Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Al Qaeda Militants Tried to Hijack a Pakistani Navy frigate

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

  • Al Qaeda Militants Tried to Hijack a Pakistani Navy frigate

    KARACHI, Pakistan—Al Qaeda militants tried to hijack a Pakistan Navy frigate earlier this month and use it to target U.S. Navy vessels on antiterrorism patrol in the northwestern Indian Ocean, Pakistani security officials said.

    The Sept. 6 raid, which was foiled after a fire fight and a suicide bombing, was carried out in part by Pakistan Navy personnel who had been recruited by al Qaeda, these officials said. The raid, in which 10 militants and one petty officer died, raised fears about terrorist infiltration of the nuclear-armed nation's military forces.

    "Without assistance from inside, these people could not have breached security," Defense Minister Khawaja Asif said about the incident at a recent parliament session.

    The Karachi raid was the first major operation carried out by al Qaeda's newly formed regional wing, al Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent, according to counterterrorism officials. The timing of the raid may have been set to mark the start of the affiliate or to coincide roughly with the anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Western security officials believe.

    News of the attempted seizure of the frigate, PNS Zulfiqar, was initially kept from the media, and the details of the incident are only beginning to emerge.

    The Pakistan Navy works closely with the U.S. Navy and other foreign maritime forces in combating terrorism, piracy and the drug trade in the Indian Ocean. That cooperation includes the docking of ships from allied nations in Karachi, Pakistan's largest port.

    "If we are to work with the Pakistan Navy, we have to be able to trust them. This attack raises a lot of questions," said a Western counterterrorism official.

    The Karachi plot has drawn comparison with the October 2000 attack on U.S. Navy destroyer USS Cole by al Qaeda in the Yemeni port of Aden, in which 17 U.S. sailors died.

    "The Pakistan Navy very bravely thwarted this attack. There was no damage of any kind to our installations," Mr. Asif said.

    It isn't unheard of for al Qaeda to recruit within the Pakistani military, a U.S. official said, but "these occurrences are rare." Still, there have been several attacks on military facilities and personnel in Pakistan carried out with the help of serving and retired military.

    In the attempted seizure of PNS Zulfiqar, "the rogue officers were in uniform and had their service cards displayed. They simply walked on board," one Pakistani security official said.

    Pakistani officials said the frigate was due to sail the same day to join an international naval flotilla in the Indian Ocean. On Aug. 15, Pakistan took over from Britain's Royal Navy the command of Combined Task Force-150, a multinational maritime security coalition that includes the U.S. and is focused on combating terrorism.

    "It appears the officers on board were to be joined by other militants who were to arrive by boat from the sea and then stow away on board," the Pakistani security official said. "The plan was to get close to the U.S. ships on the high seas, and then turn the shipboard weapon systems on the Americans." The frigate's weaponry includes an antiship missile system with a range of up to 300 kilometers (186 miles).

    The militants' plan was foiled primarily by the alertness of PNS Zulfiqar's gunner. His vigilance was probably sharpened, Pakistani officials said, by the security precautions implemented since recent intelligence led to the arrest of a gang of Uzbek militants planning an attack on Pakistan Navy facilities. Official maps and details of naval facilities were also found on militants captured in the tribal area of Waziristan on the Afghan border four days before the Karachi attack.The militants who were supposed to board PNS Zulfiqar approached the docked ship in an inflatable boat, wearing Marine uniforms.

    "The gunner felt they were too close and their weapons appeared to be AK-47s, which aren't standard Marine issue," a Pakistani security official said. "The gunner turned his sights on them and fired a warning shot. The militants, fearing the game was up, also retaliated with rockets and automatic weapons."At the sound of the firing, Marines and naval commandos rushed to the ship and were engaged by the renegade officers awaiting the militants on the inflatable boat.

    While those on board the ship continued to fight it out for a few hours, the ones in the inflatable boat had no chance, security officials said. The gunner ripped apart the boat with his Gatling antiaircraft gun, killing all six in the boat.

    The four rogue naval men were killed aboard the frigate, officials said. The battle ended when the last surviving rogue naval officer—a young Navy sublieutenant—blew himself up after being surrounded.

    Pakistani military officials are divided over how much damage could have been accomplished. "Taking over an attack frigate is not a joke, as measures are already in place to face eventualities such as mutiny," one said.

    Among those killed on the inflatable boat was former Pakistan Navy Lt. Owais Jakhrani. Officials said he had been recently dismissed for harboring extremist views. He was the son of a serving Karachi police superintendent, and Pakistani intelligence officials believe he played the key role in recruiting naval personnel to al Qaeda.Four other people involved in the attack were later arrested, Pakistan officials say.

    "I can neither confirm nor deny the involvement of naval officials," said the Pakistan Navy's spokesman, Commodore Nadeem Bokhari. "All I can say is that four of the attackers were arrested, the attack was successfully prevented and investigations into it are continuing."

    Al Qaeda's claim of responsibility includes a photo of what it says are the target U.S. ships—possibly taken earlier by one of the renegade Pakistani naval officers. Al Qaeda's statement also included a diagram of the layout of PNS Zulfiqar.

    A Western counterterrorism official said the intended target could have been an American naval supply ship deployed in the Indian Ocean.

    "If they hadn't been detected, the minimal damage would have been similar to the USS Cole in 2000. However, if they had somehow managed to maneuver the weapons systems, then we are talking about a full scale naval engagement," said another Pakistani security official.

    The attempted strike was initially claimed by the Pakistani Taliban, which works closely with al Qaeda. Then, on Sept. 10, the new al Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent issued its own claim.

    "The naval officers who had captured the PNS Zulfiqar intended to use it to attack American ships and Marines," said the AQIS statement. "They were ready to render any sacrifice, including carrying out a martyrdom operation and were only prevented by bombardment by the Pakistan Navy."

    The newly appointed AQIS chief, Asim Umar, is largely unknown, officials say, but the group's top military council includes several well-known Pakistani militants.

    Following the Sept. 6 raid, three naval officials were arrested in Quetta near the Afghan border. Security officials said, as they were trying to flee to Taliban- and al Qaeda-controlled havens along the border or within Afghanistan.
    LINK

    I didnt see this story pop up when I searched for it. If it has been previously posted, my apologies.
    "We are all special cases." - Camus

  • #2
    Honestly, how did the terrorists think they were going to be able to take the frigate out of the harbor, assuming that their collaborators could actually get the ship to move?

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Skywatcher View Post
      Honestly, how did the terrorists think they were going to be able to take the frigate out of the harbor, assuming that their collaborators could actually get the ship to move?
      There were Pakistani Naval Officers ONBOARD the ship. Some were killed, one blew himself up.
      "We are all special cases." - Camus

      Comment


      • #4
        I guess what I am trying to say is that these officers had access, and they would have authority. Remove the senior leadership, or even just the CO, and this could have been an absolute disaster.
        "We are all special cases." - Camus

        Comment


        • #5
          So what happens if a combatant like a Burke gets taken/goes rogue/mutinies? Those ships seem like they could do one hell of a lot of damage in a relatively short amount of time.

          Does the USN send a task force to sink them? Try to negotiate?

          God forbid that ever happen to a nuclear sub. They could probably hide until they ran out of food!

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by SteveDaPirate View Post
            So what happens if a combatant like a Burke gets taken/goes rogue/mutinies? Those ships seem like they could do one hell of a lot of damage in a relatively short amount of time.

            Does the USN send a task force to sink them? Try to negotiate?

            God forbid that ever happen to a nuclear sub. They could probably hide until they ran out of food!
            PN does not operate any ship as large and powerful as a Burke class. They do have a few OHP frigates and Chinese F-22Ps. Limited land attack capability but decent anti-ship weaponry. If they actually manage to take one of these, they must already be aware it is a suicide mission. Negotiating won't work. Only thing that remains to be seen is whether they will attack nearby PN/merchant ships in Karachi or make a dash for the Indian coast to cause some damage to the IN.

            Comment


            • #7
              I thought they were friends

              Good taliban/ bad taliban, good islamist/ bad islamist, freedom fighter/ terrorist and all that.
              "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Firestorm View Post
                PN does not operate any ship as large and powerful as a Burke class. They do have a few OHP frigates and Chinese F-22Ps. Limited land attack capability but decent anti-ship weaponry. If they actually manage to take one of these, they must already be aware it is a suicide mission. Negotiating won't work. Only thing that remains to be seen is whether they will attack nearby PN/merchant ships in Karachi or make a dash for the Indian coast to cause some damage to the IN.
                All I know is that if a PN frigate hijacked by terrorists make an attack against India or any of its ships, it is tantamount to declaration of war under the rules of engagement/war. It would be the complete responsibility of Pakistan to ensure that any of its ships could not be used against India if it does not want a strong response from India. That is my view.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I'd imagine that the Pakistani's would immediately take measures to declare a mutiny and take all measures themselves to sink or retake the ship. Anything less would immediately place any military relationships they had on near-permanent hold, not something they'd desire.
                  In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

                  Leibniz

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Even if they try to make it to Indian cost, being a ship belonging to PN wouldn't it be sinked the moment it touches Indian waters before it can do any real damage ?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
                      I'd imagine that the Pakistani's would immediately take measures to declare a mutiny and take all measures themselves to sink or retake the ship. Anything less would immediately place any military relationships they had on near-permanent hold, not something they'd desire.
                      They also need to make clear to their sailors that they will sink any such vessel or use any force necessary to stop it. It strikes me that you are going to need more than a few people to make sure that the ship you seize goes where you want it to & shoots at what you want it to. How many people do you need to make a ship do what you want it to & how easy is it for non-cooperative crew members to sabotage your efforts? If you know that you are probably going to die if the ship stays under the command of the terrorists it might make the threats of death they are using a little less persuasive.

                      Hopefully we never find out how this will play out.
                      sigpic

                      Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        4 officers may have taken the frigate, but they wouldn't have been able to utilise it without a full crew. A wake up call, but not a real threat.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by chanjyj View Post
                          4 officers may have taken the frigate, but they wouldn't have been able to utilise it without a full crew. A wake up call, but not a real threat.
                          There were 8 officers in total that were part of it, and there has been reports that there were several enlisted men as well. Not to mention the 4 guys rocking AK-47's on the rubber craft. On a crew of 170, that's not a bad ratio. Also, depending on how they played it, many onboard might not even be aware that something was happening. All it takes is one "O" with weapons release authority. It's not like the engineers, deckhands, and cooks (the 3 largest departments on a ship) are going to be worried about what the C4 folks are doing, or even have access. The very fact that these guys were on the boat in the first place is a real threat. Considering the fact it was due to take over as the lead ship of CTF150, coalition forces in the GOO/GOA, wouldn't worry about this vessel getting close to them. Their intentions were to attack USNS vessels, as stated by AQIS.
                          "We are all special cases." - Camus

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by commander View Post
                            Even if they try to make it to Indian cost, being a ship belonging to PN wouldn't it be sinked the moment it touches Indian waters before it can do any real damage ?
                            I couldn't see this getting that close to the Indian coast, even though they do have some good range on their C-802 and wouldn't need to come within Indian waters. Given the amount of naval activity out of Mumbai, I wouldn't expect it. Also, India wasn't the target.
                            "We are all special cases." - Camus

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X