Rogue Pakistan spies aid Taliban in Afghanistan

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

Post Reply
[R_H]
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2894
Joined: 2007-08-24 08:51am
Location: Europe

Rogue Pakistan spies aid Taliban in Afghanistan

Post by [R_H] »

Times Online
The United States has accused Pakistan’s main spy agency of deliberately undermining Nato efforts in Afghanistan by helping the Taliban and Al-Qaeda militants they are supposed to be fighting.

President George W Bush confronted Yusuf Raza Gillani, Pakistan’s prime minister, in Washington last week with evidence of involvement by the ISI, its military intelligence, in a deadly attack on the Afghan capital and warned of retaliation if it continues.

The move comes amid growing fears that Pakistan’s tribal areas are turning into a global launch pad for terrorists.

Gillani, on his first official US visit since being elected in February, was left in no doubt that the Bush administration had lost patience with the ISI’s alleged double game.

Bush warned that if one more attack in Afghanistan or elsewhere were traced back to Pakistan, he would have to take “serious action”.

Gillani also met Michael Hayden, director of the CIA, who confronted him with a dossier on ISI support for the Taliban. The key evidence concerned last month’s bombing of the Indian embassy in Kabul, which killed 54 people, including the military attaché.

An intercepted telephone conversation apparently revealed that ISI agents masterminded the operation. The United States also claimed to have arrested an ISI officer inside Afghanistan.

Yesterday ministers said they had left Washington reeling from what they described as a “grilling” and shocked at “the trust deficit” between Pakistan and its most important backer.

“They were very hot on the ISI,” said a member of the Pakistan delegation. “Very hot. When we asked them for more information, Bush laughed and said, ‘When we share information with your guys, the bad guys always run away’.”

“The question is why it’s taken the Americans so long to see what the ISI is doing,” said Afra-siab Khattak, provincial president for the Awami National party which runs the government in the Frontier province bordering Afghanistan. “We’ve been telling them for years but they wouldn’t buy it.”

The American accusations were categorically denied by Rehman Malik, Pakistan’s de facto interior minister. “There is no involvement by the ISI of any form in Afghanistan,” he told The Sunday Times. “We requested evidence which has not yet been given.”

Malik admitted that in meetings in London, senior British government and intelligence officials had also told him they were convinced of ISI involvement in the embassy bombing.

It is the first time the White House has openly confronted Pakistan since just after the 9/11 terrorist attacks on Washington and New York when General Pervez Musharraf’s regime was told to drop its support for the Taliban or be bombed back to the Stone Age.

Musharraf agreed and went on to change the director of the ISI and build a close relationship with Bush who described him as his “best friend”. But many middle-ranking officers continued to hold close links with militants built up over 20 years since the mujaheddin was fighting the Russians in Afghanistan.

There were persistent reports of Pakistani territory being used for terrorist training camps and recruitment. Foreign journalists were banned from Quetta “for our own security” – those of us who have ventured there to investigate have generally ended up arrested.

President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan has repeatedly accused Pakistan of harbouring Taliban leaders, providing lists of addresses and at one time claiming that its leader, Mullah Omar, was living in a military cantonment.

For the West, confronting Islamabad is a risky strategy as Pakistan’s support is critical to the war on terrorism. Afghanistan is landlocked and much of the logistical support and food for the 53,000 Nato troops, including water for the British forces in Helmand, has to be shipped into Karachi and driven through Pakistan.

“It’s a calculated risk,” said a western diplomat in Islamabad, pointing out that Pakistan could not afford to do without US aid, which averages £1 billion a year. The military has also benefited: only last week four more F-16 fighter jets were handed over to the air force.

An open challenge to the ISI was welcomed by Nato troops operating in Afghanistan, particularly the American forces fighting in the east.

For years their commanders have expressed frustration at militants coming across the border to take pot shots at them, before moving back to the sanctuary of the triba areas. These areas are seen as the new battleground in the war on terror. Originally created by the British as a buffer between the Indian empire and Afghanistan, they stretch along Pakistan’s 1,500-mile border with Afghanistan.

As the poorest and most backward part of Pakistan with a literacy rate of just 3%, but fiercely martial, they are the breeding ground for militant groups. Political parties are not allowed. As militant groups have grown in influence, local people have nowhere else to turn.

Most of the attacks on US soldiers in eastern Afghanistan are ordered by Maulvi Jalalud-din Haqqani, who operates from Miramshah in North Waziristan, and whom the United States believes to have close ties with Al-Qaeda.

Neighbouring South Waziristan is dominated by Baitullah Mehsud, a former gym teacher, whose Pakistan Taliban is believed by the CIA to be responsible for the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, the former prime minister, last December.

“The security of Pakistan, Afghanistan, the entire region and maybe that of the whole world will be determined by developments in the tribal areas over the next few months,” said Khattak.

The United States has carried out a number of bombings and missile strikes inside the areas, although each time the key targets seem to have escaped. So concerned is the Bush administration that the ISI is tipping militants off that in January it sent two senior intelligence officials to Pakistan. Mike Mc-Connell, the director of national intelligence, and Hayden asked Musharraf to allow the CIA greater freedom to operate in the tribal areas.

Of particular US concern was the ISI’s alleged involvement with Haqqani, one of its former allies, and its links to Lashkar-i-Toiba, a Punjab-based militant group, which is thought to have been behind the attack on an American outpost in Kunar last month in which nine US soldiers were killed.

Many US intelligence officials have long suspected that ISI officers accept their money and then help their foes, but it has been difficult to find proof. In June the Afghan government publicly accused the ISI of being behind an assassination attempt on Karzai in April and threatened to send their own troops into the border. But they were unable to produce any concrete evidence.

“The Indian embassy bombing seems to have finally provided it. This is the smoking gun we’ve all been looking for,” a British official said last week.

On the eve of the Washington visit, the Pakistan government tried to tame the ISI by announcing that it would henceforth come under interior ministry control. It was forced to revoke the decision within three hours after angry phone calls from the army chief.

Malik, on behalf of the government, claimed the decision had been misinterpreted. “What we were trying to do was bring national security and the war on terror under the interior ministry but it was wrongly announced,” he said.

US officials say the number of attacks on their soldiers in Afghanistan have increased by 60% since the civilian government took power this year.

There is widespread disillusion with Gillani’s government after elections in the wake of Bhutto’s assassination brought her Pakistan People’s party (PPP) to power as head of a coalition government. Nearly six months on, Musharraf is still president.

In a reflection of who really calls the shots, while the government party was in Washington Lieutenant-General Martin Dempsey, acting commander of Centcom, the US military command, was in Islamabad handing over F-16 fighter planes and holding meetings with the top brass. A British officer who was present at the meeting said Pakistani generals had spoken of their frustration with the civilian government: “They said they were still waiting for a signal to act in the tribal areas. To be honest, none of us could think of a thing they had done in six months.”

The sensitivity of the intelligence issue became clear on Friday night when Sherry Rehman, the information minister, acknowledged to journalists that the ISI might still contain pro-Taliban operatives. “We need to identify these people and weed them out,” she said, only to change her statement later to maintain that the problems were in the past and there would be no purge.

For its part, Islamabad says America is interested only in countering attacks in Afghanistan and gives it no help to confront militants causing problems in its own territory nor vital equipment, such as drone spy planes.

Pakistan ministers were particularly incensed when the United States launched a missile strike inside one of the country’s tribal areas on Monday, while the government party was still en route to Washington. “It was the first thing I read on my BlackBerry when I got off the plane,” said a member of the delegation. “What a nice gift.”

Offer of Inquiry into Kabul attack

Pakistan yesterday offered to investigate the bombing of the Indian embassy in Kabul on July 7, in which 54 people died and 140 were injured. It was the bloodiest attack in the Afghan capital since the fall of the Taliban in 2001. Nobody has claimed responsibility.

A suicide bomber drove a lorry laden with explosives into the embassy gate during the morning rush hour, wounding and killing many of those queuing for visas. The embassy is in the centre of Kabul.

The main target seemed to be a diplomatic convoy that had just entered the gate. Among those killed were two senior diplomats including the military attaché, Brigadier Ravi Mehta.
And another article about the ISI in Afghanistan

Pakistanis Aided Attack in Kabul, U.S. Officials Say (NYT)
WASHINGTON — American intelligence agencies have concluded that members of Pakistan’s powerful spy service helped plan the deadly July 7 bombing of India’s embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan, according to United States government officials.

The conclusion was based on intercepted communications between Pakistani intelligence officers and militants who carried out the attack, the officials said, providing the clearest evidence to date that Pakistani intelligence officers are actively undermining American efforts to combat militants in the region.

The American officials also said there was new information showing that members of the Pakistani intelligence service were increasingly providing militants with details about the American campaign against them, in some cases allowing militants to avoid American missile strikes in Pakistan’s tribal areas.

Concerns about the role played by Pakistani intelligence not only has strained relations between the United States and Pakistan, a longtime ally, but also has fanned tensions between Pakistan and its archrival, India. Within days of the bombings, Indian officials accused the Directorate of Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI, of helping to orchestrate the attack in Kabul, which killed 54, including an Indian defense attaché.

This week, Pakistani troops clashed with Indian forces in the contested region of Kashmir, threatening to fray an uneasy cease-fire that has held since November 2003.

The New York Times reported this week that a top Central Intelligence Agency official traveled to Pakistan this month to confront senior Pakistani officials with information about support provided by members of the ISI to militant groups. It had not been known that American intelligence agencies concluded that elements of Pakistani intelligence provided direct support for the attack in Kabul.

American officials said that the communications were intercepted before the July 7 bombing, and that the C.I.A. emissary, Stephen R. Kappes, the agency’s deputy director, had been ordered to Islamabad, Pakistan’s capital, even before the attack. The intercepts were not detailed enough to warn of any specific attack.

The government officials were guarded in describing the new evidence and would not say specifically what kind of assistance the ISI officers provided to the militants. They said that the ISI officers had not been renegades, indicating that their actions might have been authorized by superiors.

“It confirmed some suspicions that I think were widely held,” one State Department official with knowledge of Afghanistan issues said of the intercepted communications. “It was sort of this ‘aha’ moment. There was a sense that there was finally direct proof.”

The information linking the ISI to the bombing of the Indian Embassy was described in interviews by several American officials with knowledge of the intelligence. Some of the officials expressed anger that elements of Pakistan’s government seemed to be directly aiding violence in Afghanistan that had included attacks on American troops.

Some American officials have begun to suggest that Pakistan is no longer a fully reliable American partner and to advocate some unilateral American action against militants based in the tribal areas.

The ISI has long maintained ties to militant groups in the tribal areas, in part to court allies it can use to contain Afghanistan’s power. In recent years, Pakistan’s government has also been concerned about India’s growing influence inside Afghanistan, including New Delhi’s close ties to the government of Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president.

American officials say they believe that the embassy attack was probably carried out by members of a network led by Maulavi Jalaluddin Haqqani, whose alliance with Al Qaeda and its affiliates has allowed the terrorist network to rebuild in the tribal areas.

American and Pakistani officials have now acknowledged that President Bush on Monday confronted Pakistan’s prime minister, Yousaf Raza Gilani, about the divided loyalties of the ISI.

Pakistan’s defense minister, Chaudhry Ahmed Mukhtar, told a Pakistani television network on Wednesday that Mr. Bush asked senior Pakistani officials this week, “ ‘Who is in control of ISI?’ ” and asked about leaked information that tipped militants to surveillance efforts by Western intelligence services.

Pakistan’s new civilian government is wrestling with these very issues, and there is concern in Washington that the civilian leaders will be unable to end a longstanding relationship between members of the ISI and militants associated with Al Qaeda.

Spokesmen for the White House and the C.I.A. declined to comment for this article. Pakistan’s ambassador to the United States, Husain Haqqani, did not return a call seeking comment.

Further underscoring the tension between Pakistan and its Western allies, Britain’s senior military officer said in Washington on Thursday that an American and British program to help train Pakistan’s Frontier Corps in the tribal areas had been delayed while Pakistan’s military and civilian officials sorted out details about the program’s goals.

Britain and the United States had each offered to send about two dozen military trainers to Pakistan later this summer to train Pakistani Army officers who in turn would instruct the Frontier Corps paramilitary forces.

But the British officer, Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup, said the program had been temporarily delayed. “We don’t yet have a firm start date,” he told a small group of reporters. “We’re ready to go.”

The bombing of the Indian Embassy helped to set off a new deterioration in relations between India and Pakistan.

This week, Indian and Pakistani soldiers fired at each other across the Kashmir frontier for more than 12 hours overnight Monday, in what the Indian Army called the most serious violation of a five-year-old cease-fire agreement. The nightlong battle came after one Indian soldier and four Pakistanis were killed along the border between sections of Kashmir that are controlled by India and by Pakistan.

Indian officials say they are equally worried about what is happening on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border because they say the insurgents who are facing off with India in Kashmir and those who target Afghanistan are related and can keep both borders burning at the same time.

India and Afghanistan share close political, cultural and economic ties, and India maintains an active intelligence network in Afghanistan, all of which has drawn suspicion from Pakistani officials.

When asked Thursday about whether the ISI and Pakistani military remained loyal to the country’s civilian government, Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, sidestepped the question. “That’s probably something the government of Pakistan ought to speak to,” Admiral Mullen told reporters at the Pentagon.

Jalaluddin Haqqani, the militia commander, battled Soviet troops during the 1980s and has had a long and complicated relationship with the C.I.A. He was among a group of fighters who received arms and millions of dollars from the C.I.A. during that period, but his allegiance with Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda during the following decade led the United States to sever the relationship.

Mr. Haqqani and his sons now run a network that Western intelligence services say they believe is responsible for a campaign of violence throughout Afghanistan, including the Indian Embassy bombing and an attack on the Serena Hotel in Kabul earlier this year.
User avatar
Fingolfin_Noldor
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 11834
Joined: 2006-05-15 10:36am
Location: At the Helm of the HAB Star Dreadnaught Star Fist

Post by Fingolfin_Noldor »

They have been hints and talk about this for years. It's only because of the "special relationship" with Musharraf that Bush turned a blind eye on the problem.
Image
STGOD: Byzantine Empire
Your spirit, diseased as it is, refuses to allow you to give up, no matter what threats you face... and whatever wreckage you leave behind you.
Kreia
User avatar
Shroom Man 777
FUCKING DICK-STABBER!
Posts: 21222
Joined: 2003-05-11 08:39am
Location: Bleeding breasts and stabbing dicks since 2003
Contact:

Post by Shroom Man 777 »

So, why does America always help people that hates it again? :?
Image "DO YOU WORSHIP HOMOSEXUALS?" - Curtis Saxton (source)
shroom is a lovely boy and i wont hear a bad word against him - LUSY-CHAN!
Shit! Man, I didn't think of that! It took Shroom to properly interpret the screams of dying people :D - PeZook
Shroom, I read out the stuff you write about us. You are an endless supply of morale down here. :p - an OWS street medic
Pink Sugar Heart Attack!
User avatar
irishmick79
Rabid Monkey
Posts: 2272
Joined: 2002-07-16 05:07pm
Location: Wisconsin

Post by irishmick79 »

Anybody else get the feeling that US military operations in Waziristan are far more extensive then we realize? It would not surprise me one bit to discover that Special Forces and various CIA assets have been operating in the area for quite a while now. I'm also curious about to what extent US air power has been unleashed in the area. I doubt the US has limited itself to the occasional Predator strike.
"A country without a Czar is like a village without an idiot."
- Old Russian Saying
User avatar
FedRebel
Jedi Master
Posts: 1071
Joined: 2004-10-12 12:38am

Re: Rogue Pakistan spies aid Taliban in Afghanistan

Post by FedRebel »

[R_H] wrote: “The question is why it’s taken the Americans so long to see what the ISI is doing,” said Afra-siab Khattak, provincial president for the Awami National party which runs the government in the Frontier province bordering Afghanistan. “We’ve been telling them for years but they wouldn’t buy it.”
It probably has something to do with the fact that...Pakistan is a nuclear power!

We can't "bring democracy" to them without opening up several cans of 'Instant Sunrise'
It is the first time the White House has openly confronted Pakistan since just after the 9/11 terrorist attacks on Washington and New York when General Pervez Musharraf’s regime was told to drop its support for the Taliban or be bombed back to the Stone Age.
Great, so the only reason the Paki's are our friends is because we have a gun to their heads. And some of them at least are starting to think that we don't have the guts to pull the trigger so they can do as they please
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Post by Darth Wong »

Shroom Man 777 wrote:So, why does America always help people that hates it again? :?
There's an old saying, dating back to the 1960s: "America always picks the wrong horse".

It isn't actually spectacularly bad judgment which leads to this interestingly accurate statement, although it does seem that way at times. It is actually America's self-centred mentality. They attempt to make alliances with groups or individuals who serve America's interests at the moment, but they show no concern whatsoever for their allies' own interests.

As a result, the Americans are free to undertake policies which enrage their allies, and they stupidly continue to expect their allies to remain loyal forever and lose none of their domestic popularity. That's not how it works: their allies will either become very unpopular and eventually be toppled, or they will walk away from the US.

You still hear this idiotic mindset from so many right-wing apologists who think that "ally" means "vassal state". They don't seem to understand that allies have their own interests, and they won't (and should not) remain allies if you shit all over those interests. This doesn't mean they are disloyal scum; it means that you pushed them away.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
Adrian Laguna
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4736
Joined: 2005-05-18 01:31am

Post by Adrian Laguna »

Darth Wong wrote:There's an old saying, dating back to the 1960s: "America always picks the wrong horse".

It isn't actually spectacularly bad judgment which leads to this interestingly accurate statement, although it does seem that way at times. It is actually America's self-centred mentality.
Specifically, it is the self-centred idea that the whole world should love the United States and lick its boots, because America is the Land of the Free and Home of the Brave(tm). This mentality leads to a short sightedness that would be funny if it wasn't so dangerous. Many people honestly believe that everyone who fights against the US must be thoroughly evil, and those who do not support it spineless cowards.

The problem isn't so much that the United States is self-interested, that it considers its own people more valuable than anyone else's, or that it will happily screw over anyone and everyone to further its aims. The previous top dog on the planet could be described in those terms, there is an old saying, from the 19th century, that goes, "The British Empire has no permanent friends, only permanent interests." Yet they ran a quarter of the fucking planet without ineffectively bumbling around like fools the way the United States is so fond of doing.

The difference is that the British understood that other States and peoples had their own interests, and that they would pursue those interests even to the detriment of British interests.
Adrian Laguna
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4736
Joined: 2005-05-18 01:31am

Post by Adrian Laguna »

GHETTO EDIT - The British were also under no illusions about being the world's Knight in Shining Armour, or that its opponents are Evil Dragons that must be slayed. This meant that they were shamelessly ruthless and dastardly when they felt they had to be, having no qualms about getting a little bloody to get shit done. It also, and this is the important part, meant that they had no problem in negotiating with the enemy, letting the Empire's economic prowess encourage them to come around, and even befriending them eventually if it was beneficial to do so. This is a little hard to do when you insist that your opponents are pure evil and solely motivated by hatred.
User avatar
Fingolfin_Noldor
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 11834
Joined: 2006-05-15 10:36am
Location: At the Helm of the HAB Star Dreadnaught Star Fist

Post by Fingolfin_Noldor »

Adrian Laguna wrote:The problem isn't so much that the United States is self-interested, that it considers its own people more valuable than anyone else's, or that it will happily screw over anyone and everyone to further its aims. The previous top dog on the planet could be described in those terms, there is an old saying, from the 19th century, that goes, "The British Empire has no permanent friends, only permanent interests." Yet they ran a quarter of the fucking planet without ineffectively bumbling around like fools the way the United States is so fond of doing.

The difference is that the British understood that other States and peoples had their own interests, and that they would pursue those interests even to the detriment of British interests.

GHETTO EDIT - The British were also under no illusions about being the world's Knight in Shining Armour, or that its opponents are Evil Dragons that must be slayed. This meant that they were shamelessly ruthless and dastardly when they felt they had to be, having no qualms about getting a little bloody to get shit done. It also, and this is the important part, meant that they had no problem in negotiating with the enemy, letting the Empire's economic prowess encourage them to come around, and even befriending them eventually if it was beneficial to do so. This is a little hard to do when you insist that your opponents are pure evil and solely motivated by hatred.
Erm, the trouble with the British was that they were perfectly fine with using a fair bit of brutality to enforce their will on the local populace. That sort of brutality would have been fine in those days, since the people they dominated were regarded somewhat along the lines of a second-class race and not worth caring about. If we take a look at India, where anti-British sentiment simmered for nearly a century, the British dismantled numerous states, and shelled them to submission. You also have the Zulus in Africa.

Of course, the British were not ashamed of what they did, neither were the other colonial powers. Their actions of course had very far reaching implications. Some in the West would try to forget what they did, and hope that their exported democracy would do everyone, including their former holdings, good.
Image
STGOD: Byzantine Empire
Your spirit, diseased as it is, refuses to allow you to give up, no matter what threats you face... and whatever wreckage you leave behind you.
Kreia
Adrian Laguna
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4736
Joined: 2005-05-18 01:31am

Post by Adrian Laguna »

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:Erm, the trouble with the British was that they were perfectly fine with using a fair bit of brutality to enforce their will on the local populace. That sort of brutality would have been fine in those days, since the people they dominated were regarded somewhat along the lines of a second-class race and not worth caring about.
Tell that to the lilly white Boers. I'm not going to say that the Empire wasn't racist, it was, but they were also equal opportunity about their dispensation of brutality. Hell, in the lead-up to WWII they made serious plans to have the Royal Air Force dump poison gas on German cities.
User avatar
Stuart Mackey
Drunken Kiwi Editor of the ASVS Press
Posts: 5946
Joined: 2002-07-04 12:28am
Location: New Zealand
Contact:

Post by Stuart Mackey »

Adrian Laguna wrote:
Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:Erm, the trouble with the British was that they were perfectly fine with using a fair bit of brutality to enforce their will on the local populace. That sort of brutality would have been fine in those days, since the people they dominated were regarded somewhat along the lines of a second-class race and not worth caring about.
Tell that to the lilly white Boers. I'm not going to say that the Empire wasn't racist, it was, but they were also equal opportunity about their dispensation of brutality.
The British could be brutal when needed, but they tended to rely on more diplomatic means to accomplish things (divide and conquer). While there was a lingering undercurrent of racist tendency, that would vary according to the area, after all its kind of difficult to maintain a racist tendency when your unit has just had its arse handed to it by the natives in combat, such as happened in New Zealand on numerous occasions and victory in combat was not a certain thing here.
Via money Europe could become political in five years" "... the current communities should be completed by a Finance Common Market which would lead us to European economic unity. Only then would ... the mutual commitments make it fairly easy to produce the political union which is the goal"

Jean Omer Marie Gabriel Monnet
--------------
Post Reply