What's new

Pakistan: Hello al-Qaeda, goodbye America

Tiki Tam Tam

<b>MILITARY PROFESSIONALS</b>
Joined
May 15, 2006
Messages
9,330
Reaction score
0
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/HI08Df03.html

South Asia
Sep 8, 2006


Pakistan: Hello al-Qaeda, goodbye America



By Syed Saleem Shahzad

MIRANSHAH, North Waziristan - With a truce between the Pakistani Taliban and Islamabad now in place, the Pakistani government is in effect reverting to its pre-September 11, 2001, position in which it closed its eyes to militant groups allied with al-Qaeda and clearly sided with the Taliban in Afghanistan.

While the truce has generated much attention, a more significant development is an underhand deal between pro-al-Qaeda elements and Pakistan in which key al-Qaeda figures will either
not be arrested or those already in custody will be set free. This has the potential to sour Islamabad's relations with Washington beyond the point of no return.

On Tuesday, Pakistan agreed to withdraw its forces from the restive Waziristan tribal areas bordering Afghanistan in return for a pledge from tribal leaders to stop attacks by Pakistani Taliban across the border.

Most reports said that the stumbling block toward signing this truce had been the release of tribals from Pakistani custody. But most tribals had already been released.

The main problem - and one that has been unreported - was to keep Pakistan authorities' hands off members of banned militant organizations connected with al-Qaeda.

Thus, for example, it has now been agreed between militants and Islamabad that Pakistan will not arrest two high-profile men on the "most wanted" list that includes Osama bin Laden, his deputy Ayman al-Zawahiri and Taliban leader Mullah Omar.

Saud Memon and Ibrahim Choto are the only Pakistanis on this list, and they will be left alone. Saud Memon was the owner of the lot where US journalist Daniel Pearl was tortured, executed and buried in January 2002 in Karachi after being kidnapped by jihadis.
Pakistan has also agreed that many people arrested by law-enforcement agencies in Pakistan will be released from jail.

Importantly, this includes Ghulam Mustafa, who was detained by Pakistani authorities late last year. Mustafa is reckoned as al-Qaeda's chief in Pakistan. (See Al-Qaeda's man who knows too much, Asia Times Online, January 5. As predicted in that article, Mustafa did indeed disappear into a "black hole" and was never formally charged, let alone handed over to the US.)

Asia Times Online contacts expect Mustafa to be released in the next few days. He was once close to bin Laden and has intimate knowledge of al-Qaeda's logistics, its financing and its nexus with the military in Pakistan.

Militants at large
"Now they [Pakistani authorities] have accepted us as true representatives of the mujahideen," Wazir Khan told Asia Times Online at a religious congregation in Miranshah. "Now we are no longer criminals, but part and parcel of every deal. Even the authorities have given tacit approval that they would not have any objections if I and other fellows who were termed as wanted took part in negotiations."

Wazir Khan was once a high-profile go-between for bin Laden and one of his closest Waziristan contacts. He was right up there on the "wanted" list. Now he can move around in the open. "The situation is diametrically changed," he said.

From a personal point of view, things have changed for Wazir Khan and others like him, but in the bigger picture things have also changed diametrically.

Pakistan, the leading light in the United States' "war on terror" and a "most important" non-North Atlantic Treaty Organization ally, is returning to the heady times of before September 11 when it could dabble without restraint in regional affairs, and this at a time when Afghanistan is boiling.

"The post-September 11 situation [in Pakistan] was draconian," a prominent militant told Asia Times Online on condition of anonymity. "All jihadi organizations were informed in advance how they would be [severely] dealt with in the future and that they had better carve out an alternative low-profile strategy. But some people could not stop themselves from unnecessary adventures and created problems for the establishment. This gave the US the chance to intervene in Pakistan, and over 700 al-Qaeda mujahideen were arrested.

"Now the situation changed again ... we know the state of Pakistan is important for the Pakistan army, but certainly we know that the army would never completely compromise on Islam."

The truce between Islamabad and the Pakistani Taliban in Waziristan has been a bitter pill for Washington to swallow, although Pakistan's pledge to allow foreign troops based in Afghanistan hot pursuit into a limited area in Pakistan softens the blow a bit.

Islamabad's overriding concern, though, is to earn some breathing space domestically, as well as get Uncle Sam off its back.

The situation in Waziristan was becoming unmanageable - it's already virtually a separate state - and trouble is ongoing in restive Balochistan province, especially since the killing at the hands of Pakistani security forces of nationalist leader Nawab Akbar Bugti. Fractious opposition political parties have shown rare unity in attacking the government of President General Pervez Musharraf on the issue.

Redrawing the map
An article by retired US Major Ralph Peters titled "Blood borders" published in the Armed Forces Journal last month has given Pakistan some food for thought over manipulating the geopolitical game on its own terms and conditions.

Peters, formerly assigned to the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence, where he was responsible for future warfare, argues that borders in the Middle East and Africa are "the most arbitrary and distorted" in the world and need restructuring.

Four countries - Pakistan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Turkey - are singled out for major readjustments. Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are also defined as "unnatural states".

Though the US State Department was quick to deny that such ideas had anything to do with US policymaking, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Turkey read much between the lines of talk of restructuring their boundaries.

Among Peters' proposals was the need to establish "an independent Kurdish state" that would "stretch from Diyarbakir [eastern Turkey] through Tabriz [Iran], which would be the most pro-Western state between Bulgaria and Japan".

Pakistani Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz recently visited Turkey and then Lebanon, where he announced that his country would not send any peacekeeping troops to the latter. Ankara then said that if peacekeeping forces tried to disarm Hezbollah, Turkey would pull out of the peace mission. These decisions are the result of back-channel diplomacy among Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan.

Across Pakistan's border in Afghanistan, the Taliban have control of most of the southwest of the country, from where Mullah Omar is expected soon to announce the revival of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan - the name of the country before the Taliban were driven out in 2001. Once the proclamation is made, a big push toward the capital Kabul will begin.

The sounds of jail doors opening in Pakistan will jar with the United States, as will Islamabad adopting a more independent foreign policy and, crucially, aligning itself with the resurgent Taliban in Afghanistan, which once again could become a Pakistani playground.

Syed Saleem Shahzad is Asia Times Online's Pakistan Bureau Chief. He can be reached at saleem_shahzad2002@yahoo.com.

(Copyright 2006 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing .)

Quo Vadis?
 
A lot of panic over the wrong things.

Bin Laden's still wanted.
 
Firstly, there is no good bye America or supporting of Al-Qaeda.

Secondly, U.S is looking at these deals very closely, also the deal was consulted before it was put into action.

Bush says US watching Pakistan deal with militants
WASHINGTON, Sept 7 (Reuters) - A peace deal between Pakistan and pro-Taliban militants does not give "safe haven" to terrorists who may be hiding on tribal lands near the Pakistani-Afghan border, U.S. President George W. Bush said in an interview on Thursday.

"I don't read it that way," Bush said of the agreement Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf's government signed on Tuesday in which the militants agreed to stop attacks in the region.

"What he is doing is entering agreements with governors in the regions of the country, in the hopes that there would be an economic vitality, there will be alternatives to violence and terror," Bush said in an ABC News interview.

Hundreds of Pakistani troops and militants have been killed in the Waziristan region as the Pakistani government has attempted to push its authority into semi-autonomous tribal lands on the Afghan border as part of efforts in the U.S.-led war on terrorism.

Many members of the al Qaeda network and the Taliban fled to Waziristan after U.S.-led forces overthrew the Taliban in Afghanistan in late 2001. Tuesday's agreement said foreigners could stay in Waziristan as long as they kept the peace.

Bush said he did not know all the details of the agreement but added that he would be seeing Musharraf "pretty soon."

"You know, we are watching this very carefully, obviously," Bush said. "We have made it clear that, uh, he should not provide an environment that enables people to go from his country into Afghanistan."

"I will tell you this: President Musharraf, in my conversations with him, and I talk to him quite frequently, fully understands, and does not want his country to become a launching pad for military actions against neighbors and/or U.S. troops," Bush said.
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N07309127.htm
 
:) The US top officials were yesterday quoted in Newspaper saying the signing of the peace agreement is Pakistan's internal affair.

and the agreement is not with the Al-qaeda rather ist with the locals, which certainly will prevent any shletr to the foreign elements.
 
They did the exact same thing in the South last year and there was no one who raised an eyebrow.
 
A lot of panic over the wrong things.

Bin Laden's still wanted.

This article however begs to differ"

Pakistan Offers Osama Bin Laden A Deal

September 5, 2006 10:43 p.m. EST

Matthew Borghese - All Headline News Staff Writer

Islamabad, Pakistan (AHN) - After signing a truce with pro-Taliban militants on its border with Afghanistan, Pakistan is now extending the olive branch to America's most wanted man; Osama bin Laden.

Pakistani officials tell ABC that the leader of the terror group al-Qaeda, and the mastermind of the September 11th attacks in the U.S. will not face capture if he agrees to lead a "peaceful life."

Major General Shaukat Sultan Khan says that "as long as one is being like a peaceful citizen" bin Laden "would not be taken into custody."

Currently, the U.S. says bin Laden is hiding in the mountainous and tribal regions on the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan; yet intelligence is unable to pinpoint a specific location as of yet.

Now, ABC News consultant Richard Clarke, the former White House counter-terrorism director explains, "What this means is that the Taliban and al Qaeda leadership have effectively carved out a sanctuary inside Pakistan."

The news comes as yet another blow as the White House says America is still no safer five years after 9/11 than it was on the day it was attacked. President Bush is currently touring the country, making speeches to shore up support for the GOP during an election year.

http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7004763605

5
 
Have you tried to find out whether that article is accurate?

It's unlikely that after all the bloodshed, and commitment they'd do something like that.

You seem to want to believe it, and that's enough for you I guess.
 
They did the exact same thing in the South last year and there was no one who raised an eyebrow.
Exactly!

Whatever is happening in our backyard is our concern and we'll deal with it properly, putting our national interests first.
In the longer run, it will be us and Afghanistan only, US and Nato will leave once their interests have been served.
 
This article however begs to differ"
It's lying, there has been swift denial to such assumptions. The deal was with tribes of N. Waziristan, a deal which de-militarizes the Taliban as a force to operate anywhere out of Waziristan.

The rest has all been assumptions which started off with "OMG!" + panic statement.
 
This article however begs to differ"

Woohoo "headlinenews"...like that is up there with the other news big hitters...:whatever:

Lets get a little real here please.

The situation in FATA is that there has to be some normalcy for both US and Pakistan to be able to do what they have to do for Afghanistan....had the Americans not bought onto this, GoP would not be putting their pointman Aurakzai in front of the tribals.
 
Quo Vadis?


Syed Saleem Shehzad is the most unprofessional prolific writer about Pakistan and here I am being nice ;)

Only God knows what this guy's angle and origins are as he never ever discloses his sources...always relies on shady sources labelled "inside sources, high level sources" etc. etc. that pretty much any two-bit journalist can pull out of his arse. So when it comes to this Shehzad joker and AT with regards to the ongoings in Pakistan, I can't really buy anything.

" Asia Times Online contacts", now what the hell kind of trash is that?? Always unverifiable, discrete suggestions that always bode something bad for Pakistan....this is what we call propaganda at work.

Give me a break on his bs theory that Pakistan would give up its relations with the US (which have been a bedrock of our foreign policy since 1951) in order to support Taliban...yeah right! This aint happening under PM's watch.
 
Exactly!

Whatever is happening in our backyard is our concern and we'll deal with it properly, putting our national interests first.
In the longer run, it will be us and Afghanistan only, US and Nato will leave once their interests have been served.

Well, lets just say if the news is true, then making a deal with OBL is not just Pakistan's internal issue.
 
It's lying, there has been swift denial to such assumptions. The deal was with tribes of N. Waziristan, a deal which de-militarizes the Taliban as a force to operate anywhere out of Waziristan.

The rest has all been assumptions which started off with "OMG!" + panic statement.


The interview with Saukat has been recorded. So says the ABC

Therefore, if the news guys are lying, then they should be sued for defamation.

I am sure Sultan will initiate the case if indeed they are lying.

The news reports says it has been recorded. If they are so bold as to sort of throw a challenge, sort of, then one wonders.

Maj-Gen Shaukat Sultan's comments came after a US network broadcast remarks by him saying Bin Laden would remain free if he was "a peaceful citizen".

ABC News recorded the interview after Pakistan struck a deal with pro-Taleban militants on the Afghan border.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/5320116.stm
 
The interview with Saukat has been recorded. So says the ABC

Therefore, if the news guys are lying, then they should be sued for defamation.

I am sure Sultan will initiate the case if indeed they are lying.

The news reports says it has been recorded. If they are so bold as to sort of throw a challenge, sort of, then one wonders.

I do not think this is a case of defamation rather mis-quoting or wrongly interpreting the comments. Minor screw-up on the part of ISPR spokesman...OBL is no getting a free "get out of jail" pass this easy.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom