Tag: Taliban

  • Osama Death-Pakistan Arrests CIA Informants.Denies AsUsual.

    If any confirmation is needed that the Pakistani Authorities knew of Osama bin laden staying in Pakistan, this is it.

    Pakistan must have been keeping tabs on the CIA operatives.

    Otherwise how would they know that they have passed on the information?

    Again, even if Pakistan did not know of Osama staying in Pakistan before following  the CIA personnel, Pakistan should have known where Osama was staying by following these people.

    What action would Pakistan take against the personnel who had information of Osama bin laden?

    Or is it still in the denial mode?

    The arrest of the CIA informants is like arresting the State’s evidence and letting the Guilty go scot-free!

    Pakistan’s intelligence service has arrested the owner of a safe house rented to the CIA to observe Osama bin Laden’s compound before the U.S. raid that killed the al-Qaida leader, as well as a “handful” of other Pakistanis, a U.S. official said late Tuesday.

    The Times, in an article posted on its website late Tuesday, said detained informants included a Pakistani army major who officials said copied the license plates of cars visiting bin Laden’s compound in Pakistan in the weeks before the raid.

    The fate of the CIA informants who were arrested was unclear, but American officials told the newspaper that CIA Director Leon Panetta raised the issue when he visited Islamabad last week to meet with Pakistani military and intelligence officers…

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/15/pakistan-arrests-cia-informants-bin-laden-raid_n_877193.html

    Pakistan government has denied reports that its intelligence service has arrested five informants of Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) over the raid at Osama bin Laden’s hide out in AbbotabadPakistan

    However, a spokesman of Pakistan’s Inter Services Pubilc Relations (ISPR) has strongly refuted the news report.

    “There is no army officer detained and the story is false and totally baseless,” the statement from ISPR said.

    Another Wound in Strained Relations

    Nevertheless, the latest developments add salt to the already strained relationship between U.S. and Pakistan after the Osama raid.

    http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/163192/20110615/osama-bin-laden-central-intelligence-agency-al-qaeda-cia-pakistan-isi-osama-raid-operation-geronimo-.htm

     

  • Inside Al-Qaeda and the Taliban: Beyond 9/11-Syed Saleem Shahzad.Excerpts.

    Myriad of evidence is piling up about ISI’s collusion with Al_Qaeda.

    Even Pasha would not have had access to the wealth of material found in the Book.

    But Pakistan’s propensity for ignoring what is destroying their Nation is well-known.

    It will take action ,it seems, only if the Sal himself proclaims the Truth about ISI.

    The Book , a good read, lays bare the skeletons in Pakistan’s cup board.

    A myriad of authors, journalists, academics and analysts have attempted to analyze what drives Al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders and fighters. Syed Saleem Shahzad is the only one to have gone to their strongholds and asked them. Shahzad, a Pakistani investigative reporter, has a level of access to Al-Qaeda and the Taliban that Western journalists can only dream of. He has interviewed many top-level strategists and fighters in both movements on multiple occasions in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Jordan. In Inside Al-Qaeda and the Talibanhe uses first-hand accounts and his own local knowledge to build up a convincing picture of the aims and motivation of the leaders and fighters in radical Islamic movements. This is a version of the “war on terror” that has never been told. It will fascinate anyone concerned with the strategy and tactics of the most controversial Islamic movements….

    Syed Saleem Shahzad, a Pakistani investigative reporter, has a level of access to Al-Qaeda and the Taliban that Western journalists can only dream of. He has interviewed many top-level strategists and fighters in both movements on multiple occasions in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Jordan. In Inside Al-Qaedaand the Taliban he uses first-hand accounts and his own local knowledge to build up a convincing and compelling picture of the aims and motivation of the leaders and fighters in radical Islamic movements.

    This is a version of the ‘war on terror’ that has never been told. It will fascinate anyone concerned with the strategy and tactics of the most controversial Islamic movements…

    “With Ilyas Kashmiri’s immense expertise on Indian operations, he stunned the Al-Qaeda leaders with the suggestion that expanding the war theatre was the only way to overcome the present impasse. He presented the suggestion of conducting such a massive operation in India as would bring India and Pakistan to war and with that all proposed operations against Al-Qaeda would be brought to a grinding halt. Al-Qaeda excitedly approved the attack-India proposal.”

    “Ilyas Kashmiri then handed over the plan to a very able former army major Haroon Ashik, who was also a former LeT commander who was still very close with the LeT chiefs Zakiur Rahman Lakhvi and Abu Hamza. Haroon knew about a plan by Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) that had been in the pipelines for several months with the official policy to drop it as it was to have been a low-profile routine proxy operation in India through LeT.”

    “The former army major, with the help of Ilyas Kashmiri’s men in India, hijacked the ISI plan and turned it into the devastating attacks that shook Mumbai onNovember 26, 2008 and brought Pakistan and India to the brink of a war (a detailed account of this is presented in the next chapters). “


    The book contains important correspondence and all other details that former Kashmiri Jihadi and former armed forces officials changed Al-Qaeda/Taliban’s strategic perception in South Asian war theatre….

    “There has never been a full picture shown before of Al-Qaeda to a western audience. Whatever was portrayed was misleading. Thus all the decisions taken after 9/11 were wrongly directed. Intelligence services around the world pre-9/11 visualized Al-Qaeda simply as a disorganized group of mercenaries, not a sophisticated organization capable of orchestrating consequential attacks on the United States . Even when the new awareness of al-Qaeda’s capabilities dawned, the organisation’s true nature and intentions were a mystery. What remains a fact, however, is that the defeat of the United States has become an obsession with Al-Qaeda’s and it prepares its game plans accordingly.

    Ideas play pivotal role in wars. But ideas alone do not provide results. A fusion of ideas and resources are necessary for success. Absence of either one can lead to failure. Al-Qaeda came into existence in late 1980s. But it took its real shape when ideas fused with resources in the middle of 1990s: with the alliance of Dr Zawahiri’s ideas and Osama bin Laden’s resources.

    Six feet three inches tall, rich, and close enough to the Saudi royal family to be counted a family member, Osama was as an ‘angry young man’. 14 years ago in his native Saudi Arabia he spoke out against the kingdom for allowing western forces to use its territory after the first Gulf War. The Bin Laden family conglomerate was influential in business and highly respected in Saudi Arabia, as well as in the world business community. Family members finally persuaded Osama to appear personally before King Fahd for a royal pardon. Many important members of the Saudi royals, including Prince Turki and Prince Abdullah, tried their best to settle the dispute. But it was all to no avail.

    That was the beginning of the false impression presented about bin Laden and his supporters. US intelligence agencies reported him as a Saudi dissident who had fought bravely in Afghanistan against the Soviets in the 1980s, but who was no more than a political nuisance in Saudi Arabia . In fact, Osama Bin Laden had become anti-American to the core – and anti Saudi monarchy soon after they invited the Americans troops in the first Gulf War. But he did not have an ideology nor a strategy. Most political analysts believed his initial sloganeering against America would not amount to anything. And, had he not been met up with Al-Zawahiri in 1997 it may not have. But Dr Ayman Al-Zawahiri indoctrinated Osama Bin Laden’s with the idea of armed opposition to America and gave such a spin to it that Bin Laden’s uncertain security threat for America turned into a deadly reality.”

    What is Al-Qaeda upto without Bin Laden?…

    “The next step was ideological fusion: to spawn Al-Qaeda’s ideological genes in Ibnul Balad (Sons of the Soil) transforming them into `Blood Brothers’. The whole of the future war was to be fought by the Ibnul Balad from which Al-Qaeda aimed to produce a new generation of Dr Ayman Al-Zawahiris, with each and every segment of their lives committed to a life-long struggle. They were to live for the movement and die for it. But before they died they were to leave another generation behind to continue the war against America . This was Al-Qaeda’s arsenal.”..

    So far A-Qaeda has introduced a few leaders for example  Ilyas Kashmiri and his highly sophesticated guerrilla 313 Brigade who espoused the global Jihad.

    Born in Bimbur (old Mirpur) in the Samhani Valley of Pakistan-administered Kashmir on February 10, 1964, Ilyas passed the first year of a mass communication degree at Allama Iqbal Open University, Islamabad. He did not continue due to his heavy involvement in jihadi activities.

    The Kashmir Freedom Movement was his first exposure in the field of militancy, then the Harkat-ul Jihad-i-Islami (HUJI) and ultimately his legendary 313 Brigade. This grew into the most powerful group in South Asia and its network is strongly knitted in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Kashmir, India, Nepal and Bangladesh. According to some CIA dispatches, the footprints of 313 Brigade are now in Europe and capable of the type of attack that saw a handful of militants terrorize the Indian city of Mumbai last November.

    Little is documented of Ilyas’ life, and what has been reported is often contradictory. However, he is invariably described, certainly by world intelligence agencies, as the most effective, dangerous and successful guerrilla leader in the world.

    He left the Kashmir region in 2005 after his second release from detention by Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and headed for North Waziristan. He had previously been arrested by Indian forces, but he broke out of jail and escaped. He was then detained by the ISI as the suspected mastermind of an attack on then-president Pervez Musharraf, in 2003, but was cleared and released. The ISI then picked Ilyas up again in 2005 after he refused to close down his operations in Kashmir.

    His relocation to the troubled border areas sent a chill down spines in Washington as they realized that with his vast experience, he could turn unsophisticated battle patterns in Afghanistan into audacious modern guerrilla warfare.

    Ilyas’ track record spoke for itself. In 1994, he launched the al-Hadid operation in the Indian capital, New Delhi, to get some of his jihadi comrades released. His group of 25 people included Sheikh Omar Saeed (the abductor of US reporter Daniel Pearl in Karachi in 2002) as his deputy. The group abducted several foreigners, including American, Israeli and British tourists and took them to Ghaziabad near Delhi. They then demanded that the Indian authorities release their colleagues, but instead they attacked the hideout. Sheikh Omar was injured and arrested. (He was later released in a swap for the passengers of a hijacked Indian aircraft). Ilyas escaped unhurt. On February 25, 2000, the Indian army killed 14 civilians in Lonjot village in Pakistan-administered Kashmir after commandos had crossed the Line of Control (LoC) that separates the two Kashmirs. They returned to the Indian side with abducted Pakistani girls, and threw the severed heads of three of them at Pakistani soldiers.

    The very next day, Ilyas conducted a guerilla operation against the Indian army in Nakyal sector after crossing the LoC with 25 fighters of 313 Brigade. They kidnapped an Indian army officer who was later beheaded – his head was paraded in the bazaars of Kotli back in Pakistani territory.

    However, the most significant operation of Ilyas was in Aknor cantonment in Indian-administered Kashmir against the Indian armed forces following the massacre of Muslims in the Indian city of Gujarat in 2002. In cleverly planned attacks involving 313 Brigade divided into two groups, Indian generals, brigadiers and other senior officials were lured to the scene of the first attack. Two generals were injured (the Pakistan army could not injure a single Indian general in three wars) and several brigadiers and colonels were killed. This was one of the most telling setbacks for India in the long-running Kashmiri insurgency….

    http://www.syedsaleemshahzad.com/

  • Pakistan-‘An Army in Search of A Country’-Wiki Leaks.

    The coat of arms of Pakistan displays the nati...
    Image via Wikipedia

    Look at Pakistan‘s turbulent  history from Ayub Khan.

    A nation formed on the very mistaken notion of Religion, that too because its founder could not the spoils of Power in India is being tossed from Dictatorships to Dictatorships, with Civilian Government being thrown in the middle as a garnish to ensure that Pakistan gets Foreign aid.

    The moment the Dictator finds the going rough in the country, the time-tested recipe is going to war with India and loss of face and in a case loss of portions of the country as well.

    The tailor-made solution then is to usher in a puppet Regime , which,when found to breaking g the reins of the Army,is dethroned and another military Regime is on.

    Foreign powers are game to this for it is to their advantage to have an unstable Pakistan,considering its strategic location and their desire to check mate China by playing India against Pakistan /Pakistan vs India.

    Unfortunately for them India happens to be a Democracy and India plays the Foreign powers game adeptly by pitting one against another.

    This Pakistan  is unable to do because of its internal contradictions and fundamentalism and general lawless in governance.

    No surprises Pakistan’s friends and foes alike deride Pakistan in private.

    Samples.

    Pakistan remains “an army in search of a country,” according to French President Nicolas Sarkozy’s Diplomatic Adviser. ..

    Levitte also asserted that “the Pakistani army is well regarded by the Pakistani people when not in power, but that it fails when in power.”..

    Day also inquired about US perspective on Nawaz Sharif “whom he described as ‘potentially less venal’ than other Pakistani leaders.” Previously published cables have already revealed what opinion Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed and Saudi King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz held of President Zardari and Mr. Sharif…..

    Director General, Defence and Intelligence of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office of the British government expresses satisfaction that China had “dumped” Pakistan in the Conference on Disarmament which in her opinion was a “good sign.”….

    a senior Saudi intelligence official is quoted as telling a US official that “the SAG [Saudi Arabian government] viewed the Afghan Taliban as largely under the control of Pakistan” and that “the Afghan Taliban needed support to be able to become more independent of Pakistan.”…

    http://www.dawn.com/2011/05/28/what-friends-say-about-pakistan-in-private.html

  • ‘Osama in Pakistan’- Declared Benazir-Killed for This?

    Benazir Bhutto, photographed at Chandini Resta...
    Image via Wikipedia

    Pakistan Army,Musharaff,ISI that was your late Prime Minster’s Statement.

    Still deny  Links to terrorist outfits?

    Of course, the statement was never made!

    On numerous occasions, Benazir spoke of the influence of the Pakistani intelligence services. She made clear that when she was the elected prime minister, ostensibly the leader of the nation, she had had little control over intelligence organizations or the military. A fervent believer in the need to combat Islamic fundamentalism and terrorism, she bemoaned the close relationships among the Taliban, al-Qaeda and Pakistan’s intelligence community. She felt they were “in cahoots” in Afghanistan, working against American and Western interests, and she recognized that her own life might be threatened because of her efforts to address this problem….

    On more than one occasion she told me she was virtually certain that Osama bin Laden was not living in a cave in the mountainous region of Afghanistan or Pakistan. “He’s living comfortably somewhere in Pakistan,” she would say. “He’s being supported and protected by Pakistani intelligence. You can bet on it.”

    October 2007- she was killed after a political rally and speech to a large throng of supporters. Many of her friends, myself included, believe that the military government that ran Pakistan at the time failed to provide her with the necessary security. Whether this failure was on purpose or from neglect, the result was the loss of the one Pakistani who offered the best hope for secular, progressive leadership in a nation and region that desperately need it.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/what-benazir-bhutto-knew-about-pakistan-and-bin-laden/2011/05/11/AFvkDz2G_story.html

  • China or US -Pakistan’s Dilemma.Analysis.

    Though written in lucid prose,the article presumes the importance of Pakistan than warranted by its polity.
    True, a Nation need not be huge and economic power house as India is.
    But at least the Nation should be stable and be economically self-reliant;it should have some political system in place;the responsibilities of the various organs must be clear.
    Only then Alliance with a country like Pakistan which is more or less a failed State, where none knows,including their President knows what happens in the Country(remember the instance of Indian planes incursions into Pakistan last year), will be beneficial to the Allies.
    The Alliance with Pakistan, apart from the reasons mentioned in the article, is also motivated by the anxiety ,rather urgency of the World(not merely US) to stop the export of terrorism.
    Having found Pakistan to be an unstable State,the US is slowly giving up on Pakistan, though it is discomforting for the US to deal with India, as India wants to deal with US on its terms and not as a supplicant like Pakistan
    China regards Pakistan to check mate US in the region.
    Having noticed that US is developing India relationship,China is looking elsewhere to encircle India as Pakistan can only be a liability to it in the long run;China wants Pakistan remains unstable.
    Funniest point is that Pakistan has a grievance that it has not been involved in Afghan Rebuilding.while the World knows the part played by Pakistan in Afghan confusion.

    The dynamic nature of geo-political environment is transitioning from American efforts to retain its uni-polarity to a stage where the emerging competitors and challengers are moving to a position of asserting their influence. This is likely to result in geo-economic, geo-political and geo-strategic changes, realignments and re-assertions, in certain regions which are likely to play important, if not pivotal roles in the future. These are high-stake political games which may well result in either prolonging geo-political status-quo or the commencement of changes towards a multi-polar balance of power.

    To maintain the geo-political status-quo, major US concerns are likely to remain focused on Asia. These include an emerging China, sustaining support for a countervailing India, a resurgent Russia and a concerned Muslim world attempting to redefine its place in the world polity. While US led efforts aimed at containment of Russia are stabilizing almost along the original Russian borders in Europe, endeavours to curtail her expansion towards the south and limit Russian and Chinese influence in Eurasian hinterland are underway.

    PakistanPakistan

    In February 2002, Colin Powell told the House International Relations Committee that, “America will have a continuing interest and presence in Central Asia of a kind that we could not have dreamed of before.” Chairman of NATO Military Committee while on a recent visit to Australia stated that, securing the safety of Washington and Brussels requires the expansion of a US dominated military alliance into “the Euro-Asian and Asian-Pacific regions.” Major US and NATO presence in Afghanistan and their efforts to enhance military presence in various Central Asian countries under the garb of providing support for Afghan war are clear indications in this direction.

    In the post 9/11 environment Asia therefore became the test-bed of American attempts to assert and realign the politico-economic order to maintain her full-spectrum domination and deny or delay the emergence and assurgence of competing powers. US invasion of Iraq was essentially a venture to sustain these objectives and not against terrorism which had roots in Afghanistan. It was thought that the US adventure in Iraq would achieve its objectives soon and would allow shifting the focus to stabilize Afghanistan for a protracted US presence because of geo-political compulsions. While the US was busy in Iraq, they co-opted Indian support to replace Pakistan as a stabilizing influence in Afghanistan, mainly due to Pak-US trust deficit. This also provided Americans an opportunity to project Indian influence in Central Asia to dilute the existing Russian and increasing Chinese support base.

    Having failed in her earlier attempts to coerce Pakistan through application of direct strategy, India readily took this opportunity to pay back Pakistan for its alleged interference in Indian Occupied Kashmir and ventured in to a strategic encirclement of Pakistan. Under a calibrated strategy, US also supported India by attempting to persuade Pakistan to allow passageway for sustaining the Indian influence in Afghanistan and beyond. While addressing a press conference in January this year in Islamabad, Hillary Clinton openly supported this venture to the discomfiture of her hosts. However, Pakistan did not acquiesce and avoided a self-inflicted strategic encirclement.

    Moreover, in order to dilute and contain resurgent Taliban, US contrived with Indian and Afghan support to shift the terrorist center of gravity to Pakistani territory resulting in manifold increase in drone attacks in Pak regions bordering Afghanistan. However, the US desire to confine this war to Af-pak region was short-lived. Soon the Taliban outside of so-called Af-pak region re-emerged stronger, warranting a US surge followed by a crisis of command and strategy.

    Also, the Americans soon realized Indian inability to replace Pakistan’s strategic influence in its backyard. This also solidified the fact that the geo-politically influenced strategic pivot provided by Pakistan could not and would not be replaced by India, no matter how powerful India may be. Pakistan had withstood the challenge, no matter how weak it had been or would be. Achievement of US geo-political and geo-strategic goals therefore would become extremely difficult without co-opting Pakistan. This fact can not be overstated by citing a statement of Senator McCain (courtesy wikileaks), who while talking to David Cameron in a 2008 meeting said that, “if they (Pakistan) don’t cooperate and help us, I don’t know what we are going to do.”

    Many believe that India is a regional power, yet they fail to realize the fact that its regional prowess can only be exercised against nations as small and vulnerable as Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, Maldives and Bangladesh. It has not been able to convincingly project its power potential against present day Pakistan and China and it is unlikely to happen in the future as well. US Embassy, New Delhi (courtesy wikileaks) corroborates this fact indicating that, with present Indian military capabilities, Cold Start doctrine would encounter mixed results.

    US, France, UK, China and Russia etc can project their power potential because either they do not have a powerful regional threat to counter or they have enough capability to deter a regional threat and also project their capability to take care of extra-regional threats.

    India cannot laterally expand its influence beyond its western borders due the existence of geo-political impediments in addition to the geographical restrictions placed by the presence of Pakistan. Expansion of its influence towards the east is impeded due to the large geographical lay of China. Myanmar can provide India with limited ability to expand towards South East Asia. She attempted to undertake such a venture but due to its internal upheaval in adjoining areas failed to take timely advantage. Chinese influence in Myanmar has in the meantime increased manifold which may limit future Indian endeavours. Therefore the only direction it may be able to expand its influence is towards the vast expanse of sea in the south.

    http://www.eurasiareview.com/pakistans-geopolitical-dilema-china-or-us-viewpoint-from-pakistan-analysis-22032011/#comment-95089