Pakistan Refuses to Help as U.S. Sorts Out a Fatal Attack

N&P: Discussion of news headlines and politics.

Moderator: frigidmagi

Post Reply
User avatar
frigidmagi
Dragon Death-Marine General
Posts: 14757
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 11:03 am
21
Location: Alone and unafraid

#1 Pakistan Refuses to Help as U.S. Sorts Out a Fatal Attack

Post by frigidmagi »

NYTimes
The American airstrikes that killed two dozen Pakistani soldiers last week were called in during a skirmish in which both sides thought they were under attack by the Taliban, American officials said Friday. But efforts to sort out precisely what happened — and in the process ease the latest crisis to strain the tenuous alliance between the United States and Pakistan — are being hindered by Pakistan’s refusal to cooperate with the American-led military investigation into the attack, the officials said.

A week after the raid on two Pakistani outposts, American and Pakistani officials are offering competing narratives of what went wrong during a tightly planned operation by Afghan and American Special Forces against a Taliban training camp on the remote, cedar-studded mountain slopes along the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Even the most basic facts are in dispute. The Americans say they were fired on first and cleared the strikes with the Pakistanis. The Pakistanis say that NATO gave the wrong coordinates for the proposed airstrikes and that their forces fired only after the attacks began.

Previous cross-border strikes were investigated jointly and the fallout quickly contained, like the dispute that followed the American helicopter attacks on Pakistani forces in September 2010. But a year of crises that began with an American contractor shooting two Pakistanis to death on a street in Lahore and included the Navy Seal raid northwest of Islamabad that killed Osama bin Laden, now risks ending with the breach of an alliance that has been the cornerstone of American national security policy for the past decade, American officials and analysts said.

One United States official described the current feeling in Washington as “crisis fatigue.” The relationship has reached the point “where everyone expects a problem,” the official said.

The chief of the Pakistan Army, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, gave his forces the green light this week to return fire without waiting for orders from superiors if confronted by any future “aggression” from NATO forces, Pakistani military officials said. Pakistan is also moving to upgrade air defenses along the Afghan border, where only American aircraft could present a challenge.

The new orders, issued only days after top Pakistani officers insisted their forces were on the Afghan border only to fight the Taliban, were issued in a “command communiqué,” details of which were published on Friday in Pakistani newspapers. In the announcement, General Kayani said his troops “could respond on their own, when attacked, without waiting for orders from the command.”

He also said that “any act of aggression will be responded with full force, regardless of its consequences.”

The change in the Pakistani military’s rules of engagement appears intended to improve morale and ease anger among the rank and file and elements of the officer corps. After the Bin Laden raid in May, some officers publicly questioned General Kayani about his insistence that Pakistan continue to cooperate with the United States.

In Washington, Capt. John Kirby, a Defense Department spokesman, acknowledged that the deaths of the Pakistani soldiers last week have had “a chilling effect” on relations between the two countries, and that General Kayani’s statement was understandable. “He reiterated their right of self-defense,” Captain Kirby said. “We certainly respect that right of his. We have it as well.”

American officials also repeated their invitation to Pakistan to join the investigation into the strikes. But “they have elected, to date, not to participate,” said George Little, a spokesman for the Pentagon.

To make up for Pakistan’s lack of cooperation, a senior American military intelligence official said, the United States would rely on phone conversations, e-mail exchanges and images collected by Predator drones and on other reconnaissance and surveillance aircraft that were operating in or near the region before, during and after the airstrikes.

American Special Forces and Afghan commandos were sent into the mountains to clear a Taliban training camp. Much of what happened in the few hours between the troops’ arrival and the fatal airstrikes remains murky.

But it is clear that near the end of the operation, the Americans and Afghans came under fire and called in air support. What they did not know — as Apache attack helicopters and an AC-130 gunship swept in overhead — was that the people shooting at them were Pakistani soldiers, not Taliban insurgents.

American officials believe that the Pakistanis also thought they were fighting off the Taliban. Fearing an attack on their position, the Pakistanis fired on the allied force, one of a series of apparent mistakes that led to the Pakistani deaths.

The American belief is partly based on the fact that Pakistan had intelligence indicating that the Taliban were preparing to attack their positions, said a former senior American official who had been briefed on the NATO airstrike.

One of the main disputes is whether the Americans sought clearance from Pakistan before launching the airstrikes, and whether they gave the Pakistanis the right coordinates. The former administration official said the initial investigation indicated “both sides didn’t do what they were supposed to do,” although the details are unclear.

American officials say they did get clearance, passing on the information at one of the centers on the border where both sides station officers and exchange information in an effort to avoid firing on each other. The American officials said they received authorization from Pakistani officers who did not know Pakistani forces were in the area, The Wall Street Journal reported Friday, citing anonymous American officials.

But the Pakistan Army said they never gave the go-ahead for the airstrikes and that they were given the wrong coordinates by the Americans. The army has said the strikes lasted more than an hour and has called the attack “unprovoked and indiscriminate.”
I'm not sure Pakistan is picking a good time to start a confrontation with the US. Last I heard they were moving Anti-Aircraft Assets up to the borders and declaring they would shot down any American Drone operating in Pakistani Airspace. Shooting down drones is one thing and unlikely to cause trouble, if they shot down a manned aircraft...

An election year is a bad time to bet on an American President letting things slide.
"it takes two sides to end a war but only one to start one. And those who do not have swords may still die upon them." Tolken
User avatar
The Minx
Pleasure Kitten
Posts: 1581
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 8:29 pm
18

#2 Re: Pakistan Refuses to Help as U.S. Sorts Out a Fatal Attac

Post by The Minx »

It's not really surprising that they're not being helpful right now. After all, two dozen of their guys got killed on their own territory by NATO forces.

You have to admit that the US would be quite furious in the hypothetical event that a US ally deployed on US land were to have killed 24 American servicemen, especially if said ally had recently conducted multiple drone raids resulting in the deaths of an unspecified number of civilians, as well as a raid into US territory to nab a terrorist who it turns out was right under the Joint Chiefs of Staff's noses, followed by numerous disparaging remarks about US commitment to fighting the good fight.

I don't really trust Pakistan's intentions, but I don't blame them for being mad. :smile:
Librium Arcana resident ⑨-ball
User avatar
frigidmagi
Dragon Death-Marine General
Posts: 14757
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 11:03 am
21
Location: Alone and unafraid

#3 Re: Pakistan Refuses to Help as U.S. Sorts Out a Fatal Attac

Post by frigidmagi »

It's not really surprising that they're not being helpful right now. After all, two dozen of their guys got killed on their own territory by NATO forces.
You mean those 2 dozen guys who opened fire on a NATO patrol? Those guys? You mean shooting at NATO gets you killed! :shock:
You have to admit that the US would be quite furious in the hypothetical event that a US ally deployed on US land were to have killed 24 American servicemen, especially if said ally had recently conducted multiple drone raids resulting in the deaths of an unspecified number of civilians, as well as a raid into US territory to nab a terrorist who it turns out was right under the Joint Chiefs of Staff's noses, followed by numerous disparaging remarks about US commitment to fighting the good fight.
You mean the same Pakistan who trains and arms insurgents and sends them off to fight the US? Who has Osama Bin Lauden sitting down the street from their version of West Point? There have been repeated instances of Pakistani fire on NATO troops. To the point where it gets it own Wiki page!

Pakistan is hardly an innocent bravely attempting to protect it's territory in this case.
"it takes two sides to end a war but only one to start one. And those who do not have swords may still die upon them." Tolken
User avatar
The Minx
Pleasure Kitten
Posts: 1581
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 8:29 pm
18

#4 Re: Pakistan Refuses to Help as U.S. Sorts Out a Fatal Attac

Post by The Minx »

frigidmagi wrote:You mean those 2 dozen guys who opened fire on a NATO patrol? Those guys? You mean shooting at NATO gets you killed! :shock:


You mean the same Pakistan who trains and arms insurgents and sends them off to fight the US? Who has Osama Bin Lauden sitting down the street from their version of West Point? There have been repeated instances of Pakistani fire on NATO troops. To the point where it gets it own Wiki page!

Pakistan is hardly an innocent bravely attempting to protect it's territory in this case.
Of course shooting at NATO gets you killed. Of course they're not innocent. I did say that I don't trust them, after all.

But the point is, they can hardly be expected not to be angry. It's politics, even if it's not reasonable, I think the US had only a 17% favorable rating over there in 2010, it's probably a lot less right now. I just hope that enough bridges can be mended in the near future.
Librium Arcana resident ⑨-ball
User avatar
frigidmagi
Dragon Death-Marine General
Posts: 14757
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 11:03 am
21
Location: Alone and unafraid

#5 Re: Pakistan Refuses to Help as U.S. Sorts Out a Fatal Attac

Post by frigidmagi »

The bridge isn't going to be mended because to be blunt, to many men in the Pakistani ISS and military don't want there to be a bridge in the first place. Many of the terrorist leaders we killed via drone? Trained by Pakistani intelligence in the first place.

The Taliban? Was originally armed by Pakistan after the Soviet's pulled out of Afghanistan (the majority of them were refugees who fled the Soviets and were educated in schools taught by Saudi clerics). The idea was that not only would the Taliban bring law and order to Afghanistan (they did, at first the Taliban was wildly popular because they made the warlords stop) but provide an ally against India (the single greatest obsession of the Pakistan military and intelligence service).

Before someone explodes on me, I'm not saying that we were innocent lambs here. We also funded people and sent weapons, most of them joined the United Islamic Front aka the Northern Alliance. Most of them were veterans of the war with the Soviets, and frankly they weren't nice people. Pakistan sent in as many as 8,000 soldiers with the Taliban to fight the Northern Alliance and to be fair, the Taliban offered Ahmad Shah Massoud the last unifying figure in the alliance (Pakistan killed the rest) the seat of Prime Minister if he would just stop fighting. Let me quote his response.
"The Taliban say: “Come and accept the post of prime minister and be with us”, and they would keep the highest office in the country, the presidentship. But for what price?! The difference between us concerns mainly our way of thinking about the very principles of the society and the state. We can not accept their conditions of compromise, or else we would have to give up the principles of modern democracy. We are fundamentally against the system called “the Emirate of Afghanistan”."

"There should be an Afghanistan where every Afghan finds himself or herself happy. And I think that can only be assured by democracy based on consensus."
He wasn't by our standards a nice man, but neither was George Washington. Hell the man signed the Women's Right Declaration, that's more then we can get from the Afghans now!

On September 9th 2001 he was murdered by a pair of Arab operatives of Al Qaeda. Pakistan is rumored to have supported the operation. They certainly didn't condemn it, in fact they were the first to recognize the Taliban as the legal government of Afghanistan and the last to withdraw recognization. Unsurprising as the Taliban was their boy from day one.

As for the average Pakistani? Most of them believe that 911 was a Jewish plot to kill Arabs and the US is in Afghanistan in order to set for stealing Pakistan's nukes. The military and intelligence community makes sure they're feed a constant diet of anti-American stories and propaganda. As long as the current power set up is in place, the Pakistanis will be anti-American.

In short, we sent in those drones because Pakistan preferred letting the Taliban operate from their soil to kill Americans, Europeans and Afghanis then any other offered solution. At every step Pakistan has preferred to preserve as much of the Taliban and it's allies as possible no matter the price. We can't mend a bridge that only exist in imagination. The military and intelligence organizations of Pakistan are part of the problem.
"it takes two sides to end a war but only one to start one. And those who do not have swords may still die upon them." Tolken
Post Reply