[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
International News Title: Afghans Say Pakistan Fired First in NATO Attack Afghan and Western officials on Sunday said NATO and Afghan forces on a nighttime operation Saturday came under fire from across the Pakistan border before they called in a deadly airstrike on two Pakistani military posts, in an incident has left U.S.-Pakistan relations in tatters.
Pakstan's military denied firing on NATO forces, calling the "unprovoked" raid on the border posts an "irresponsible act." The army questioned why the coalition undertook a sustained two-hour attack on well-known border positions, involving helicopters and fighter jets, which left 25 soldiers dead and another 25 injured.
Tensions are high in Pakistan as a deadly air strike is blamed on NATO. The US is now being ordered to leave an airbase within 15 days. FOX News correspondent Molly Henneberg has the story. (Video Courtesy: Newscore) . "No first fire came from Pakistan troops," said a senior Pakistani military official Sunday. "But they did respond in self-defense after NATO gunship helicopters and jet fighters carried out unprovoked firing."
In retaliation, Pakistan indefinitely shut down North Atlantic Treaty Organization supply lines through Pakistan and said it was re-evaluating its military, intelligence and diplomatic links with the U.S. Authorities there gave the U.S. two weeks to pull out of a Pakistani air base that Washington has used in the past to launch drone strikes on Taliban militants, attacks that have become increasingly unpopular among Pakistani people.
Pakistan Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar, in a telephone conversation with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Sunday, communicated her "deep sense of rage" for the attack, which she said had set back efforts to improve relations, Pakistan's foreign ministry said.
Enlarge Image
Close European Pressphoto Agency
People burn NATO and U.S. flags as they shout slogans against the NATO airstrikes on Pakistani military checkposts in Mohmand tribal agency, during a protest in Multan, Pakistan, on Sunday. .Pakistan Protests Raid View Slideshow
Reuters
Activists protested in Lahore, Pakistan. . More photos and interactive graphics . On Sunday, NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen promised a full inquiry into the "tragic unintended incident." He termed the deaths of Pakistani personnel "unacceptable and deplorable."
Enlarge Image
Close Wali Khan Shinwari/European Pressphoto Agency
NATO supply trucks sitting idle after Pakistani officials closed the border crossing into Afghanistan to protest the NATO attack. . The Obama administration pledged a full investigation into the attack. Mrs. Clinton, the U.S. government said on Saturday, committed to reviewing the "circumstances of the incident" and stressed "the importance of the U.S.-Pakistani partnership."
The attack is a major setback for U.S. efforts to bring Pakistan onside as President Barack Obama's administration works to find an exit strategy from the 10-year war in Afghanistan.
White House, State Department and Pentagon officials scrambled over the weekend to minimize the damage to relations, which were already tenuous, and assess the implications for both the immediate war effort in Afghanistan and broader cooperation sought by Washington to end the conflict.
The Pentagon can weather a limited disruption in the flow of military supplies into Afghanistan through Pakistan by routing more supplies through northern entry points. But a longer-term shutdown of traffic through Pakistan, or a decision by Pakistan to close a critical air-resupply corridor used by the military over southern Pakistan, could have more serious implications, defense officials said.
The State Department is assessing how the incident could affect efforts by Mrs. Clinton to secure Pakistan's assistance in organizing peace talks with the Taliban to underpin the U.S. withdrawal.
"It's as serious an incident as we've had. Whether it becomes a serious crisis remains to be seen," a senior official said.
Mrs. Clinton, in an October visit to Islamabad, attempted to forge an agreement with Pakistan to squeeze militants operating in Pakistan's border areas and to get the country's help in bringing Taliban leaders to peace talks.
A Western official with knowledge of the discussions said both sides had begun to rebuild confidence ahead of a key international meeting in Bonn, Germany, next month to discuss the situation in Afghanistan.
The attack set the clock back on a relationship that had only just begun to recover from a number of incidents, including the secret U.S. raid that killed Osama bin Laden on Pakistani soil in May and the killing of two Pakistani men in Lahore by a Central Intelligence Agency contractor in January.
"It will be difficult to make much progress in the days to come," the Western official said.
The incident took place hours after Gen. John R. Allen, the coalition commander in Afghanistan, met Friday with army officers in Pakistan to reduce rising tension on the poorly demarcated border. Gen. Allen said a one-star coalition general will lead an investigation into Saturday's deaths.
Afghan and U.S. officials say their troops are increasingly facing fire from Pakistan's side of the border. Pakistan is angry over the increased incidence of cross-border raids by Afghan and NATO forces.
As U.S. military, Pakistani forces and Afghan officials sought to piece together the incident, three Afghan officials and one Western official said the attack took place in response to fire from the remote Pakistani posts in the Mohmand tribal region, a lawless border area that abuts Afghanistan's eastern Kunar province.
Two Afghan officials working in the border area where the attack took place said Sunday that the joint force was targeting Taliban forces in the area when it received fire from a Pakistan military outpost. That prompted the coalition force to call for an air attack on the Pakistani posts, said an Afghan Border Police official in the area. Pakistani officials were informed of the operation before it took place, he said.
"There was firing coming from the position against Afghan army soldiers who requested support and this is what happened," said a third Afghan official in Kabul, where Gen. Allen met with top government leaders for a special security meeting to discuss the incident. The Afghan official in Kabul said the government believes that the fire came from the Pakistan base—and not from insurgents operating nearby.
That view was bolstered by one Western official who discussed the attack with military officials in Kabul on Sunday.
"They were fired on from a Pakistani army base," the Western official in Kabul said. "It was a defensive action."
A U.S. official in Kabul said insurgents may have been firing into Afghanistan near the Pakistani border outpost Saturday morning, which prompted coalition forces to strike back. He pointed to an incident in September 2010, when a NATO helicopter fired on a Pakistan outpost, killing two soldiers.
"It was a situation where insurgent forces butted right up against a Pakistani border post and used that as a firing position. When we fired back, we hit Pakistani security forces. This is a possibility we're circulating here for Saturday's incident," the official said.
Military officials in Kabul said insurgents in Pakistan have also used empty Pakistan border bases to stage attacks, which may have been the working assumption of the coalition forces who called in the airstrike.
U.S. officials said the units believed they were responding to incoming fire from the Pakistan side of the border.
"They believed they were coming under attack from that side of the border," a senior U.S. official said, although investigators have yet to pinpoint the precise source of fire.
The official said "all the leaders on the U.S. side are taking this very seriously," given damage to relations with Pakistan and the potential impact of a lengthy disruption in the flow of NATO supplies.
"We always have alternatives in the terms of logistics. It depends on how long it lasts as to whether or not there will be a longer-term impact," the senior U.S. official said of flow of supplies through Pakistan.
Pakistan's military disputes this version of events. Military officials say the posts were attacked without warning at 2 a.m, while most of the around 50 soldiers were sleeping, and that NATO helicopters and jets even attacked Pakistani military forces sent in as back-up during the two-hour assault. Pakistan says it has increased the number of soldiers at border posts like these as part of a campaign in Mohmand this year to wipe out the Taliban in the area.
The campaign, involving 3,000 Pakistani soldiers, took back much of Mohmand from the Taliban. But Pakistan's army says Taliban militants continue to mount attacks on its forces in Mohmand from across the border in Afghanistan.
The posts hit by NATO on Saturday are built on the Salala mountain, part of a chain of low-lying rugged mountains that divide Pakistan from Afghanistan. Many of the tribal people that live in the area, and have set up lashkars, or local armies, to aid the military to attack the Taliban were angered over the NATO attack. "We have sacrificed our lives in the fight against Taliban who killed hundreds of our tribesmen," said Malik Mohammad Ali, a tribal elder from Mohmand.
The incident comes as the U.S. has begun to more publicly voice concerns that Pakistan's military, despite fighting militants in places like Mohmand, is harboring some factions of the Taliban as a way of influencing events in Afghanistan after most international troops pull out in 2014. At the least, U.S. officials said, Pakistan is failing to stop some militants firing on U.S. troops from close to Pakistani military posts.
But the U.S. also has attempted to get Pakistan army chief, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, to play a larger role in bringing the Taliban into nascent peace talks that have so far failed to bear fruit.
Gen. Kayani's ability to accede to U.S. demands is greatly limited by events like the one Saturday, which stoke anti-U.S. fervor in Pakistan, said Talat Masood, a retired general and defense analyst.
"Those who have been more moderate, even those people are asking is it worth having a relationship with the U.S.?" Mr. Masood said. "It will be very difficult for Gen. Kayani to defend the alliance."
Mr. Masood said he had taped a television chat show Saturday after the attack on the border posts during which he was the only participant arguing that the U.S. wouldn't have targeted Pakistani soldiers in Mohmand as a deliberate act of aggression.
Few observers, though, expect a complete breakdown in relations.
Pakistan has shut its border, which will temporarily hurt NATO's supply chain to Afghanistan, but the country continues to rely on billions of dollars in military and civilian aid from the U.S. Washington, likewise, needs Pakistan to keep up pressure on Taliban militants in the tribal region, and as a supply route.
"This is a need-based relationship. It will have its temporary hiccup, probably in the form of the suspension of NATO cargo," said Imtiaz Gul, director of the Center for Research and Security Studies, an Islamabad-based think tank.
During the national security meeting Sunday, Afghan leaders also solidified plans to carry out the second phase of plans for coalition forces to cede security control to Afghan forces across the country.
The new plan includes six of the country's 34 provinces, including Kabul, seven major cities, including Jalalabad, and dozens of districts, including Helmand province's Marjah, which was the first target last year of U.S. Marines at the forefront of the American military surge meant to cripple the Taliban-led insurgency.
If the transition is a success, it will put Afghan forces in the lead in protecting more than half of the country's population, officials said.
During the first phase of the transition process carried out earlier this year, Afghan forces assumed control of seven cities and provinces.
Oh yeah ..... forgot to mention Pakistan in those GOP debates. Dumbshits!
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: buckeroo (#0)
t1.gstatic.com/images?q=t...sDfTAKsQZF3KDu9rVvA1jrNbx Pakistan Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar
What happens when you want to trade with Iran....;} Astounding by jj-chevrus on 27.11.2011 [19:01 ] It never ceases to amaze me. I mean really how many times does a nation have to be screwed over before they say enough....? Eleventeen!? My question is why. They weren't bombing a wedding, it appears fixed positions were hit....more than one. I fail to see the benefit . The convoys grinding to a halt seems like a serious backlash... Who benefits @jj-chevrus by phil_s66 on 27.11.2011 [20:46 ] I think the same. It is very confusing the behavior of the western terrorists. But i do believe it is a symptom of ego above brains. Something in the background at military or diplomatic level must have gone wrong between both sides of the table. I guess Pakistan's military chiefs have either said no to some outrageous demands that pissed of Obamas handlers and Nato.
False. Pakistan was disucssed at length in relationship to the war in Afghanistan during the first foreign policy debate more than a week ago. The subject was specifically raised in counterpoint Obama's hare-brained Oct 2012 time-table and Ron Paul's underwhelming 'bring 'em home now' approach.
You are so full shit the crap is flowing out of your ears. IRAN was the complete ISSUE as in make war to protect Israel. There was only one GOP candidate, Ron Paul, that stood his ground on IRAN. And then the GOP pack-rat club went after him like mad dawgs to prove why they need all that AIPAC campaign money. It was kinda funny.
American forces have been given 15 days to vacate the Shamsi airbase in southwestern Pakistan, where the U.S. sometimes lands unmanned drone aircraft used to attack militants on Pakistani territory. Pakistan ordered the departure a day after choking off the two main land routes for moving nonlethal supplies to U.S.-led NATO forces in Afghanistan. NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen says Saturday's killing of 24 Pakistani soldiers by U.S. aircraft was a “tragic unintended accident.” He has told Pakistan's prime minister the attack was as “unacceptable and deplorable as the deaths of Afghan and international personnel.” With a NATO investigation into the matter pending, Pakistan's Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar telephoned U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to convey the “deep sense of rage” in Pakistan. She said the attack demonstrated “complete disregard for international law and human life, and... negates the progress made by the two countries on improving relations.” Clinton responded by saying she was deeply saddened, and promised to work with Pakistan on the issue. Pakistan also is reexamining its decision to attend a major Afghanistan peace conference in Bonn next month, but has made no final announcement. Retired Lieutenant General Talat Masood, an expert on Pakistan's strategic affairs, says the killings have dealt a severe blow to the already negative perceptions of the U.S. among Pakistanis. “The majority of the people think that it was an aggression committed by the U.S. by design. The public sentiment has become very anti-American," Masood stated. "And, of course, it gives a big handle to the media to spread the nationalist frenzy.” Pakistani television networks broadcast images of the soldiers' funerals Sunday. Soldiers' coffins were draped in the Pakistani flag and airlifted to their respective hometowns for burial. Masood says a thorough and transparent investigation into why and how the airstrike took place may have a chance at soothing some of the anger in this country. “I think if the investigation takes place in which Pakistan is taken into full confidence, and if the truth comes out that this was a gross miscalculation on the part of some of the intelligence people - and they apologize, and they compensate - I think it would make definitely a difference,” Masood said. Al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden used Afghanistan as a base to plan and execute the terror attacks of September 11, 2001. U.S. special forces killed bin Laden in a Pakistan compound earlier this year. U.S.-led NATO forces in Afghanistan have faced a constant challenge with the Pakistan border, which is frequently crossed by Pakistan-based militants. America has, indeed, won friends across the pond.
Proof? Cause I have proof that thermate brought down WTC7.
Afghan and Western officials on Sunday said NATO and Afghan forces on a nighttime operation Saturday came under fire from across the Pakistan border before they called in a deadly airstrike on two Pakistani military posts, in an incident has left U.S.-Pakistan relations in tatters. 'from across the Pakistan border' OK, we're going to be firing across the border, so the first lie that we don't know where the border is...a lie. Next, anything over the border that we should know about? This isn't our first rodeo in this area. 'Don't buy Iranian Gas or bad things will happen.'...;}
...and you're as sharp as a marble. November 15, 2011, 2:38 pm: How do Republican frontrunners Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich view Pakistan, a country mentioned a staggering 55 times in Saturday night’s debate in South Carolina? ---read more----
Again, you're wrong..here is a clip from the GOP National Security debate on Nov 22nd. where Pakistan is discussed.
Do you believe the posts you actually make? ALL OF THOSE MFers are just CHUMPS receiving AIPAC money. And, of course, all those same chumps say and do is what gets them elected. BTW, learn to read posts.
Iranian students invade British embassy in Tehran, Iran Plain Dealer - 10 minutes ago Pakistan is pulling up the drawbridge. Note that No ONe in Pakistan has talked about a BS Inquiry...;} 12 Days to evac Shamsi.....maybe less..watch the USbanks now... and your money. Iranian students invade British embassy in Tehran, Iran Plain Dealer - 10 minutes ago
Russia will defend Syria.
Contrary to your braying that they didn't..the GOP candidates discussed Pakistan at length in the last two debates. Deal with it.
|
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|