Showing posts with label Pakistan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pakistan. Show all posts

4/13/2015

China to build $2bn Iran-Pakistan natgas pipeline



Πηγή: Trade Arabia
April 12 2015


China plans to build a pipeline to transport natural gas from Iran to Pakistan in a move to alleviate the crippling burden of electricity shortage in Pakistan, a report said.

A deal is likely to be signed during the Chinese president’s visit to Islamabad this month, Pakistani officials were quoted as saying in the Tehran Times report.

Pakistan has been negotiating for months for China to build the Pakistani portion of the pipeline, which will cost up to $2 billion, according to the report.

“We’re building it,” Pakistani Petroleum Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi told The Wall Street Journal. “The process has started.”

Dubbed the “Peace Pipeline,” its 900-kilometre part from an Iranian gas field is complete and Pakistan is under pressure to complete its part of the scheme.

Pakistan hasn’t begun construction in light of threatened US sanctions for trading with Iran, the report said.

“This [Iran nuclear agreement] will help us in getting a few things which were coming into the way of the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline to be cleared and we will move forward,” Pakistan’s ambassador to Iran, Noor Muhammad Jadmani, was quoted in the report, which cited the official Iranian news agency Irna.

Pakistan is negotiating with China Petroleum Pipeline Bureau, a subsidiary of Chinese energy giant China National Petroleum Corporation, to build 700 kilometres of pipeline from the western Pakistani port of Gwadar to Nawabshah in the southern province of Sindh, where it will connect to Pakistan’s existing gas-distribution pipeline network.

The cost would be $1.5 billion to $1.8 billion for the pipeline, or $2 billion if an optional Liquefied Natural Gas terminal at Gwadar is included in the scheme. Under the deal, 85 per cent of the financing will be provided by a Chinese loan, with Pakistan coming up with the rest.

The remaining 50 miles (80 kilometres) will be built by Pakistan. The pipeline, which would take two years to build, would eventually supply Pakistan with enough gas to fuel 4,500 M of electricity generation.


12/22/2012

The inside story of the CIA-ISI immunity deal


Πηγή: The News
By Amir Mir
Dec 21 2012

ISLAMABAD: The US State Department’s decision to extend immunity to two former ISI chiefs in the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks case is in accordance with a clandestine understanding reached between Admiral Mike Mullen and General Ashfaq Kayani during a day-long meeting held at a secluded resort in Oman on February 22, 2011.

The State Department informed a New York federal court on December 19 that the ISI and two of its former director generals enjoyed immunity and cannot be tried in the Mumbai terror attacks case.

But well-informed diplomatic circles in Islamabad say a commitment to this effect had been given to Pakistan’s military top brass almost a year ago by their American counterparts during the Oman meeting.

Those who attended the Oman meeting [besides Kayani and Mullen] included General David Petraeus, the then commander of International Security Assistance Force, Admiral Eric Olson, commander of US Special Operations Command, General James Mattis, commander of US Central Command and Major General Javed Iqbal, the then director general Military Operations. Interestingly, the ISI and CIA chiefs were absent from the conference room during the high-powered meeting.

The meeting was meant to overcome the diplomatic crisis threatening the Pak-US ties in the wake of the arrest of Raymond Davis, an undercover CIA agent, who had killed two youngsters in Lahore on January 27, 2011. The shooting had led to a major diplomatic row between Washington and Islamabad as the Americans insisted that Davis enjoyed diplomatic immunity while Pakistanis argued that he was a CIA contractor and not an embassy employee to be given immunity.

In fact, the Davis episode took place hardly a few weeks after a US court summoned the then DG ISI Ahmed Shuja Pasha and several other senior army officers [in November 2010] for their alleged involvement in the Mumbai terror attacks.

The US summons had deeply upset the Pakistani military establishment, which was of the view that the spy chief of a friendly country should not have been treated like this. On December 16, 2010, shortly after the issuance of the summons, the Islamabad Police had moved to register a murder case against the then CIA station chief in Pakistan, Jonathan Banks, who was supervising the deadly drone campaign in the tribal areas. The complainant was a resident of North Waziristan, who wanted a murder case to be registered against Jonathan for the killings of his son and brother in a drone attack in December 2009.

The standoff had pushed the CIA and ISI into an eyeball-to-eyeball confrontation, compelling the military leadership of the two countries to hold a secret moot in a third country to resolve the crisis. The Pakistani side made it clear that any understanding to improve the ties, including the release of Davis, would include the withdrawal of the summons against the ISI chief. Subsequent to the clandestine deal, Raymond Davis was set free on March 16, 2011 by a Pakistani court after the families of the two killed men were paid $2.4 million as blood money. The CIA agent was immediately taken out of Pakistan.

Almost a year later, the US State Department has informed a New York court that the defendants in the Mumbai attacks case — Ahmed Shuja Pasha and Nadeem Taj — are immune from the law suit. The State Department also pointed out that its determination was not subject to judicial review. The US court had issued summons in November 2010 to Lt Gen Ahmed Shuja Pasha, Lt Gen Nadeem Taj, Hafiz Mohammad Saeed, Zakiur Rehman Lakhvi and five serving and retired Majors of the Pakistan Army for their alleged involvement in the Mumbai attacks, asking them to appear before it. The court was hearing a law suit filed by the relatives of Gavriel Noah Holtzberg, an American Jew and his wife Rivka who were shot dead at the Chhabad House in Mumbai during the 2008 terror strikes. Their son, Moshe, was saved by his Indian nanny.

Filed on November 19, 2012, the 26-page lawsuit stated: “The ISI has long nurtured and used international terrorist groups, including the LeT, to accomplish its goals and has provided material support to the LeT and other international terrorist groups. The Mumbai attacks were planned, trained for and carried out by members of defendant, the LeT. Defendant ISI provided critical planning, material support, control and coordination of the 26/11 attacks,” the lawsuit alleged.

The lawsuit further alleged: “On and prior to November 26, 2008, the ISI, Ahmed Shuja Pasha, Nadeem Taj, as well as other officials, agents and employees of the ISI directed, engaged and/or relied upon the efforts of US-based individuals, including but not limited to David Headley and Tahawwur Rana, for raising funds, building a network of connections, recruiting participants and planning the operation of the Mumbai terror attack”.

Noting that the LeT still operates training camps in Pakistan, Kashmir and Afghanistan, the petition alleged that the group has openly advocated violence against India, Israel and the US. It also named Muridke, Manshera and Muzaffarabad as centres of training camps operated by the Lashkar. The 10 LeT activists who undertook on-the-ground Mumbai attack underwent extensive training in the LeT camps in Pakistan, the lawsuit further alleged.

The lawsuit also claimed that Pakistani American LeT operative David Headley, who has already pleaded guilty to his role in the plotting of the Mumbai attack, built a network of connections from Chicago to Pakistan, undertaking these efforts at the direction and with the material support of both the LeT and ISI. Prior to and following each trip to Mumbai, Headley reported to and received further instructions from both the LeT and ISI.

“In September 2008, the 10 LeT attackers were moved to Karachi and installed in an ISI/LeT safe house and isolated from outside contact,” it said, adding that while staying in the Karachi safe house, the attackers received specific instructions on Mumbai targets. The safe house was part of the ISI’s “Karachi Project,” an initiative by which anti-Indian groups were tasked and supported by the ISI in a surreptitious fashion to engage in acts of international terrorism.

As the US State Department has extended amnesty to two former ISI chiefs in the 26/11 case, India has reacted sharply, saying the American decision was a matter of deep and abiding concern as it contradicted Washington’s public commitment to bringing those responsible for the Mumbai terror attacks to justice. Six Americans were among the 166 killed in the Mumbai attacks. India’s National Investigation Agency (NIA) has already secured an Interpol Red Corner Notice against five officers of Pakistan Army for their alleged role in the Mumbai terror strikes.

They include Major Sajid Majid (named by David Headley, an American terror accused being tried in the US), Major Mohammad Iqbal (an ISI official and Headley’s alleged handler who faces terrorism charges in the US for his role in the Mumbai attacks), Major Sameer Ali (an ISI official accused of having worked with Headley), Major Syed Abdul Rehman alias Pasha (accused of carrying out recruitments for the Lashkar-e-Taiba) and Major Abu Hamza (one of the alleged handlers of the Mumbai attackers who was on phone with the terrorists who carried out Mumbai attack). The warrants were issued on the basis of claim made by Headley that these people had worked in close coordination with him in executing the Lashkar-e-Taiba plans for carrying out the 26/11 strikes in Mumbai.

It took two days of persuasion for Headley to waive his right to silence under the US law and detail every meeting he had with his LeT handlers, including Hafiz Saeed and the ISI officials in Muzzaffarabad and Lahore before the 26/11 attacks. He told the NIA team in Chicago in the presence of US prosecutors, FBI agents and his lawyers, that his reconnaissance missions and its results were closely and jointly monitored by the LeT and ISI before he received fresh instructions. The 11th dossier, which India had handed over to Pakistan on June 18, 2010, contained every statement by Headley, which shows the ISI as a central player. “An ISI brigadier served as handler for Zakiur Rehman Lakhvi who is also close to DG ISI. The ISI funds LeT and shields Hafiz Saeed from interference,” so said the 11th dossier while quoting Headley.


9/22/2012

US Drone Strike Kills 3 Militants in Pak

At least 151 people have been killed in 20 drone strikes launched in northwest tribal area of Pakistan since the beginning of this year


Πηγή: Outlook India
Sept 22 2012

At least three suspected militants were killed when a US drone targeted a car in Pakistan's restive North Waziristan tribal region today, officials said.

The drone fired missiles at the car in Datta Khel area of North Waziristan Agency. Three persons in the vehicle were killed instantly, officials were quoted as saying by TV news channels.

Drones continued hovering over the area after the strike, causing tensions among local residents.

This was the first US drone strike in Pakistan's tribal belt since violent protests erupted across the country against the anti-Islam film "Innocence Of Muslims".

The Datta Khel area has witnessed numerous drone strikes in the past few years. Afghan and US officials describe North Waziristan as a safe haven for Al Qaeda and Taliban elements, including the Haqqani network.

The US has continued its drone campaign in the tribal belt bordering Afghanistan despite strong protests from Pakistan. During a meeting with US Special Envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan Marc Grossman on September 15, President Asif Ali Zardari reiterated Pakistan's call for an end to drone attacks.

Zardari described the use of drones as counter-productive in the fight against militancy and in the "battle of winning hearts". He said Pakistan and the US need to find alternatives to drones.

7/19/2012

Families of U.S. citizens killed in drone strikes sue CIA


Πηγή: The Raw Story
By Karen McVeigh (The Guardian)
July 18 2012

The killing of three US citizens, one a 16-year-old boy, in targeted drone strikes last year were unlawful and violated their constitutional rights by not affording them due process, according to a lawsuit filed by their relatives on Wednesday.

Anwar al-Awlaki, a radical Muslim cleric who was placed on a CIA “kill list” last year, died in a targeted strike in Yemen on 30 September that also killed Samir Khan, an alleged propagandist for al-Qaida, in the Arabian Pensinsula. Al-Awlaki’s teenage son, Abdulrahman, was killed in a separate strike 200 miles away in which six others died two weeks later.

The lawsuit accuses Leon Panetta, the secretary of defence, David Petraeus, the director of the CIA, and two military commanders of authorising and directing unlawful killings. President Barack Obama is not named in the lawsuit: presidents are immune from civil suits arising from their official actions.

The complaint alleges that the deaths are part of a broader programme of deliberate and premeditated killings by the United States, which rely on “vague legal standards, a closed executive process and evidence never presented to the courts”.

The lawsuit has been filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) on behalf of Nasser al-Awlaki, the father of Anwar and grandfather of Abdulrahman, and Sarah Khan, the mother of Khan. It aims to force the Obama administration to disclose information about secret decisions behind the killing.

Jameel Jaffir, deputy legal director of the ACLU, said: “It is about accountability. We don’t want to minimise the seriousness of the allegations [against Al-Awlaki]. The question here is not whether people are guilty of crimes but whether the government is justified in killing them.”

Jaffir said the government had adopted a “dangerous position” over the targeting killing programme by saying that not only do they not have to explain but do not have to acknowledge the killings.

The lawsuit argues that all three killings were unlawful because, outside of military conflict, the constitution and international law prohibit killing without due process, “except as a last resort to avert a concrete, specific, and imminent threat of death or serious physical injury”.

Anonymous US government officials were quoted in news reports saying that neither Khan nor Abdulrahman were targets of the strikes that killed them.The complaint said that if the US government were targeting others, then they failed in their obligations under constitutional and international law to protect Khan, Abdulrahman and “other bystanders”.

Pardiss Kebriaei of the CCR said: “The government was quick to claim responsibility for the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki but it said nothing of the strike on the 14 October.”

She said there was something “terribly wrong that a 16-year-old boy can be killed by his own government without any explanation”.

In a video statement, posted on the ACLU website, Nasser al-Awlaki, said: “I want Americans to know about my grandson. He was a very nice boy he was very caring boy. I never thought that one day this boy, this nice boy, will be killed by his own government for no wrong he did certainly.”

It is unclear who the US targeted in the second strike, which was 200 miles away from the strike which killed al-Awlaki. The teenager, who was born in Denver, was killed when he was eating dinner at an outdoor restaurant with his teenage cousin.

Two years ago, ACLU and CCR were unsuccessful in their attempts to involve the courts in an action by Nasser al-Awlaki to try to stop the government from killing his son. A federal judge threw out the case on the basis that Nasser al-Awlaki had no standing to file the lawsuit on behalf of his son. He also said decisions about targeted killings were a “political question” for executive branch officials and not for the courts.

US officials have defended the drone campaign in recent speeches, but the Obama administration has generally refused to openly discuss the criteria for operations.

US government officials, including Eric Holder, the attorney general, have defended targeting suspected terrorists without a trial, even if they are US citizens.

In a speech in March, Holder said: “Some have argued that the president is required to get permission from a federal court before taking action against a United States citizen who is a senior operational leader of al-Qaida or associated forces.

“This is simply not accurate. ‘Due process’ and ‘judicial process’ are not one and the same, particularly when it comes to national security. The constitution guarantees due process, not judicial process.”

There have been reports that Anwar al-Awlaki was involved in the attempted bombing of a Detroit-bound airliner on Christmas Day 2009 and other terrorist plots, but he was never indicted or tried.



7/06/2012

Inside the U.S. ‘apology’ to Pakistan


Πηγή: FP
By Josh Rogin
July 3 2012

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said "sorry" to Pakistan today and announced that Pakistan would resume allowing U.S. military goods to flow through its border with Afghanistan, but her near-apology was only one piece in a much larger set of moving parts in the effort to restore some normalcy to the troubled U.S.-Pakistan relationship.

"We are sorry for the losses suffered by the Pakistani military," Clinton said in a Tuesday statement, referring to the Nov. 25 incident when NATO forces killed 24 Pakistan soldiers on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. "We are committed to working closely with Pakistan and Afghanistan to prevent this from ever happening again."

Clinton spoke with Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar by phone Tuesday and said that Khar had promised Pakistan would reopen its supply lines for U.S. military flows into Afghanistan, which have been closed down for six months in retaliation for the killings. Pakistan dropped its demand for fees of up to $5,000 per truck and will not even charge the $250 per truck the United States was paying before the incident occurred, Clinton said.

She also indicated that the progress announced today carried with it the prospect of tackling some of the larger issues plaguing the bilateral relationship, namely Pakistan's reluctance to go after the Taliban and other militant groups as well as what the United States sees as Pakistan's refusal to play a useful role in reconciliation talks to end the Afghanistan war.

"Foreign Minister Khar and I talked about the importance of taking coordinated action against terrorists who threaten Pakistan, the United States, and the region; of supporting Afghanistan's security, stability, and efforts towards reconciliation; and of continuing to work together to advance the many other shared interests we have," Clinton said.

Tuesday's announcement came after months of protracted and often excruciating negotiations between the two governments. On the U.S. side of the table, the process was led by Deputy Secretary of State Tom Nides, who was in Pakistan Monday, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Asian and Pacific Affairs Peter Lavoy, and Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan Marc Grossman.

ISAF Commander Gen. John Allen also traveled to Pakistan twice over the past two weeks, once at the invitation of Pakistani Army Chief of Staff General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani and again as part of larger discussions regarding the NATO mission in Afghanistan.

The internal U.S. process that led to today's remarks by Clinton was extensive -- and rocky at times. It has been well reported that the State Department, especially soon-to-be-former U.S. Ambassador Cameron Munter, urged the White House to apologize long ago but was overruled due to objections from the Defense Department, where officials were angered by the fact that the Pakstani military accused the U.S. military of killing the soldiers intentionally.

Three administration sources confirmed to The Cable that between December and early spring, the National Security Council convened at least 8 separate high-level meetings to debate the apology, and ultimately, the White House earlier this year decided to issue one.

The Pakistani government in early Spring asked the White House not to issue the apology because the Pakistani parliament was in the middle of its comprehensive review of the bilateral relationship. Then, following deadly attacks in Kabul on NATO forces in April, which were traced back to the Pakistan-based Haqqani network, the White House took the apology off the table.

That's why today's comments by Clinton came as a huge surprise to many Pakistan-watchers. But experts saw in her comments a careful dance that the administration thinks represents a compromise, because Clinton never actually said the word "apology" or "apologize."

"It allows the administration to say to Congress, we didn't ‘apologize,' we said we were ‘sorry,'" saidShuja Nawaz, director of the South Asia Center at the Atlantic Council. He emphasized that discussions about several thorny issues in the relationship are still ongoing.

Asked directly at today's press briefing if the "sorry" comment constituted an "apology," State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland wouldn't say that it did.

"The statement speaks for itself, the words are all there, and I'm not going to improve on it here," she said.

In conjunction with Tuesday's announcement, the Obama administration has agreed to hand over about $1.2 billion to the Pakistanis in Coalition Support Funds (CSF) that were owed but delayed as part of the overall unhappiness between the two governments, two administration sources confirmed. Pakistan, which views the funds as reimbursements the United Sates agreed to pay in exchange for Pakistan's help in fighting the war on terror, argues that America owes it a larger sum.

"It's not a coincidence," Nawaz said, referring to the timing of the CSF funding. "This was part of the overall discussion."

The deal may not stop there.

Pakistan might still ask for money to help repair the infrastructural wear and tear that comes along with thousands of NATO trucks traversing its highways. The Pakistanis might also demand a new system that institutes some regularity in the CSF funds because the U.S. government currently demands detailed receipts and then rejects about 40 percent of the Pakistani reimbursement requests.

In the past, the United States has used delays in the CSF funds to punish Pakistan when the administration is frustrated with Pakistani actions.

"Internally on the U.S. side, when the administration has been pissed off at the Pakistanis, they've just said, ‘Oh, we'll slow down the CSF funds and just not tell them,'" one former U.S. official toldThe Cable.

Getting the CSF funding was always the real goal of the negotiations as far as the Pakistanis were concerned, according to the former official.

"The Pakistani government doesn't care about the transit fees as much as they care about the coalition support funds," the official said. "CSF offers them more of a short-term benefit. The reason they were making such a big deal about the transit fees before was because that was their negotiating position."

The U.S. side still wants concrete steps to show that the Pakistani government is moving more aggressively to stem the flow of fighters from its territory into Afghanistan, where they regularly attack and kill U.S., NATO, and Afghan forces. Both sides want a better system of on-the-ground operational coordination to make sure incidents like the November killings aren't repeated.

Clinton didn't mention the CSF funds in her speech, perhaps because that money could still be held up by Congress, which has been engaged in some serious bipartisan Pakistan-bashing,especially since a Pakistani court sentenced the doctor who helped the CIA find Osama bin Laden to 33 years in prison.

After the administration notifies Congress it wants to release the funds, a notification that could come today, Congress has 15 days to reject it or the money gets released.

A key Republican in the debate over Pakistan will be Sen. Lindsey Graham, a senior member of the House Armed Services Committee and the ranking Republican on the Senate Appropriations State and Foreign Operations subcommittee. In a Tuesday statement, Graham indicated he would support the administration's position.

"These supply lines are essential to supporting our troops in Afghanistan and I believe the terms and conditions negotiated by Secretary Clinton's team are acceptable to American interests throughout the region," he said.

But Graham also indicated that any thawing of the U.S.-Pakistan relationship would only be endorsed by Congress if and when Pakistan gets more serious about helping in Afghanistan.

"This agreement is a good step in the right direction, but more has to be done between the United States and Pakistan in the area of counterterrorism," he said. "If the Pakistani military intelligence services would engage in aggressive efforts to combat terrorism in coordination with coalition forces, it would tremendously enhance our successes in Afghanistan, provide stability to the Pakistani government, and eventually a better life for people on both sides of the border."

Nawaz warned that the relationship is still very fragile and that any number of things could send it spiraling downward once again, including a clumsy drone strike, a U.S. troop incursion into Pakistan, or another attack on NATO forces by Pakistan-based militants.

"This is only a Band Aid for this relationship. Any number of new crises or recurring crises is likely to trigger another round of recrimination," he said. "‘Sorry' was the hardest word, but it's a bit too early to celebrate. We're not yet out of the woods."



7/04/2012

Pakistan agrees to open supply lines after U.S. apology

Crucial corridor: Pakistan has agreed to reopen the NATO supply lines, allowing trucks into Afghanistan. Here is a look at the trucks, truckers and the highway that stalled diplomacy for eight months.

Πηγή: Washington Post
By Karen DeYoung and Richard Leiby
July 3 2012

Pakistan agreed Tuesday to reopen its border crossings to U.S. and NATO military transit after Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton apologized for a deadly U.S. airstrike last year.

The moves ended a seven-month diplomatic standoff and raised hopes within the Obama administration that the Pakistanis are ready to expand counterterrorism cooperation.

The White House had resisted Pakistan’s insistence on an explicit apology for the deaths of 24 Pakistani soldiers in the November airstrike. But a flurry of meetings in recent days led to Clinton issuing an artfully worded statement saying she had spoken with her counterpart in Islamabad and agreed that mistakes were made on both sides.

“We are sorry for the losses suffered by the Pakistani military,” the statement said. “We are committed to working closely with Pakistan and Afghanistan to prevent this from ever happening again.”

Although the language expressed mutual regret, the statement was quickly billed in Pakistan as a unilateral apology, an interpretation that the Obama administration was content to leave undisputed.

“Everyone hopes this will open the doors to other cooperation with them on counterterrorism and Afghanistan,” a senior administration official said. “That’s yet to be seen. I think we should take it for what it is and go from there.”

Disagreements remain over militant sanctuaries in Pakistan, cross-border attacks by extremists in Pakistan and Afghanistan, U.S. drone strikes in Pakistani territory and reconciliation with the Taliban.

But for the moment, both sides are clearly relieved that the most visible evidence of the breach in their always-tense relationship — the miles of stalled U.S. military container trucks awaiting passage to Afghanistan — would soon disappear. U.S. officials said they expected the first vehicles to cross the newly opened border by early Wednesday.

In recent months, the United States has spent at least an additional $100 million a month to use an alternative, northern route across Central Asia. That cost had been expected to increase as the massive withdrawal of U.S. troops and equipment from Afghanistan accelerated.

Both sides yielded ground, but the dispute finally ended because “the two countries agreed we need to move beyond this issue,” said a source knowledgeable about the negotiations. “These things need time.”

U.S. officials spoke on the condition of anonymity about the negotiations, saying they would not publicly discuss anything beyond Clinton’s statement.

Pakistan’s Defense Committee of the Cabinet, which approved the deal, said the agreement was in the country’s best interest and a boon to the Afghanistan peace process. Allowing NATO convoys to enter and exit Pakistani territory would speed the withdrawal of Western forces, the Islamabad government said in a statement, and “enable a smooth transition in Afghanistan.”

The cabinet meeting, chaired by Prime Minister Raja Pervez Ashraf, included the powerful army chief, Gen. Ashfaq Kayani, and the director of the Inter-
Services Intelligence agency, Lt. Gen. Zaheer ul-Islam. Ashraf opened the meeting by calling Pakistan “a responsible member of the international community” and saying that continued closure of NATO supply lines would “impinge” on Pakistan’s international relationships.

Information Minister Qamar Zaman Kaira, pressed by reporters on the language in Clinton’s statement, dismissed what he called “this useless issue of which word has been used. The reality is that the nation has been able to bring the world superpower to offer an apology.”

‘It was a matter of pride’

In her statement, Clinton noted that Pakistan would not charge any new fees for the containers, an issue that had dominated the drawn-out negotiations at one point, with Pakistan insisting on a payment of $5,000 per truck.

“This is a tangible demonstration of Pakistan’s support for a secure, peaceful and prosperous Afghanistan and our shared objectives in the region” and will result in “a much lower cost” for withdrawing U.S. troops, Clinton said.

About 90,000 American combat troops, and 40,000 from NATO and other countries, are due to leave Afghanistan by the end of 2014.

The senior administration official said U.S. negotiators had told Pakistan that they would notify Congress to release more than $1 billion in withheld funds for Pakistani counterterrorism operations. Pakistan has said that it is owed more than $3 billion as part of an existing U.S. agreement to reimburse Pakistan for its expenses.

But money was never the main issue, Pakistani analysts said. “It was a matter of honor for the army,” said Laiq ur-Rehman, defense correspondent for ARY News, a cable channel. “The only word they were looking for was ‘sorry.’ It was a matter of pride, a matter of honor, a matter of ego.”

“If it had been about the money, it would have been done months ago,” said the source knowledgeable about the negotiations. “Just like for us, it was not just about the supply routes.”

Drawn-out negotiations

Final agreement on the wording of Clinton’s statement came after a week of marathon talks that included two trips to Islamabad by Gen. John R. Allen, the U.S. commander in Afghanistan, and a quickly arranged weekend trip by Thomas R. Nides, the deputy secretary of state for management and resources. In recent weeks, Nides and Pakistani Finance Minister Abdul Hafeez Shaikh had spearheaded the negotiations.

The senior administration official said that agreement on financial issues was reached last week and that the wording of the statement was decided Monday. “Everybody had been circling around this for some time,” the official said. “It took everybody to say, ‘Okay, let’s do this.’ ”

On the U.S. side, the White House and the Pentagon had long rebuffed State Department entreaties to utter what one U.S. diplomat called “the ‘sorry’ word.” They insisted that an apology was not merited because both countries were at fault in the Nov. 26 incident. A U.S. military investigation said the soldiers’ deaths were inadvertent and resulted from a skirmish in which the Pakistanis fired first at U.S. ground forces near the border in Afghanistan. Pakistan has disputed that conclusion, saying its forces did not fire first.

Although the Pakistani military had publicly deferred to the civilian government in Islamabad to make a decision on the border closings — and a parliamentary committee determined that an apology was necessary — Allen and Nides held private meetings with Kayani before the final deal was reached.

Allen issued a statement Tuesday that was similar to Clinton’s, calling the agreement “a demonstration of Pakistan’s desire to help secure a brighter future for both Afghanistan and the region at large.”

But the decision also carries the prospect of another public backlash in Pakistan, where opposition to U.S. policies remains strong.

As the container trucks got ready to move, the Defense Council of Pakistan, a coalition of Islamic parties that includes pro-Taliban clerics and other foes of the NATO routes, vowed civil disobedience to stop the convoys.

“The decision to reopen NATO supplies is a big crime against the country, and we will not sit silently over this,” retired Lt. Gen. Hamid Gul, a leader of the group and a former chief of the Inter-Services Intelligence agency, told the Pakistani cable channel Express News. “We will come to roads and streets and protest against the decision and will also try to stop the supplies.”



5/23/2012

Pakistan hands 33-year sentence to doctor who helped CIA track bin Laden

Dr Shakil Afridi sentenced for US spying. 

Πηγή: The State
By SAEED SHAH
May 23 2012

ISLAMABAD — The Pakistani doctor who helped the CIA in the hunt for Osama bin Laden was sentenced to 33 years in prison for treason Wednesday, officials said, in a further blow to relations between Islamabad and Washington.

The United States had been negotiating behind the scenes to win freedom for Dr. Shakil Afridi, who was detained by Pakistani intelligence agents after the May 2, 2011, U.S. special forces raid that found and killed the al-Qaida founder in the northern town of Abbottabad.

Word that Afridi had been tried in a tribal court, rather than in a regular Pakistani one, came just after Pakistan and the United States failed to come to an agreement at the NATO summit held in Chicago on reopening a land route through Pakistan for supplies to coalition troops in landlocked Afghanistan.

The Afridi case illustrates the stark differences between the two countries on anti-terrorism issues. Afridi is regarded as a hero by American officials but as a traitor in Pakistan.

McClatchy Newspapers revealed in July last year that Afridi had set up a fake health program in Abbottabad, sending health workers door to door to vaccinate residents for Hepatitis B, in an effort to get DNA samples from the house where the CIA suspected that bin Laden lived.

American officials were never sure that bin Laden was present in the home, to which they had traced a key al-Qaida courier. The work by Afridi was carried out in the weeks leading up to the raid and was an important part of the CIA's attempts to verify that bin Laden was in the Abbottabad house before mounting a risky operation in another country's territory to kill him. It remains unclear whether Afridi's efforts gained any useful information.

After the bin Laden raid, Afridi remained in Pakistan, where he was arrested three weeks later by agents of the military's Inter-Services Intelligence agency. U.S. officials believe he has been tortured in custody, a claim angrily denied by Pakistani military officials.

Afridi's case was heard under colonial-era tribal laws that give the local administration in Pakistan's tribal area sweeping powers to jail people, even though his alleged offense was committed in Abbottabad, where tribal laws do not apply. However, Afridi officially was employed to work in the tribal area, in the part known as Khyber agency. He is also a member of one of the tribes of the area.

News reports in Pakistan said Afridi was sent Wednesday to the central jail in Peshawar, the main city in the northwest of the country. The local nurses and other health officials in Abbottabad who cooperated unwittingly with Afridi have been fired.

In January, U.S. Defense Secretary, Leon Panetta, had gone public with Washington's concerns about Afridi.

"I am very concerned about what the Pakistanis did with this individual. This was an individual who, in fact, helped provide intelligence that was very helpful with regard to this operation," Panetta said during an interview aired by CBS's "60 Minutes." "He was not in any way treasonous towards Pakistan. He was not in any way doing anything that would have undermined Pakistan."

However, Pakistan regarded the bin Laden raid as a national humiliation, and the cooperation of one of its citizens angered many here. Panetta's remarks had confirmed on the record that Afridi had worked for the CIA. Under the laws in Pakistan, and many other countries, including the United States, working for a foreign intelligence agency is a crime.

U.S-Pakistan relations disintegrated last year over a series of clashes, including the bin Laden raid, culminating in a "friendly fire" episode in November in which American aircraft attacked two Pakistani border outposts, killing 24 soldiers. In response, Pakistan stopped NATO supplies to Afghanistan passing through its territory.





5/19/2012

Pakistan: New restrictions imposed on CIA


Πηγή: Nation
May 19 2012

ISLAMABAD - Pakistan on Friday has issued its new rules and regulations for officials, Ambassadors and contractors of Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

The new rules and regulations are imposed by mutual collaboration of top technical teams of the two countries.

According to a report of private news channel, a total of 13 meetings were held between technical teams of both the countries and finalised these rules and regulations.

According to new mechanism, the CIA officials deployed in Pakistan must prove their identity to Pakistani officials including Pakistani top spy agency ISI.

The CIA officials have to procure Non-Objection Certificate from the Foreign Ministry for travelling inside Pakistan and would not be allowed to use vehicles with fake number plates.



US House passes Defence Bill, defies veto threat


Πηγή: The Statesman
May 19 2012

WASHINGTON: Defying the White House veto threat, the Republican-majority US House of Representatives has passed the US$ 643 billion defence authorisation Bill for 2013 that among other things calls for certain conditions for American aid to Pakistan.

The White House, in a statement this week, had said such conditions and certification regarding aid to Pakistan would be counter-productive.

The National Defence Authorisation Act (NDAA) 2013, passed by the House ~ 299 votes to 120 ~ yesterday now heads for a showdown with the Democrat-majority Senate.

The NDAA imposes conditions on Pakistan for receiving economic and military aid from the USA based on Islamabad's action against terrorists and IEDs.

Among other things, it prohibits the preferential procurement of goods or services from Pakistan till Islamabad re-opens the crucial Nato supply routes to Afghanistan, which were closed in the aftermath of the death of 24 Pakistani soldiers on 26 November last year in a Nato cross-border fire.

The Bill also calls for the construction of an East Coast missile defence system in the USA by the end of 2015 and has budgeted US$ 100 million in this regard for next year.

The NDAA authorises US$ 643 billion in spending for department of defence and overseas contingency operations, US$ 8 billion above the spending caps in last year's Budget Control Act (BCA) and US$ 3.7 billion higher than the request made by President Barack Obama.

“This Bill mandates fiscal responsibility within the department of defence, through sound fiscal stewardship, careful prioritisation of resources, and reforming the way the Pentagon interacts with the defence industrial base,” House Armed Services Committee chairman Mr Howard P 'Buck' McKeon said.

House Republican Policy Committee chairman Mr Tom Price said the Bill reflects a conscious effort to maintain strong alliances with friends like Israel, and it ensures “we do not underestimate” the threats emanating from nations like Iran and North Korea.

The Bill also notes that the Taliban, Haqqanis and associated insurgents continue to enjoy safe havens in Pakistan, but are unlikely to be capable of overthrowing the Afghan government unless the USA withdraws forces precipitously from Afghanistan.

Opposing many provisions of the Defence Bill, including conditions imposed on US aid to Pakistan, the White House had threatened to veto it if it impedes the ability of the government to execute the new American defence strategy.

“If the cumulative effects of the Bill impede the ability of the administration to execute the new defence strategy and to properly direct scarce resources, the President's senior advisors would recommend to the President that he veto the Bill,” an eight-page statement issued by the White House Office of Management and Budget had warned on Tuesday.


4/17/2012

US to press Pakistan to 'squeeze' Haqqani network: Clinton


Πηγή: The Nation
By INP
April 17 2012

The United States has said that it will continue to press Islamabad to 'squeeze' the al-Qaeda linked Haqqani network, as Afghanistan blamed the Pakistan-based group for the latest brazen attacks in Kabul.

Declaring "there were indications of Haqqani involvement" in the weekend attacks in the Afghan capital, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that she had pressed Pakistan to 'squeeze' the Haqqani network when she visited Islamabad last October.

"I will continue to make that point, and press it hard," Clinton was quoted by Fox News as telling reporters in the Brazilian capital Brasilia, where she described the Haqqani network as a 'determined foe'.

Afghan Interior Minister Bismillah Mohammadi had told newsmen in Kabul that one of the militants arrested during the latest attacks on the Afghan capital and three other cities had told the authorities that al-Qaeda linked Haqqani network was behind the assaults.

The Secretary of State said she had spoken to her Pakistani counterpart Hina Rabbani Khar to urge her for a commitment to work closely for peace and stability in Afghanistan and also discussed the recent terrorist attacks in Kabul.

The telephonic talks between Clinton and Khar come a day ahead of a crucial meeting of Pakistan's top civilian and military leadership, who are expected to take a final decision on re-opening of logistic supply lines to Nato troops in Afghanistan. Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani will preside over the meeting of the Defence Committee of Cabinet, which will also be attended by key ministers, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee General Khalid Shamim Wayne, Army Chief Ashfaq Pervez Kayani and chiefs of Air Force and Navy.

The meeting has been called days after the parliament unanimously approved a resolution for resetting the country's strained relations with the US.

The parliament had opposed use of supply route for arms transfer to Nato troops and called for an immediate cessation of US drone strikes on Pakistani soil. In Washington State Department spokesperson Mark Toner told reporters: "They (Clinton and Khar) did discuss next steps in the US-Pakistani dialogue in light of the conclusion of this parliamentary review. They also, of course, discussed the attacks in Afghanistan." "Our posture right now is you know we recognise that this has been a long and difficult road for Pakistan. It speaks to the strength of Pakistan's democratic institutions that this parliamentary review's taken place, that the civilian government has taken the lead on this issue, has owned it, and has come up with a series of recommendations." "I think it's incumbent on us now to engage with them in a discussion about some of those recommendations," he said.



4/16/2012

From Libya to Syria: "War is a racket. It always has been."

Major General Smedley Butler: 'War is a racket. It always has been.'

Πηγή: Scoop
By James Corbett
April 14 2012

'War is a racket. It always has been.” These words are as true now as they were when Major General Smedley Butler first delivered them in a series of speeches in the 1930s. And he should have known. As one of the most decorated and celebrated marines in the history of the Corps, Butler drew on his own experiences around the globe to rail against the business interests that use the U.S. military as muscle men to protect their racket from perceived threats. From National City Bank interests in Haiti to United Fruit plantations in Honduras, from Standard Oil access to China to Brown Brothers operations in Nicaragua, Butler pointed out how intervention after intervention served the business interests of the well-connected even as American taxpayer money went to foot the bill for these adventures. The names and places may have changed, but the old adage holds: the more things change, the more they stay the same.

The National Transitional Council that is nominally in charge of what is left of Libya announced this week that they're beginning a probe of foreign oil contracts brokered during Gaddafi's reign by his son, Saif al-Islam. Libya is sitting on the largest oil reserves in Africa, and it is no coincidence that within weeks of the start of the NATO campaign last year the rebels had already secured the country's oil ports and refineries on the Gulf of Sidra and established their own national oil company for negotiating contracts with the invading forces. Although the oil contract probes are supposedly meant to show the transparency of the new “government” and their willingness to root out the graft and kickbacks inherent in the old regime, it's quietly acknowledged that the process will be used to reward the nations that most visibly supported last year's invasions and punish those who were more reticent.

Surprising, then, that the first companies on the block are Italy's Eni and France's Total. Both countries fostered close ties with the NTC last year and France was the first country to officially recognize them as the government of Libya. But now Libya's general prosecutor is reviewing documents related to these companies for possible financial irregularities. The SEC is getting in on the act, too, requesting documents relating to both companies' Libyan operations to check for suspected violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. The potential blow to the European giants' share in the Libyan market is especially painful in light of the upcoming Iranian oil embargo that threatens to squeeze the crude imports of Greece, Italy and Spain. Now, as Libya ramps up oil production to pre-war levels the obvious potential winners in the probe are the American and British majors, who could end up eating up some of Eni and Total's share in Libya's oil production should the investigation lead to charges.

China may also have reason to be wary of their standing with the new government. Chinese-Libyan ties were increasingly close in the years leading up to Gaddafi's ouster, with trade volume having reached $6.6 billion in 2010. In 2007, as the US was beginning to put AFRICOM together and the competitive scramble for African resources was heating up, Gaddafi delivered an address to the students of Oxford University where he praised China's hands-off approach to investment in Africa. At the time, Gaddafi suggested that Beijing was winning the hearts and minds of Africans with its reluctance to interfere in local politics, while Washington was alienating the population with their heavy-handed interventions. In the wake of the NATO bombing the would-be government of Libya is singing a different tune and relations with China have cooled down. Last August a senior NTC official suggested that China would be punished when it came time to award reconstruction contracts in Libya because of their initial reluctance to support the rebels. Although the statement was downplayed, it was revealed earlier this month that Chinese companies are still waiting to begin negotiations on losses to frozen and outstanding contracts worth $18.8 billion. Relations are still cordial, though, and the Libyan government is assuring China that the contracting companies will be in a better position to resume negotiations after national elections in June.

These latest moves from Tripoli may be as much about projecting the idea that the NTC is actually functioning as a government than anything else, though. Armed militias are still waging violent turf wars throughout the country, with 26 people dying in fighting between rivals in the western town of Zwara earlier this month and 150 dying in skirmishes last month in the southern city of Sabha. One militia stormed a hotel in Tripoli and opened fire, then beat and kidnapped the manager after he told a militia member to pay an outstanding room bill. Last week hundreds marched in Benghazi to call for an end to the violence between the armed gangs. The country is deeply divided along tribal lines and armed militias still occupy government buildings and openly flaunt the pronouncements of the erstwhile government. The idea that the NTC is actually functioning as a government is a pipe dream at this point, but as long as they keep the oil pumping and the victors of last year's humanitarian love bombing get their spoils, there's hardly a peep out of Washington, Paris, or London. Smedley Butler wouldn't be surprised.

Meanwhile in Syria, the racketeers' plans for a Libyan repeat are proceeding apace. Last week we reported on the so-called “Friends of Syria” and their agreement to begin openly funding the rebels to the tune of millions of dollars. This week we have been watching the inevitable, pre-scripted “break down” in Annan's UN-brokered ceasefire. Exactly on cue, unverified reports from unnamed activists have begun rolling in to the usual media mouthpieces via foreign-based NGOs proclaiming so many people have died in continued fighting. The unacknowledged elephant in the room, however, is that, exactly as Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has been attempting to point out all month, it's impossible to expect a cessation in fighting when you are openly arming, training and funding an insurgent proxy army that is hell-bent on toppling the government. However, Lavrov is banging his head against a brick wall. The ceasefire was never meant to be a ceasefire and it's all political theater at this point anyway. Any and every unverified rumor of fighting or violence in the country will now be taken as a sign that Assad has broken the agreement and the pressure to get Beijing and Moscow to acquiesce to the toppling of the Syrian government will intensify.

In the end, this will not be a carbon copy of Libya. There will be no NATO-led bombardment or large-scale military intervention, because Russia couldn't allow that to happen. Besides, Syria has Russian supplied surface-to-air missiles and no compunction about using them. Instead, political pressure will increase for Assad to step down and the funds and arms to the rent-a-rebel force will continue increasing until the government is toppled. The dangerous factor in this equation is that neither the west nor China/Russia have blinked yet and there is a significant amount of face to lose for one side or the other in this proxy struggle. The one with the most to lose is clearly Iran, which all things being equal would be a dominant power player in regional politics. All things, however, are not equal. With their oil increasingly embargoed, the sanctions getting progressively tighter, and one of their key allies in the region threatening to topple in favor of a hostile Sunni insurgency, Iran has to know that when and if the Syrian domino falls, it falls on them.

At the same time, attention is turning once again to another of the war racketeers' key interests: Pakistan. There has been newfound congressional interest in the so-called “Free Baluchistan” movement seeking independence for Pakistan's Baluchi nationals. Citing human rights violations, Rep. Rohrbacher (R-California) has introduced a resolution calling on Pakistan to recognize Balochi self-determination. He has even written an op-ed in the Washington Post where he begins his argument with recourse to human rights and switches seamlessly in the fourth paragraph into noting with evident glee the region's natural gas, gold, uranium, and copper reserves.

Interestingly, Russia agreed last week to pony up $1.5 billion in financing and technical assistance for a proposed Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline. The projected course of the pipeline? It would start in Iran’s southern Assalouyeh Energy Zone and enter Pakistan from the west, crossing straight through Baluchistan. Coincidence, surely. The IP pipeline has had a tumultuous history, complete with plans to run the pipeline all the way to India (an idea from which India has distanced itself but never completely abandoned) and the potential involvement of China, which has flirted with the idea of incorporating the pipeline into a planned logistical network running from the port of Gwadar in Pakistan's southwest all the way to Xinjiang province. Now, with a proposal for Russian funding on the table the pipeline looks closer than ever to becoming a reality.

From the outset, the US has used every bit of leverage it has to get the parties involved to scrap the idea. Diplomatic pressure has been brought to bear on China, Pakistan, and India, with Beijing and New Delhi both appearing to buckle under the pressure and pull out of the project. The US has backed its own alternative pipeline, a Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India route, but that idea is looking less feasible by the day. Iran has nearly completed its share of the proposed IP pipeline, but Pakistan has been hesitant. Now along come the racketeers to fund yet another rebel movement in another geostrategically vital corridor, and before you know it “Free Baluchistan” might derail the project altogether. Look for US pressure on the Pakistani government regarding Baluchistan to increase as the pipeline comes closer to completion.

Butler was right. War is a racket, after all. These days the muscle men are rent-a-mobs and insurgents more so than the U.S. military, but the idea is the same: fund, arm and train the fighters to secure the resources and control the strategic areas. In Libya the NATO-backed rebels wrested the oil spigot from the unpredictable Gaddafi. In Syria the “Friends of Syria” are overthrowing a key Iranian ally and taking over an important square on the geopolitical chessboard. In Pakistan, American-backed rebels may succeed in driving a wedge through a key Iran-Pakistan pipeline. And the racket continues. One would do well to remember the grand finale of Butler's speech: “To hell with war!”




3/14/2012

Official: Chinese Bank Cold On Iran-Pak Gas Deal


Πηγή: Official Wire
By Asif Shahzad
March 14 2012

A state-owned Chinese bank that had agreed to finance the Pakistani section of a gas pipeline from Iran that is opposed by the United States is no longer interested in the project, a Pakistani finance ministry spokesman said Wednesday.

Finance Ministry spokesman Naveed Iqbal said he didn't know why the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China was apparently backing out, but said "the geopolitical situation" had previously been cited by the petroleum ministry as the reason.

The U.S. has warned Pakistan and companies assisting the project could face sanctions if they go ahead.

Washington believes Iran is trying to develop a nuclear bomb, and wants to isolate Tehran economically to try and get it to abandon any nuclear plans. Iran says its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes.

Iqbal said the Chinese bank and Pakistan's Habib Bank Limited had jointly agreed to help finance the Pakistani section of the pipeline, but now seemed to "have no more interest in the project." Neither company could immediately be reached for comment Wednesday.

Pakistani leaders have vowed to press ahead with the pipeline despite U.S. opposition, saying it was vital for the supply of gas to the energy-starved country. But there have been widely expressed doubts over who will finance the project given U.S. opposition.

Asked about the Chinese bank's apparent withdrawal, Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar said, "There are always a multiplicity of funding sources which are available for any project."

"This is a fairly viable project and we hope and we will not see any problem in trying to find ways and means of ensuring its funding," she said.


3/12/2012

UK accoused of 'assisting' covered CIA drone strikes


Πηγή: Channel 4 News
March 12 2012

Lawyers working for human rights group Reprieve launch formal proceedings against the government over claims the UK is "helping" the US carry out covert drone strikes in Pakistan.

London-based charity Reprieve and law firm Leigh Day & Co. are filing papers to the high court claiming that civilian staff at GCHQ, Britain's chief electronic listening post, could be liable as "secondary parties to murder" for providing "locational intelligence" to the CIA's drone programme in Pakistan.

The two groups are acting on behalf of Noor Khan, 27, a Pakistani whose father was killed by a drone strike in northwest Pakistan in March 2011 while attending a gathering of elders. More than 40 other people were killed in that attack, they said.

Lawyer Shahzad Akbar, who is acting on behalf of victims of US drone strikes in Pakistan, toldChannel 4 News he hopes the legal challenge will lead to "accountability and transparency in the drone programme and eventaully help victim families seek justice".

He explained: "Noor Khan is one of our clients here in Pakistan and with Reprieve's help we have been able to instruct Leigh Day to file in UK."

Reprieve, which has previously worked on behalf of Guantanamo Bay inmates, urged the British government to offer more clarity about its role - if any - in US drone strikes.

"What has the government got to hide? If they're not supplying information as part of the CIA's illegal drone war, why not tell us?" Reprieve director Clive Stafford Smith said.

The Foreign Office and GCHQ declined to comment on the legal action. British officials have never commented publicly on US drone activity.

Since 2004, CIA drones have targeted suspected militants with missile strikes in the Pakistani tribal regions, killing hundreds of people. The programme is controversial because of questions about its legality, the number of civilians it has killed, and its impact on Pakistan's sovereignty.

US officials do not publicly acknowledge the covert drone programme but they have said privately that the strikes harm very few innocents and are key to weakening al-Qaeda and other militant groups.

Leigh Day & Co. claim that GCHQ staff may be guilty of war crimes by passing along detailed intelligence to a drone programme that violates international humanitarian law.


2/18/2012

Pakistan won't give US bases to attack Iran


Πηγή: PakTribune
Feb 18 2012

ISLAMABAD: A clear message has been given to the United States through the trilateral summit that Pakistan will support Iran in case of any possible aggression against it.

Moreover, Pakistan has clearly affirmed that the US will not be allowed to set up any airbases in Pakistan with the purpose of attacking Iran. The joint declaration further reflects this message as it says: "Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan will ensure respect of territorial sovereignty of each other and would not allow any threat emanating from their respective territories against each other".

Experts say that the US has been demanding facilities in Pakistan against the nuclear programme of Iran for the last several years. The trilateral summit between Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan has several distinctive features as this meeting is being held at a time when both Pakistan and Iran are under considerable pressure from the US. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad visited the atomic reactor of Iran near Tehran on Wednesday before leaving for Pakistan to attend the trilateral summit. Following the Osama raid back in May, Pakistan too has remained under significant American pressure.

In the joint press conference held following the summit, Presidnet Ahmadinejad confidently reiterated that foreign interference was involved in the problems facing the region. It is interesting to note that both President Zardari and his Afghan counterpart expressed their views in English, but the Iranian president chose to speak in his mother tongue. Nejad took questions in English, but gave the replies in Persian.


/div>

2/08/2012

Officials: US drone-fired missiles kill 8 people in Pakistan

FILE: This photo shows an Air Force stealth drone called the Avenger

Πηγή: Fox news

By AP
Feb 7 2012

PESHAWAR, Pakistan – U.S. drone-fired missiles hit a house in Pakistan's northwest tribal region near the Afghan border Wednesday, killing eight people, Pakistani intelligence officials said.

The attack occurred in Spalga village in the North Waziristan tribal area, said the officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk to the media. The identities of those killed were unknown, but the area is dominated by Hafiz Gul Bahadur, a prominent militant commander focused on fighting foreign troops in Afghanistan.

The U.S. does not publicly discuss details of the covert CIA-run drone program in Pakistan.

The program has caused tensions with Pakistan. Although the government is widely believed to have provided support for the strikes in the past, that cooperation has become strained as its relationship with Washington has deteriorated.

Pakistan kicked the U.S. out of a base used by American drones last year in retaliation for American airstrikes that accidentally killed 24 Pakistani troops at two Afghan border posts on Nov. 26.

The move is not expected to significantly impact drone operations, but the pace of strikes has slowed since the border incident as the U.S. has tried to repair the relationship with Pakistan.

Pakistan also retaliated for the errant airstrikes by closing its Afghan border crossings to supplies meant for NATO troops in Afghanistan.

Pakistani Defense Minister Ahmad Mukhtar said Tuesday that the country should reopen the crossings after negotiating a better deal with the coalition.

He did not provide specific details. But other Pakistani officials have suggested that the government levy additional fees on the coalition for using the route because the heavy trucks damage roads.

The closure has forced the United States to spend six times as much money to send supplies to Afghanistan through alternative routes.

Pakistan's parliament is expected to vote on a revised framework for relations with the U.S. in mid-February that could pave the way for the government to reopen the supply line.

Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar said last week that she didn't think it would be much of a problem to reopen the route after the parliament vote.

The defense minister echoed this view, saying, "I think the people who are deciding, who are giving recommendations, will make the right decision."

For most of the 10-year war in Afghanistan, 90 percent of supplies shipped to coalition forces came through Pakistan, via the port of Karachi. But over the past three years, NATO has increased its road and rail shipments through an alternate route that runs through Russia and Central Asia. The northern route was longer and more expensive, but provided a hedge against the riskier Pakistan route.

Before the accidental American airstrikes on Nov. 26, about 30 percent of non-lethal supplies for U.S. and coalition troops in Afghanistan traveled through Pakistan.

The U.S. has since increased the amount of supplies running through the northern route, but this has cost it a lot more money. Pentagon figures provided to the AP show that the alternative transport is costing about $104 million per month, $87 million more per month than when the cargo moved through Pakistan.




1/30/2012

Osama bin Laden doctor was CIA agent, says US



Πηγή: Belfast Telegraph
By David Randall
Jan 30 2012

Imprisoned Pakistani ran fake health scheme to get DNA evidence that al-Qa'ida leader was in house


The United States has confirmed publicly for the first time that a Pakistani doctor long suspected of collecting vital evidence before the assassination of Osama bin Laden was indeed working for them.


Defence Secretary Leon Panetta told 60 Minutes on CBS, in a profile to broadcast yesterday, that Shakil Afridi helped provide proof that the compound in Abbottabad to which they had tracked a Bin Laden courier, was indeed sheltering the al-Qa'ida leader.

Armed with this information, President Barack Obama swiftly authorised last May's assault by a US Navy Seals team. Bin Laden was killed, and a much-embarrassed Pakistan arrested Dr Afridi for acting for a foreign intelligence service. He has been in jail since, on suspicion of treason. Mr Panetta said he is "very concerned" for the doctor.

Mr Panetta gave no further details, but previous off-the-record briefings, both in the US and Pakistan, have provided details of just how US officials verified that the tall bearded figure seen walking in the compound was indeed Bin Laden. They could not confirm identification from long-range photographs, but strongly suspected they had found their man.

Dr Afridi, the medic in charge of health in the Khyber, was recruited by the CIA to collect DNA evidence from the children inside the compound to confirm that they were Bin Laden's – he rarely went anywhere without them for long. The plan was to mount a local hepatitis vaccination programme; ostensibly a public health initiative, its real purpose was to establish the genetics of the people inside the compound.

A nurse was duly allowed in. Either through collecting blood samples, through DNA traces on syringe needles or via an electronic device she reportedly carried in her handbag, the necessary proof was obtained. Operation Geronimo was launched, and President Obama was soon able to announce that the world's most wanted man was dead.

Pakistan was embarrassed on several levels. First, that the US was able to mount such an operation on its soil. Second, that it did not inform Pakistan until it was over. Third, by the implication that Pakistan's participation in the hunt for the al-Qa'ida leader was less than whole-hearted.

Mr Panetta told CBS: "Don't forget, this compound had 18ft walls ... It was the largest compound in the area. So you would have thought that somebody would have asked the question: 'What the hell's going on there?'"

He said he remains convinced that someone in the Pakistani government "must have had some sense" that a person of interest was in the compound, but added that he has no proof that Pakistan knew it was Bin Laden.

Of the accusation of treason against Dr Afridi, he said: "He was not in any way treasonous ... Pakistan and the United States have a common cause here against terrorism ... and for them to take this kind of action against somebody who was helping to go after terrorism, I think is a real mistake."

Associated Press reported that Pakistan had hoped to resolve the matter quietly, perhaps releasing Dr Afridi to US custody, according to two Pakistani officials. They requested anonymity because the investigation into charges that the doctor behaved treasonously was ongoing.


1/02/2012

Pakistan: ISI success against CIA Secret War



Πηγή: Asian Tribune
By Zaheerul Hassan
Jan 2 2012

Role of intelligentsia has never been negated in any type of war. During World Wars (WW) I & II, the allies remained successful in number of operations because of timely receipts of information and clandestine operations. However, after WW-II U.S launched agency CIA against KGB.During Cold War period both the agencies remained dagger drawn against each other. Anyhow, Pakistan felt a threat on it western frontiers once in 1979, Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan.

At that time U.S and Pakistan came closer to each other despite differences over the development of our nuclear programme. The coincidence of interests also forced Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and CIA to operate jointly against Soviet Union. Thus, CIA in collaboration with ISI have activated against KGB and finally able to defeat and disintegrate Great Soviet Union.

But just after the disintegration of Great Russian Empire, CIA has shaken hands with a new ally agency i.e. RAW. Change of ally was obvious since Pakistan can never be party to U.S. against China. CIA in collaboration with RAW and MI-6 again accelerated her campaign against nuclear programme and started overtly and covertly. At this occasion ISI unfolded the foreign conspiracy and security of the country. The role of major intelligence agencies in international relations, threats are often addressed within the context of security studies — especially those focusing on nuclear deterrence, alliance formation and interstate conflict. In general, a threat perception is “understood as anticipation on the part of an observer (the decision maker) of impending harm – usually of a military, strategic or economic kind – to the state”. Thus, in international relations we talk about threats aimed at the territorial integrity, political sovereignty, major national interests and core ideology of the state and its regime. The truth of this quoted statement has been proved once Al-Qaida launched attack in U.S. on 9/11.

Pakistan was forced to become ally after 9/11 in Mushraf’s regime. Since then Pakistan has faced in fact two types of threat, e.g. external and internal. Foreign sponsored ethnicity, sectarianism and economic instability emerged as fundamental variables of internal security threats which gave birth to local Taliban and exploited by external forces. Religious extremism has created an unenviable image of Pakistan in the eyes of rest of the world and has affected the country adversely. CIA penetrated foreign agents along with sophisticated weaponry, suicide attacks and target killings have become everyday occurrence in the country. Indian intelligence agency RAW of under the garb of development programmes has established 13 consulates’ along the western border. It was ISI and country’s security agencies which came out to fight back the foreign sponsored covert and overt agenda against sole Islamic nuclear power.

It may be mentioned here that Pakistan security forces and ISI defeated foreign sponsored war on terror in FATA and Swat which was appreciated by the nation too. RAW, CIA, RAAM and Mossad from 2005 onwards tried their best to destabilize Pakistan. Weapons like Kalashnikovs, MI-4 American rifles, Israeli sniper rifles, 12.7mm, 14.5mm and 107mm guns, mortars, pistols, RPG-7s, grenades, explosives, equipment like, remote control sets, jamming devices, sophisticated telephone and wireless sets, bullet proof and suicide jackets, kits, and currency of different countries have been provided to the militants. Terrorist have been sent to Pakistan through Indian training camps located at Afghanistan.

Almost four divisions of force have been involved in elimination of militancy in FATA and Swat area. Pakistan Army also managed to take care of her eastern border too. The forces came all out to undertake Operation Rah-e-Rast and her soldiers set the gallant examples while clearing Swat, Dir, Buner, Kanjoo, Shangla and other areas.

General Kayani and his team has displayed excellent professional capabilities, ISI unveiled the foreign agenda and fully supported security forces in eradication of terrorists. In this regards over 5000 civilians and 3000 troops including officers and men have laid down their lives. It also includes the martyring of over 78 intelligence officials while fighting in global war against terrorism. While addressing in-camera session General Pasha very loudly mentioned that 112 check posts of the allied forces as opposed to the 812 of the Pakistani forces. 2.8 million Individuals of Swat and surrounding area became IDPs. Pasha while addressing also maintained parliament that the actions of the United States were not expected from an ally in war against terrorism. He said that there is difference between India and the United States.

From 2007 till today, American and western media is alleging ISI for supporting Haqqani group against American forces in Afghanistan. In this connection, American, Western and Indian media has criticized ISI, instead of suggesting Afghan government to fence the border and carrying out negotiations with the true representatives of Afghan nation. Notably, American military and civilian leadership has started irrational demand of restructuring ISI when Lt. Gen. Ahmed Shuja Pasha took over the agency as Director General in September, 2008. ISI chief instead of acting upon Assistant Secretary of State, Richard Boucher demand of forming and restructuring.The agency has took interest to improve upon the efficiency of the organization in the light of national interest. On rejecting the false and baseless allegations, US top officials intensified blame game again aftermath Osama’s death in a unilateral action of 2nd May 2011.

Thus, relations between two capitals and their agencies went to its lowest level Pakistan. CIA intentionally did not involve Pakistan and her supreme intelligence agency in killing Osama, despite receiving information regarding a call made by someone from Osma’s Compound located in Abbottabad. It was ISI that first time interrupted and passed on information to the CIA for evaluation anyhow CIA mistrust over ISI, created vast distance between two agencies.

However, during a meeting with the CIA Director Michael Morell in July, 2011,it was Lt. Gen. Shuja Pasha who categorically told that we will continue anti-terror and intelligence sharing cooperation between the two agencies but would never tolerate a private ‘network’ the CIA is secretly maintaining in Pakistan. ISI under the leadership of Gen Pasha very successfully exposed the American and Indian intelligence agencies activities in Kashmir,FATA and Balochistan. The local CIA Chief Jonathan Banks has been forced to leave his station after Pakistani Intelligence services exposed his identity. It was U.S embassy that where CIA started recruiting Pakistani nationals who were vulnerable and could work on their payroll. In this context, with the pre-information of ISI, Pakistan’s police and other security agencies arrested a number of agents. For instance, on September 19, 2009, police raided the Inter-Risk, a private security company in Islamabad, and arrested its two employees, namely Tauqeer and Muhammad Khan, possessing unlicensed shotguns, handguns and ammunition. On the other side, US embassy spokesperson Richard Snelsire pretended, “The US contract with the Inter-Risk is to provide security at the embassy and consulates. Moreover, U.S ambassador address to Balochistan Jerga in 2011 Quetta has also a great concern for responsible circle of Pakistan. In memo gate issue ISI again played very vital role to expose another CIA plan against Pakistan sovereignty which is under investigation at the right forum Judicial Commission structured by Supreme Court of Pakistan .

Concluding, I say that invisible warriors of ISI under the leadership of Lt General Ahmed Shuja Pasha with very meager resources have successfully proved their superiority while defeating CIA and her sister agencies RAW and Mossad. U.S. has been forced to resolve Afghan issue as suggested by Pakistan and its intelligence Agency. In short, Intelligence organizations are not a fighting machines in its conventional sense but no army can fight without the support of an efficient Intelligence Organizations, collect, collate and disseminate information in a most efficient and reliable manner that is the key to the success of any war or battle. The job of a good organization is not only to collect information but through its mechanism, it denies or feeds false information to the enemy to achieve its goals.


12/26/2011

CIA has suspended drone attacks in Pakistan, U.S. officials say

A Pakistani security officer examines a U.S. surveillance drone that crashed in the town of Chaman near the Afghan border in August

Πηγή: LAtimes
By Ken Dilanian
Dec 23 2011

The undeclared halt in CIA attacks in Pakistan, now in its sixth week, aims at reversing a sharp erosion in trust after deadly incidents, including the mistaken attack on soldiers by U.S. gunships.

Reporting from Washington—

In an effort to mend badly frayed relations with Pakistan, theCIA has suspended drone missile strikes on gatherings of low-ranking militants believed to be involved in cross-border attacks on U.S. troops or facilities in Afghanistan, current and former U.S. officials say.

The undeclared halt in CIA attacks, now in its sixth week, is aimed at reversing a sharp erosion of trust after a series of deadly incidents, including the mistaken attack by U.S. gunships that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers last month.

The pause also comes amid an intensifying debate in the Obama administration over the future of the CIA's covert drone war in Pakistan. The agency has killed dozens of Al Qaeda operatives and hundreds of low-ranking fighters there since the first Predator strike in 2004, but the program has infuriated many Pakistanis.

Some officials in the State Department and the National Security Council say many of the airstrikes are counterproductive. They argue that rank-and-file militants are easy to replace, and that Pakistani claims of civilian casualties, which the U.S. disputes, have destabilized the government of President Asif Ali Zardari, a U.S. ally.

And some U.S. intelligence officials are urging the CIA to cut back the paramilitary role it has assumed since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, to refocus on espionage. They suggest handing the mission to the Pentagon's Joint Special Operations Command, which flies its own drones and conducts secret counter-terrorism operations in Yemen and Somalia.

The policy remains intact for now. But the CIA has decided to temporarily suspend so-called signature strikes, missile attacks against fighters and others whose actions, after observation by surveillance drones or other intelligence, suggest support for the Taliban and other insurgent groups in neighboring Afghanistan.

Among those targeted this year were members of the Haqqani network, an insurgent group allied with the Taliban. U.S. officials say Haqqani fighters took part in September attacks on the U.S. Embassyand NATO headquarters in Kabul, the Afghan capital.

The number of drone strikes in Pakistan has increased dramatically during the Obama administration. Under President George W. Bush, most of them targeted known Al Qaeda and Taliban leaders. In July 2008, Bush gave the CIA additional authority to kill militants whose names were not known, but whose "pattern of life," as the CIA called it, suggested involvement with terrorists or insurgent groups.

Under President Obama, the CIA has expanded the drone war to target anyone in Pakistan's tribal areas it considers a potential threat. The CIA has authority to fire at will, without authorization from outside the agency, as long as targets are in approved geographic "boxes" near the Afghan border.

Saying the strikes violate national sovereignty, Pakistan's government wants a say in drone targeting and a degree of control over the CIA missions, a senior Pakistani defense official said in Washington. But the Obama administration has refused, citing cases in which targets escaped after intelligence was shared with Pakistan.

One of the main points of friction between the two countries was the U.S. raid in May that killedOsama bin Laden. U.S. officials launched the attack without telling Pakistan for fear of tipping off the Al Qaeda leader.

U.S. and Pakistani officials said the CIA is still flying armed Predator and Reaper drones over Pakistan, and will kill an Al Qaeda leader if the aircraft find one. But thanks in part to the drone war, only a few senior members of the core Al Qaeda group are believed to be still alive there, including Bin Laden's successor, Ayman Zawahiri.

The CIA keeps a list of 20 top targets and "there have been times where they've struggled a little bit coming up with names to fill that list," said a former senior U.S. intelligence official, who declined to be identified in discussing a classified program.

The former official is among those urging the CIA to reconsider its approach, arguing that the agency can't kill all the fighters and that drones alone won't solve the challenge from Islamic militants.

"A lot of people wonder whether we can keep trying to kill our way out of this problem," the former official said. "There are people who are really questioning, 'Where does all of this end?'"

When the current CIA director, David H. Petraeus, served as commander of U.S. troops in Afghanistan, he was known to be concerned that the CIA conducted drone strikes without sufficient regard for the military or diplomatic repercussions in either Afghanistan or Pakistan.

Some State Department officials insist that airstrikes on low-level militants now hurt U.S. interests in Pakistan more than they help.

"What colored State's thinking was the impact that the drone operations were having on public opinion and its constraint on the evolution of a civilian government," said a former senior State Department official, who asked not to be identified as discussing a classified program. "The continued attacks probably give motivation to those who would fight us."

Shamila Chaudhary, who was Pakistan director in the National Security Council until July, said U.S. counter-terrorism operations were "one reason, though not the only reason, that the U.S.-Pakistan relationship has disintegrated. Until the conflicts over that policy are resolved, the two countries will continue to go from crisis to crisis."

CIA officials argue that the drones have helped save American lives by eliminating militants who have engaged in cross-border attacks or are supplying bomb-making networks. In some cases, they say, Al Qaeda leaders were killed in airstrikes on groups of militants, although their presence was not discovered until later.

There is no way to independently assess the accuracy or effectiveness of the strikes. Since they are classified, the Obama administration refuses to release details about them and Pakistan has barred access to the tribal areas by Western journalists or humanitarian agencies, including the International Committee of the Red Cross.

According to Long War Journal, a website that tracks the attacks through Pakistani news reports, the CIA launched 64 drone missile attacks in Pakistan this year, the last on Nov. 16. That compares with 114 last year and 53 in 2009. The agency launched 46 during the Bush administration, mostly in 2008.

The death toll is unclear. The New America Foundation, a think tank in Washington, estimates that the CIA drones have killed at least 1,717 people, including 1,424 militants. Other estimates run considerably higher.

John Brennan, Obama's chief counter-terrorism advisor, said this summer that there "hasn't been a single collateral death because of the exceptional proficiency and precision of the capabilities we've been able to develop."

When human rights groups and others challenged that assertion, citing numerous Pakistani accounts of civilian casualties, Brennan clarified his comments to say there were no civilian deaths that the administration had confirmed. U.S. officials later acknowledged a few civilian deaths this year.

The pause in the drone war comes after steadily worsening relations between Washington and Islamabad.

In January, the arrest of Raymond Davis, a CIA contractor who shot and killed two men in Lahore, stirred up anti-American sentiment. The raid by a CIA-led Navy SEAL team that killed Bin Laden enraged many in Pakistan's military. The mistaken attack Nov. 26, which killed the 24 soldiers, caused a near rupture in relations.

After the raid, Islamabad ordered the United States to vacate Shamsi air base in southwest Pakistan, which the CIA had used to stage lethal drone flights. U.S. officials say the agency now flies drones into Pakistan from bases in Afghanistan.