Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Nato's top brass accuse Pakistan over Taliban aid

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Nato's top brass accuse Pakistan over Taliban aid

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.../wafghan06.xml

    Nato's top brass accuse Pakistan over Taliban aid
    By Ahmed Rashid in Kabul
    (Filed: 06/10/2006)

    Commanders from five Nato countries whose troops have just fought the bloodiest battle with the Taliban in five years, are demanding their governments get tough with Pakistan over the support and sanctuary its security services provide to the Taliban.

    Nato's report on Operation Medusa, an intense battle that lasted from September 4-17 in the Panjwai district, demonstrates the extent of the Taliban's military capability and states clearly that Pakistan's Interservices Intelligence (ISI) is involved in supplying it.


    President Pervez Musharraf

    Commanders from Britain, the US, Denmark, Canada and Holland are frustrated that even after Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf met George W Bush and Tony Blair last week, Western leaders are declining to call Mr Musharraf's bluff.

    "It is time for an 'either you are with us or against us' delivered bluntly to Musharraf at the highest political level," said one Nato commander.

    After the September 11 attacks in 2001 America gave Mr Musharraf a similar ultimatum to co-operate against the Taliban, who were then harbouring Osama bin Laden.

    "Our boys in southern Afghanistan are hurting because of what is coming out of Quetta," he added.

    The Taliban use the southern province of Balochistan to co-ordinate their insurgency and to recuperate after military action.

    The cushion Pakistan is providing the Taliban is undermining the operation in Afghanistan, where 31,000 Nato troops are now based. The Canadians were most involved in Operation Medusa, two weeks of heavy fighting in a lush vineyard region, defeating 1,500 well entrenched Taliban, who had planned to attack Kandahar city, the capital of the south.

    Nato officials now say they killed 1,100 Taliban fighters, not the 500 originally claimed. Hundreds of Taliban reinforcements in pick-up trucks who crossed over from Quetta – waved on by Pakistani border guards – were destroyed by Nato air and artillery strikes.

    Nato captured 160 Taliban, many of them Pakistanis who described in detail the ISI's support to the Taliban.

    Nato is now mapping the entire Taliban support structure in Balochistan, from ISI- run training camps near Quetta to huge ammunition dumps, arrival points for Taliban's new weapons and meeting places of the shura, or leadership council, in Quetta, which is headed by Mullah Mohammed Omar, the group's leader since its creation a dozen years ago.

    Nato and Afghan officers say two training camps for the Taliban are located just outside Quetta, while the group is using hundreds of madrassas where the fighters are housed and fired up ideologically before being sent to the front.

    Many madrassas now being listed are run by the Jamiat-e-Ullema Islam, a political party that governs Balochistan and the North West Frontier Province. The party helped spawn the Taliban in 1994.

    "Taliban decision-making and its logistics are all inside Pakistan," said the Afghan defense minister, General Rahim Wardak.

    A post-battle intelligence report compiled by Nato and Afghan forces involved in Operation Medusa demonstrates the logistical capability of the Taliban.

    During the battle the Taliban fired an estimated 400,000 rounds of ammunition, 2,000 rocket-propelled grenades and 1,000 mortar shells, which slowly arrived in Panjwai from Quetta over the spring months. Ammunition dumps unearthed after the battle showed that the Taliban had stocked over one million rounds in Panjwai.

    In Panjwai the Taliban had also established a training camp to teach guerrillas how to penetrate Kandahar, a separate camp to train suicide bombers and a full surgical field hospital. Nato estimated the cost of Taliban ammunition stocks at around £2.6 million. "The Taliban could not have done this on their own without the ISI," said a senior Nato officer.

    Gen Musharraf this week admitted that "retired" ISI officers might be involved in aiding the Taliban, the closest he has come to admitting the agency's role.

    [email protected]
    To sit down with these men and deal with them as the representatives of an enlightened and civilized people is to deride ones own dignity and to invite the disaster of their treachery - General Matthew Ridgway

  • #2
    Originally posted by troung View Post
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.../wafghan06.xml

    Nato's top brass accuse Pakistan over Taliban aid
    By Ahmed Rashid in Kabul
    (Filed: 06/10/2006)

    Commanders from five Nato countries whose troops have just fought the bloodiest battle with the Taliban in five years, are demanding their governments get tough with Pakistan over the support and sanctuary its security services provide to the Taliban.

    Nato's report on Operation Medusa, an intense battle that lasted from September 4-17 in the Panjwai district, demonstrates the extent of the Taliban's military capability and states clearly that Pakistan's Interservices Intelligence (ISI) is involved in supplying it.


    President Pervez Musharraf

    Commanders from Britain, the US, Denmark, Canada and Holland are frustrated that even after Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf met George W Bush and Tony Blair last week, Western leaders are declining to call Mr Musharraf's bluff.

    "It is time for an 'either you are with us or against us' delivered bluntly to Musharraf at the highest political level," said one Nato commander.

    After the September 11 attacks in 2001 America gave Mr Musharraf a similar ultimatum to co-operate against the Taliban, who were then harbouring Osama bin Laden.

    "Our boys in southern Afghanistan are hurting because of what is coming out of Quetta," he added.

    The Taliban use the southern province of Balochistan to co-ordinate their insurgency and to recuperate after military action.

    The cushion Pakistan is providing the Taliban is undermining the operation in Afghanistan, where 31,000 Nato troops are now based. The Canadians were most involved in Operation Medusa, two weeks of heavy fighting in a lush vineyard region, defeating 1,500 well entrenched Taliban, who had planned to attack Kandahar city, the capital of the south.

    Nato officials now say they killed 1,100 Taliban fighters, not the 500 originally claimed. Hundreds of Taliban reinforcements in pick-up trucks who crossed over from Quetta – waved on by Pakistani border guards – were destroyed by Nato air and artillery strikes.

    Nato captured 160 Taliban, many of them Pakistanis who described in detail the ISI's support to the Taliban.

    Nato is now mapping the entire Taliban support structure in Balochistan, from ISI- run training camps near Quetta to huge ammunition dumps, arrival points for Taliban's new weapons and meeting places of the shura, or leadership council, in Quetta, which is headed by Mullah Mohammed Omar, the group's leader since its creation a dozen years ago.

    Nato and Afghan officers say two training camps for the Taliban are located just outside Quetta, while the group is using hundreds of madrassas where the fighters are housed and fired up ideologically before being sent to the front.

    Many madrassas now being listed are run by the Jamiat-e-Ullema Islam, a political party that governs Balochistan and the North West Frontier Province. The party helped spawn the Taliban in 1994.

    "Taliban decision-making and its logistics are all inside Pakistan," said the Afghan defense minister, General Rahim Wardak.

    A post-battle intelligence report compiled by Nato and Afghan forces involved in Operation Medusa demonstrates the logistical capability of the Taliban.

    During the battle the Taliban fired an estimated 400,000 rounds of ammunition, 2,000 rocket-propelled grenades and 1,000 mortar shells, which slowly arrived in Panjwai from Quetta over the spring months. Ammunition dumps unearthed after the battle showed that the Taliban had stocked over one million rounds in Panjwai.

    In Panjwai the Taliban had also established a training camp to teach guerrillas how to penetrate Kandahar, a separate camp to train suicide bombers and a full surgical field hospital. Nato estimated the cost of Taliban ammunition stocks at around £2.6 million. "The Taliban could not have done this on their own without the ISI," said a senior Nato officer.

    Gen Musharraf this week admitted that "retired" ISI officers might be involved in aiding the Taliban, the closest he has come to admitting the agency's role.

    [email protected]
    Well that pretty much spells it out. And America continues support for Pakistan why exactly? Anyone?
    In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

    Leibniz

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by troung View Post
      Nato's top brass accuse Pakistan over Taliban aid
      Gee, no effin' kiddin...

      Originally posted by parihaka View Post
      Well that pretty much spells it out. And America continues support for Pakistan why exactly? Anyone?
      What's your big plan?(seriously)

      Comment


      • #4
        Stop supplying them with aid and military hardware. Raise Afghan regiments, as Lemontree says, along clan lines and post them away from their own clan territories. Base them along the border to limit Taliban incursions. Have western forces in numbers as backup.
        Conduct NATO airstrikes on taliban positions inside Waziristan and arty along the border to strike any buildups within Waziristan and Balochistan, basically along the same lines as a DMZ, say 5km depth.
        Then see what Uncle Mushy has to say. So far he's had it all his own way, he needs an Armitage moment to re-assess his priorities.
        In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

        Leibniz

        Comment


        • #5
          OMG this is HILARIOUS ..i mean if any american still belives that pakistan is their pal on the war on terror, they should have their heads examined.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by parihaka View Post
            Stop supplying them with aid and military hardware. Raise Afghan regiments, as Lemontree says, along clan lines and post them away from their own clan territories. Base them along the border to limit Taliban incursions. Have western forces in numbers as backup.
            Conduct NATO airstrikes on taliban positions inside Waziristan and arty along the border to strike any buildups within Waziristan and Balochistan, basically along the same lines as a DMZ, say 5km depth.
            Then see what Uncle Mushy has to say. So far he's had it all his own way, he needs an Armitage moment to re-assess his priorities.
            OK, now what's your realistic, aka, workable plan.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by M21Sniper View Post
              OK, now what's your realistic, aka, workable plan.
              I guess a "workable" plan would be to give Musharraf billions worth military toys and hope things clear up.. Oh look it has gotten the Afghan war so far in these 5 years!

              eh..
              I rant, therefore I am.

              Comment


              • #8
                Casualties are not politically viable in Democracies of the West/NATO, but perhaps in India, which also claims democratic credentials, and is a significant player in Afghanistan, the political compulsions are not the same as in NATO democracies and perhaps it is time that Indian security forces shoulder responsibilties in Afghanistan - Surely, the Indian will step up to this challenge and responsibility - a sort of, put up or shut up - but then perhaps the reality is that some who claim to represent a dominant point of view among Indians on this board, represent little other than their frustration.

                :)
                _____________________

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by srirangan View Post
                  I guess a "workable" plan would be to give Musharraf billions worth military toys and hope things clear up.. Oh look it has gotten the Afghan war so far in these 5 years!

                  eh..
                  There is no way that you can control the Afghan border, and certainly not with Afghani troops.

                  It is a fantasy.

                  And no, i do not condone giving them weapons either.

                  IMO, there is NO workable plan wrt Pakistan short of telling India to "Have at 'em".

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by M21Sniper View Post
                    IMO, there is NO workable plan wrt Pakistan short of telling India to "Have at 'em".
                    India would be more than happy to whack a few training camps and contribute to the WOT. The same terrorists that go into A'stan also go to Kashmir. However, in the past, it has been the US that has restrained India.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by M21Sniper View Post
                      There is no way that you can control the Afghan border, and certainly not with Afghani troops.

                      It is a fantasy.

                      And no, i do not condone giving them weapons either.

                      IMO, there is NO workable plan wrt Pakistan short of telling India to "Have at 'em".
                      having at em is all very well but the US still has to stop supplying Pakistan. That at least is achievable without any change to US forces on the ground.
                      NATO (actually read the Commonwealth) can take care of the rest with US logistic support.
                      In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

                      Leibniz

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by tarek View Post
                        .. but perhaps in India, which also claims democratic credentials, and is a significant player in Afghanistan,
                        Surely you can do better with the left-handed compliments. That one is an apology for a snide remark :)

                        the political compulsions are not the same as in NATO democracies and perhaps it is time that Indian security forces shoulder responsibilties in Afghanistan - Surely, the Indian will step up to this challenge and responsibility
                        Now what could necessitate such a drastic step? Is it because Pakistan is

                        (a) unwilling to shoulder its responsibilities to remove sanctuary for the resurgent Taliban?

                        (b) unwilling to entirely remove the vestiges of what it believes will provide it "strategic depth" against India in Afghanistan?

                        (c) unwilling to let the West disengage from Afghanistan, so that it continues to receive inducements for reluctant co-operation and continues to be funded by Islamist regimes and the PRC for showing defiance to the West?

                        (d) unable to face the military challenge of pacifying two tribal agencies?

                        (e) counting on using a resurgent pan-Islamic ideology via its Taliban proxies to combat the rise in Baloch nationalism and the prospect of a Pushtun nationalism?

                        - a sort of, put up or shut up - but then perhaps the reality is that some who claim to represent a dominant point of view among Indians on this board, represent little other than their frustration.
                        Perhaps. But surely reminding ourselves that Pakistan is not living up to its self-professed path of "enlightened moderation" and "safeguarding supreme national interests" by fighting the Taliban (and continuing to receive money to do so), does not constitute frustration?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by M21Sniper View Post
                          IMO, there is NO workable plan wrt Pakistan short of telling India to "Have at 'em".
                          How is that a "workable" plan? Do you believe that India will be able to tame Pakistan? We may be able to destroy them with nuclear weapons, but so can the US - at much less collateral damage.

                          If you mean that the threat of unleashing India on Pakistan may be effective, I would disagree with that too. First, India is not going to fight Pakistan so that the US can be safe - we have ourselves to look after and Pakistan knows that well. Second, that threat rings hollow when the US approves large sums of military aid for Pakistan.

                          I don't have a grand plan either, but there are a series of steps that may reduce Pakistan's room to manoeuver - with each year, a decrease in textile exports quota to the US and EU if Pakistan continues to support the Taliban; a rethink of the Paris Club committment for multi-lateral debt rescheduling towards less generous terms; holding the proposed $3 billion American aid from 2007-2009 conditional upon an improvement in Afghanistan's security and greater co-operation with Europe and Turkey in disrupting Pakistan's heroin trade. All of which would require calling Musharraf's bluff about "after me, the deluge". Not easy, but easier now than at any time in the past because Musharraf needs the US more than the US needs him.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Why is this thread in the "Middle East Defense Topics" forum?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Anoop C View Post
                              Why is this thread in the "Middle East Defense Topics" forum?
                              someone, with their great historical knowledge assumed that afghanistan is part of the middle east!.lol!!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X