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto.
American intelligence officials say that the threat emanating from
Pakistan=92s tribal areas is growing, and that Pakistani networks there
have taken on an increasingly im****tant role as an ally of Al Qaeda in
plotting attacks against American and other allied troops in
Afghanistan, and in helping foreign operatives plan attacks on targets
in the West. The officials said the American military=92s proposals
included options for limited cross-border artillery strikes into
Pakistan, missile attacks by Predator aircraft or raids by small teams
of C.I.A. paramilitary forces or Special Operations forces.
In recent months, the American military officials in Afghanistan who
are urging attacks in Pakistan discussed a list of potential targets
with the United States ambassador in Pakistan, Anne W. Patterson,
officials said.
The requests by the American commanders for attacks on targets in
Pakistan were described by officials who had been briefed on the
discussions but who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the
discussions involved possible future operations.
The discussions are the latest example of a recurring problem for the
White House: that the place where the terrorist threat is most acute
is the place where American forces are most restricted from acting.
Officials involved in the debate said that the question of attacking
Pakistani militants was especially delicate because some militant
leaders were believed to still be on the payroll of Pakistan=92s
intelligence service, called the Inter-Services Intelligence
Directorate, or another part of Pakistan=92s intelligence apparatus.
Among the groups thought to be targets was one commanded by Sirajuddin
Haqqani, son of the legendary militant leader Jalaluddin Haqqani, as
well as the network led by Baitullah Mehsud that is believed to have
been behind Ms. Bhutto=92s death.
For years the intelligence services have relied on a web of sources
among Pakistani militant groups to collect information on foreign
groups like Al Qaeda that have operated in the tribal areas.
A Pentagon adviser said military intelligence officers in Afghanistan
had drawn up the detailed list of potential targets that was discussed
with Ambassador Patterson. It is unclear which senior officials in
Wa****ngton were involved in the debate over whether to authorize
attacks.
One administration official said the internal discussions in
Wa****ngton involved President Bush=92s top national security aides, and
took place earlier this year.
Military and intelligence officials say Al Qaeda and its affiliates
now have a haven to plan attacks, just as they used camps in
Afghanistan before the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Gen. Michael V.
Hayden, the C.I.A. director, said last month that the security
situation along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border =93presents clear and
present danger to Afghanistan, to Pakistan and to the West in general,
and to the United States in particular.=94
American officials involved in the discussions said that they had not
ruled out striking Pakistani militants in the tribal areas. American
forces in Afghanistan are authorized to attack targets in Pakistan in
self-defense or if they are in =93hot pursuit=94 of militants fleeing back
to havens across the border.
American-led forces in Afghanistan fired artillery at what they
suspected was a Haqqani network safe house on March 12 that an
American spokesman said posed an =93imminent threat.=94 But the Pakistani
Army said the strike killed only civilians.
Administration officials say the risk of angering the new government
in Pakistan and stirring increased anti-American sentiment in the
tribal areas outweighs the benefits of dismantling militant networks
in the region.
=93It=92s certainly something we want to get to, but not yet,=94 said one
Bush administration official. =93If you do it now, you can expect to do
it without Pakistani approval, and you can expect to do it only once
because the Pakistanis will never help us again.=94
Spokesmen for the White House and State Department declined to
comment, as did a spokeswoman for Ambassador Patterson in Pakistan.
Intelligence officials say they believe that leaders of the Pakistani
Taliban and other militant groups have in recent months forged closer
ties to the cadre of Qaeda leaders in the tribal areas. Officials have
said that they thought the leader of the Taliban there, Jalaluddin
Haqqani, may have died last year. But Mr. Haqqani recently released a
video denying those re****ts and made reference to a military attack in
eastern Afghanistan that happened this March. Mr. Haqqani=92s son,
Sirajuddin, has also made aggressive efforts to recruit foreign
fighters from the Persian Gulf and elsewhere in Central Asia.
=93The relation****p between the Taliban and Al Qaeda, and Al Qaeda and
other groups such as the Haqqani network, are stronger today than they
were, and they=92re primarily based on the Pakistani side of the
border,=94 said Seth Jones, an analyst with the RAND Cor****ation, in
Congressional testimony this month after his trip to Afghanistan.
The Haqqanis are suspected of organizing a suicide attack on March 3
that killed two American soldiers at an Afghan government office.
Sirajuddin Haqqani is also suspected of orchestrating a suicide bomb
attack in January at the Serena Hotel in Kabul that killed six people.
The discussions over how to combat Al Qaeda and Pakistani militant
networks in the tribal areas have been going on for nearly two years,
as American policy makers have weighed the growing militant threat in
the border area against unilateral American action that could
politically weaken President Pervez Musharraf, a close ally in the
global counterterrorism campaign.
A few weeks after Ms. Bhutto=92s assassination in December, two senior
American intelligence officials reached a quiet understanding with Mr.
Musharraf to intensify secret strikes against suspected terrorists by
Predator aircraft launched in Pakistan.
American officials have expressed alarm that the leaders of Pakistan=92s
new coalition government, Asif Ali Zardari of the Pakistan Peoples
Party and Nawaz Sharif of the Pakistan Muslim League (N), are
negotiating with militants believed to be responsible for an
increasing number of suicide attacks against the security forces and
political figures.
The new government has signaled that in its relations with Wa****ngton,
it wants to take a path more independent than the one followed by the
previous government and to use military force in the tribal areas only
as a last resort.
In Congressional testimony this month, a former top American commander
in Afghanistan said the need for more action was urgent. =93A senior
member of the administration needs to go to Pakistan and take the
intelligence we have on Al Qaeda, the Taliban, the Haqqani network
inside of Pakistan and lay it out for their most senior leader****p,=94
said the retired commander, Lt. Gen. David W. Barno.
He said the American envoy should =93show them exactly what we know
about, what they don=92t know about what=92s going on in their tribal
areas and say, this is not a tolerable situation for you nor for us.=94
=93And,=94 he added, =93we need to sit down and think through what we can
collectively do about this.=94
Carlotta Gall contributed re****ting from Kabul, Afghanistan.
-- Reuters --
April 18th, 2008
Pakistan more dangerous than Iraq ?
Posted by: Sanjeev Miglani
A Pakistani soldier guards a military post at a mountain peak in Swat
districtThe United States, beginning with President George W. Bush
himself, has this past two weeks trained its crosshairs on Pakistan,
warning that another Sept. 11, if it were to happen, would most
likely not be plotted out of Iraq, Afghanistan or even Iran, but
Pakistan.
Like the steady drumbeat that has often preceded major moves by the
administration, the threat from Pakistan=92s Federally Administered
Tribal Areas, considered the home of the top ranks of al Qaeda, has
been articulated from the White House, at Congressional hearings and
abroad.
Al Qaeda =93won=92t go away quietly in the night=94, having found
sanctuaries in ungoverned places, tribal areas and the Frontier
Province of Pakistan, FBI director Robert Mueller said in the latest
remarks on the matter, according to Pakistan=92s Daily Times.
The issue is starting to create ripples, both at home in America and
quite obviously in Pakistan, although for different reasons. For Bush
critics at home, the barrage of statements is an admission, at the
very least, that America is tied down in Iraq when it should be
focusing on the threat along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. At
worst, it=92s an admission that American blood and treasure have been
spent in the wrong place.
In Pakistan, the reaction is measured but concern over U.S. intentions
is unmistakable.
=93That the Americans are up to mischief is also evident from their
extraordinary interest in the internal politics of Pakistan and
formation of the government, which they are desperately trying to
influence to suit their own objectives,=94 Pakistan Defence says in a
posting arguing that Wa****ngton, faced with a strong new national
coalition government in Islamabad, had stepped up covert and public
pressure.
Raids in Pakistan=92s tribal areas have already been carried out by U.S.
drones, the News said, warning that any further U.S. intervention in
region will aggravate the considerable problems there, including the
legacy of the militant armies set up to fight the Soviet invasion of
Afghanistan.
|
