U.S. Blames Pakistan-Based Group for Attack on Embassy in Kabul

[Barney Stinson]

---

---

In lengthy talks, U.S. presses Pakistan on Haqqanis

(Reuters) - Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pressed Pakistan in 3-1/2 hours of talks on Sunday to attack the Haqqani network militant group Washington blames for a recent attack on the U.S. embassy in Kabul, a senior U.S. official said.

The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the issue of counterterrorism in general and the Haqqani network in particular were the first and last topics discussed by Clinton and Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar.

The Haqqani network is one of three, and perhaps the most feared, of the Taliban-allied insurgent factions fighting U.S.-led NATO and Afghan troops in neighboring Afghanistan.

Insurgents in a bomb-laden truck occupied a building in Kabul on Tuesday, raining rockets and gunfire on the U.S. embassy and other targets in the diplomatic quarter of the Afghan capital, and battled police during a 20-hour siege.

Five Afghan police and 11 civilians were killed.

"Obviously the issue of counterterrorism was both the first issue and the last issue on their agenda," State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland told reporters, describing the meeting as "very substantial, very candid."

A second senior U.S. official, who spoke to reporters on condition of anonymity, said it had always been Clinton's plan to have two to three hours of talks with Khar to discuss U.S.-Pakistan relations, which are marked by deep distrust.

"The attacks in Kabul on the 13th of September changed the nature of the meeting," he said. "The issue of counterterrorism and particularly the issue of the Haqqani network was ... the first thing on the secretary's agenda and also the last."

'PAKISTAN'S GOT TO DEAL WITH IT'

"What we said was that this is a huge problem and that Pakistan's got to deal with it," he added.

While he said the two discussed things Pakistan could do on its own to attack the Haqqani network as well as actions that the countries could take together, it was unclear if the United States secured any explicit commitments from Pakistan.

The U.S. ambassador to Pakistan, Cameron Munter, told Radio Pakistan in blunt comments that aired on Saturday that "there is evidence linking the Haqqani network to the Pakistan government. This is something that must stop."

The senior U.S. official suggested Clinton had discussed evidence of such links with Khar and also specific steps that Pakistan could take against the militant group but he offered no details.

"There are clearly actions that the Pakistanis could take to go after the Haqqani network and I thought the minister was quite clear in saying that those were the kinds of things that the Pakistani government would look at and ... take action on," he added.

Washington blames militants sheltering in Pakistan for violence in Afghanistan. The discovery of Osama bin Laden in a Pakistani town, where he was killed this year by U.S. commandos, has aggravated tensions between the two countries.

Islamabad says its forces are taking heavy casualties fighting insurgents and bristles at any suggestion it provides support for fighters.

The Haqqanis are thought to have introduced suicide bombing to Afghanistan, and are believed to have been behind high-profile attacks there, including a raid on Kabul's top hotel and an assassination attempt on the president.

In one example of the Haqqani group's effectiveness, they are believed to have helped an al Qaeda suicide bomber who killed seven CIA agents at a U.S. base in eastern Afghanistan last year, the deadliest strike on the agency in decades.

In lengthy talks, U.S. presses Pakistan on Haqqanis | Reuters

[Ahmad]

(Reuters) - Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pressed Pakistan in 3-1/2 hours of talks on Sunday to attack the Haqqani network militant group Washington blames for a recent attack on the U.S. embassy in Kabul, a senior U.S. official said.

Pakistan has clearly said, the Haqanis are not hurting us so we are not going after them, can not the Americans get this? Either do something about the Haqanis boldy by yourself or else stop moarning.

[Hammad Khan]

Pakistan has clearly said, the Haqanis are not hurting us so we are not going after them, can not the Americans get this? Either do something about the Haqanis boldy by yourself or else stop moarning.

Original Post By Ahmad

and the haqqanis have said they are not operating from pakistan, the damage they are doing to allies read both the side of news first

[Sanjeeb Bose]

Pakistan has clearly said, the Haqanis are not hurting us so we are not going after them, can not the Americans get this? Either do something about the Haqanis boldy by yourself or else stop moarning.

Original Post By Ahmad

Pakistan will never attack Haqqani group, these proxy group are being fed by Pakistan for its own strategic end game in Afghanistan once the US led forces leave, anyway I am not sure how much successful Pakistan will achieve that time will tell, most of the Afghans understands Pakistan's ill intention.

These ISI sponsored Haqqani cowards does not have the courage to fight ANA & US / NATO forces face to face. Terrorism is the only means under their masters plan.

Pakistan has not learned a lesson or two from the long Afghan war and the destruction it brings still today, Pakistan will pay as it is doing now for sponsoring terrorism in other countries.

[DV RULES]

Blame game should not be continuing because Pakistan and US have to find solution of their interests on equal level. The attack was security lap and showed incompetence of ISAF in Afghanistan. Afghanistan has to reform its army in order to bring peace along with their border.

[Ahmad]

and the haqqanis have said they are not operating from pakistan, the damage they are doing to allies read both the side of news first

Original Post By Hammad Khan

and it will be silly to accept what they say. do you expect to hear something different from them.

[Roy]

Panetta, Mullen hammer Pakistan over Haqqani network | World | DAWN.COM

WASHINGTON: The United States on Tuesday renewed blunt demands that Pakistan crack down on Haqqani militants allegedly based in the country, saying the network posed a serious threat to US forces in Afghanistan.

Defence Secretary Leon Panetta told reporters that Washington would “put as much pressure as possible on the Pakistanis to exercise control from their side of the border.”“We’ve continued to state that this cannot happen, we cannot have the Haqqanis coming across the border, attacking our forces, attacking Afghanistan…and then disappearing back into a safe haven. That is not tolerable,” Panetta said. He added: “I think they’ve heard the message, but we’ll see.”

Panetta’s comments reflect a tougher public US line in recent days amid growing frustration in President Barack Obama’s administration over the role of the Haqqani network. The stern warnings also coincide with increasingly strained relations with Pakistan. The Americans blame the Haqqani network for a recent bombing attack that wounded 77 US troops at a base in Wardak province and for an elaborate assault on September 13 on the US embassy and Nato headquarters in Kabul.

Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said at an earlier event Tuesday the presence of the Haqqani sanctuaries potentially jeopardised the outcome of the war. “Without that (Pakistani action), we can’t succeed in the overall effort,” he said. Mullen said Pakistan’s ISI intelligence agency had to sever all ties with the Haqqani militants, who allegedly operate out of sanctuaries in the country’s northwest.

“I think that the ISI has to make the decision to strategically disengage. The ISI has been doing this, supporting proxies for an extended period of time,” he told an audience at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Mullen met with his Pakistani counterpart over the weekend in Spain, General Ashfaq Kayani, and repeated Washington’s impatience on the Haqqani militants. At the Pentagon press conference, Mullen — who has held numerous talks with Kayani during his four year tenure — said there was no doubt about “the clarity with which I addressed this issue” in the meeting with the Pakistani general.

[Hembo]

and the haqqanis have said they are not operating from pakistan, the damage they are doing to allies read both the side of news first

Original Post By Hammad Khan

Even OBL and other Al-Qaeda & Taliban operatives were not operating from inside Pakistan, i.e., till the time they were discovered & nutralized inside Pakistan. Probably they just flew in seconds before being killed/ captured just like Haqqanis will.

We all get it..

[Mike]

WASHINGTON: The United States on Tuesday renewed blunt demands that Pakistan crack down on Haqqani militants allegedly based in the country, saying the network posed a serious threat to US forces in Afghanistan.

Defence Secretary Leon Panetta told reporters that Washington would “put as much pressure as possible on the Pakistanis to exercise control from their side of the border.”

“We’ve continued to state that this cannot happen, we cannot have the Haqqanis coming across the border, attacking our forces, attacking Afghanistan…and then disappearing back into a safe haven. That is not tolerable,” Panetta said.

He added: “I think they’ve heard the message, but we’ll see.”

Panetta’s comments reflect a tougher public US line in recent days amid growing frustration in President Barack Obama’s administration over the role of the Haqqani network.

The stern warnings also coincide with increasingly strained relations with Pakistan.

The Americans blame the Haqqani network for a recent bombing attack that wounded 77 US troops at a base in Wardak province and for an elaborate assault on September 13 on the US embassy and Nato headquarters in Kabul.

Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said at an earlier event Tuesday the presence of the Haqqani sanctuaries potentially jeopardised the outcome of the war.

“Without that (Pakistani action), we can’t succeed in the overall effort,” he said.

Mullen said Pakistan’s ISI intelligence agency had to sever all ties with the Haqqani militants, who allegedly operate out of sanctuaries in the country’s northwest.

“I think that the ISI has to make the decision to strategically disengage. The ISI has been doing this, supporting proxies for an extended period of time,” he told an audience at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Mullen met with his Pakistani counterpart over the weekend in Spain, General Ashfaq Kayani, and repeated Washington’s impatience on the Haqqani militants.

At the Pentagon press conference, Mullen — who has held numerous talks with Kayani during his four year tenure — said there was no doubt about “the clarity with which I addressed this issue” in the meeting with the Pakistani general.

The trouble is that the U.S. can only do so much. The CIA and ISI are too intertwined for affecting a paradigm shift in Pakistan's policy of propping up the Haqqani network. Three reasons that it will be just more of the same:

1. Pakistan desperately needs to install a pliable government in Afghanistan after the withdrawal of American/ISAF from there. They've pinned their hopes on the Haqqani/Mullah Omar/Quetta Shaura based in Pakistan to take over the reins in Afghanistan. Therefore, the Pak Army/ISI will continue to support them militarily.

2. The NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan remains almost completely reliant on neighbouring Pakistan. Around 75 per cent of all non-lethal supplies required by the 130,000 ISAF troops come via the Pakistani port of Karachi and are then trucked north through two key crossing points. The Americans therefore cannot ruffle too many feathers in the Establishment as alternative routes through the CIS republics are both time consuming as well as expensive.

3. The CIA and ISI are deeply involved in the drug trade in Afghanistan, used by the ISI for funding its terror operations in India, Iran and Afghanistan, and the CIA for funding its 'Colour Revolutions' in the CIS republics, Egypt, Syria, Iran etc with a substantive amount going towards funding of top secret 'black projects' that are beyond U.S. congressional oversight. So a clean break is almost impossible at this stage.

So then, it would be interesting to see what more can the U.S. do to bring Pakistan to heel. Not much I guess!


Panetta, Mullen hammer Pakistan over Haqqani network | World | DAWN.COM

[Hembo]

September 21, 2011 2:55 AM
U.S. to Pakistan: Get Haqqani, or we will




WASHINGTON | Wed Sep 21, 2011 3:23am EDT
U.S. says Pakistan's ISI using group for "proxy war"

[Hembo]

Pasha meets Petraeus in Washington to discuss Haqqani network
By Huma Imtiaz
Published: September 21, 2011

WASHINGTON: Amidst growing pressure on Pakistan to act against the Haqqani Network, Pakistan ISI chief General Ahmed Shuja Pasha visited Washington DC quietly on Tuesday for a one day visit to meet with his CIA counterpart General David Petraeus.
As first reported by Washington Post, the CIA officially declined to comment on whether the meeting had taken place. However, sources said that General Pasha had met with David Petraeus, CIA officials at the CIA headquarters in Langley and separately with senior White House officials at Ambassador Husain Haqqani’s residence in Washington before leaving for Islamabad. The Post reported that the Haqqani Network was the focus of their discussions.

The meeting between the intelligence chiefs was the third high level meeting in a week to discuss the Haqqani Network and its presence in Pakistan. With US officials urging Pakistan to take action. On Sunday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met with Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar in New York, where the first and last thing discussed was the Haqqani Network.

On Friday, US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen met COAS General Kayani in Seville, Spain for four hours, where he reiterated his desire for Pakistan to take action against the group.

On Tuesday, Admiral Mullen had said that he had no doubt that the Haqqani Network was responsible for the attacks on the US Embassy and NATO HQ in Kabul on September 13, and the attack on US soldiers in Wardak on September 11 in Afghanistan. Admiral Mullen also said that the ISI, supporting proxies, must disengage from this part of their strategy.

US military trainings in Pakistan suspended

With calls of ‘do more’ coming from both sides among plummeting bi-lateral relations, US military, which had been training Pakistani troops, has suspended their programs upon request from the Pakistani government.

The US Department of Defence spokesperson Lieutenant Colonel Elizabeth Robbins told The Express Tribune that “The number of US military personnel has been reduced and training has been suspended at the request of the Government of Pakistan.”
The spokesperson further said that while personnel had been reduced, the US military will continue deployment of a small contingent to provide support and help coordinate attacks with NATO.

“We will maintain a small presence of US military to conduct security cooperation, respond to future requests for support and to preserve military-to-military ties. We will also continue to work with the Pakistan military to improve coordination with NATO forces in Afghanistan,” the statement read.

[jack]

The “end game” is in Pakistan



The United States has turned on Pakistan with such dizzying speed over the past few weeks that it is difficult to keep pace. Yet what is clear after Admiral Mike Mullen’s extraordinarily blunt statement that the Haqqani militant network is a “veritable arm” of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency is that it now has the Pakistan army very firmly in its sights.

Mullen accused the ISI, which is effectively a wing of the Pakistan army, of supporting the Haqqani network in a truck bomb attack on a U.S. base in Afghanistan and an assault on the U.S. embassy in Kabul which led to a 20-hour siege. “We also have credible intelligence that they (the Haqqani network) were behind the June 28 attack against the Inter-Continental Hotel in Kabul and a host of other smaller but effective operations,” he said.

It was the most forthright assertion yet by the Americans that the Pakistani military is not merely turning a blind eye to militant groups based on its border with Afghanistan but actively encouraging them to attack American interests. The Pakistan army says it is overstretched as it is tackling militant groups which target Pakistan without creating new enemies by attacking Afghan militants and denies it retains links with the Haqqani network.

Just one month ago in a report titled “Pakistan, the United States and the End Game in Afghanistan” a group describing themselves as “the foreign policy elite” laid out what Pakistan wanted to happen in Afghanistan. Among their suggestions were that both the Afghan Taliban led by Mullah Mohammed Omar and the Haqqani network be included in talks on a political settlement in Afghanistan. The report was heavily criticised by those who saw it as an attempt by Pakistan to maintain its old policy of “strategic depth” – using militant proxies to stamp its influence on Afghanistan and counter India.

It looks like the United States is having none of it. I dislike the expression “end-game” applied to either Afghanistan or Pakistan (or Britain for that matter) with its implication that the people living in those countries come to an end when outside powers lose interest. But it is worth considering the expression just to show how much has changed. The so-called “end-game” is now in Pakistan.

That is not to say there are not worsening problems in Afghanistan itself, especially with the assassination of peace council chairman Burhanuddin Rabbani “laying open again the fracture lines” of civil war, as Kate Clark wrote at the Afghanistan Analysts Network. Nor is to suggest that anyone disputes the need for a political settlement in Afghanistan. Nor indeed that American tactics and strategy in Afghanistan are not open to criticism – Pakistan repeatedly says it is being used as a scapegoat for U.S. failures in Afghanistan. And nor would it be fair to dismiss Pakistan’s own concerns that by going after the Haqqani network – with its links to the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan and other militant groups – it would face even greater violence on its own soil. Those are all subjects which merit separate and serious discussion.

But it is to say that the particular end-game going on now is between the United States and the Pakistan army. Look closely at the proposition being made by Washington. According to Mullen’s testimony Pakistan – and specifically its army – must give up support for the Afghan Taliban (the so-called Quetta shura Taliban) and the Haqqani network. In return the United States will help Pakistan find “an increasing role for democratic, civilian institutions and civil society in determining Pakistan’s fate.”

Whatever language you couch that in, that is quite a difficult proposition for the Pakistan army. First it is being asked to turn on old militant proxies which for decades it saw as its main leverage against both India and a hostile Afghanistan and which for the ISI in particular were a considerable source of power. Second the army – an institution which is used to being the most powerful in Pakistan – is being asked to relinquish its dominance and cede its place to a civilian democracy. Third, even if it were willing to give up some of its power – and the considerable economic advantages that go with it – it would need to make a leap of faith that Pakistan’s warring and often corrupt politicians could get their act together to govern the country effectively.

Yet the message that appears to be being delivered by the Americans with increasing force is that if it resists, it will lose. Unlike during the Cold War when Pakistan was able to exploit U.S.-Soviet rivalry to maintain its position against India, Pakistan is looking very isolated right now. In the anti-Soviet jihad in Afghanistan in the 1980s it had American and Saudi support. This time around it is hard to find any country which will help it.

In Afghanistan ordinary people are opening blaming the ISI for the country’s troubles. Russia is worried about instability in Afghanistan spilling over into the former Soviet Central Asia and about drug smuggling pushing up the numbers of heroin addicts whose growth is already gnawing away at its economy. Moscow has been more resistant even than the United States to the idea of taking former Taliban off a UN sanctions list to create a better climate for talks. Relations with neighbouring Iran tend to go up and down, but are not helped by a spate of killings of Shi’ites by Sunni extremists in Pakistan. China is interested only in stability and securing its access through Pakistan to oil supplies and raw materials. For all Pakistan’s “deeper than the oceans” faith in Chinese friendship, it is unlikely to ride to its rescue in a confrontation with the United States over Afghanistan.

Ironically, India is being projected as a way out of the quagmire with the prospect of regional trade offered as a solution to Pakistan’s deepening economic gloom. But India – indeed far more than the United States – has tended to be more suspicious of the Pakistan military and the government has justified to its domestic critics the current peace process as a way of supporting civilian democracy in Pakistan.

So the question we need to ask is this. Will the Pakistan army fold? Institutions do not give up power easily and arguably the Pakistan army as an institution is more powerful than the individuals who lead it.

In many ways this is like a rerun of the Kargil war writ large. In 1999, the Pakistan army occupied mountain positions in the Kargil region on the Line of Control separating the Indian and Pakistani parts of the former kingdom of Jammu and Kashmir – its troops encroaching on part of the territory that was supposed to be under Indian control. In doing so, it breached a 1972 agreement with India that neither side would attempt to change the Line of Control, or ceasefire line, by force.

There was in fact an underlying – though heavily contested – logic to Pakistan’s actions in Kargil. Pakistan considered India’s occupation of Siachen (in the Karakoram mountains beyond the Line of Control) in 1984 as a similar breach of the 1972 Simla agreement. Since the late 1980s – or so I have been told by one of the generals involved – it had thought about occupying the heights above Kargil as a way of training its artillery on the main road from Kashmir towards Siachen, thereby cutting off the Indian army’s supply route.

Yet the Pakistan army had over-reached. It first denied that it had any troops in Kargil at all, saying that mujahideen and irregulars had moved into positions in the mountains as part of their campaign to free Indian Kashmir from what it calls Indian occupation. In an odd foreshadowing of the current situation in Afghanistan, it chose to launch its Kargil war at a time when India and Pakistan were engaged in peace talks. After a brief and bitter war with India, the Pakistan army was forced by international pressure — especially from the United States but more discreetly from China – into a humiliating retreat.

This time around the Pakistan army appears to have over-reached in a way which could prove to be its undoing. It has taken on the United States – a declining but still superpower – in Afghanistan. The issue here is not really who is right or wrong but rather which country can bring the greater force to bear and the greater international leverage.

The other possibility is that the confrontation between the Pakistan army and the United States could become more and more dangerous. But with its very public comments on the Haqqanis and the ISI, the United States has just rolled a dice that it hopes and believes is weighted in its favour.

Link:The “end game” is in Pakistan | Pakistan: Now or Never?

[Sanjeeb Bose]

Pakistan stands isolated and I believe USA does something concrete on ground level and make Pakistan understand that the liability of feeding terrorists like Haqqani & Mulla Omar...

Pakistan has the history of backing out when the going gets tough, this time too I see similar back out to save its own ass.

[lucifer]

why would the haqqani's themselves say that they are operating from within pakistan, when they themselves are funded by the pakistan's ISI. its a no brainer people....

[Hembo]

Pakistan will not attack Haqqani group, defying U.S.

ISLAMABAD | Mon Sep 26, 2011 10:49am IST

ISLAMABAD (Reuters) - Pakistan's military will not take action against a militant group Washington blames for an attack against its embassy in Kabul, despite mounting American pressure to do so, a Pakistani newspaper reported on Monday.

Pakistan's army chief General Ashfaq Kayani met with his top commanders on Sunday in a "special" meeting to discuss the security situation, the military said, as the war of words with the United States escalated.

That emergency meeting came against the backdrop of sharp U.S. allegations that the Pakistani army's powerful spy agency supported the Haqqani militant group Washington blames for the recent attack on its embassy and other targets in Kabul.

The commanders agreed to resist U.S. demands for a Pakistani army offensive in North Waziristan, where the United States believes the Haqqani network is based, the Express Tribune reported, quoting an unnamed military official.

"We have already conveyed to the U.S. that Pakistan cannot go beyond what it has already done," the official told the newspaper on condition of anonymity.


Pakistan blog, click blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/


The United States has long pressed its ally Pakistan to pursue the Haqqani network, one of the most lethal Taliban-allied Afghan groups fighting Western forces in Afghanistan.

Pakistan denies it supports the Haqqanis and says its army is too stretched battling its own Taliban insurgency to go after the network, which has an estimated 10,000-15,000 fighters.

Analysts say the Pakistani military could suffer heavy casualties if it were to attempt a crackdown on the group, which has developed extensive alliances with other militant organisations in the region, and has mastered the rugged mountain terrain.

Sirajuddin Haqqani, who heads the group, says it no longer needs sanctuaries in Pakistan, and it feels safe operating in Afghanistan.

Two weeks ago, militants launched an assault against the U.S. embassy and NATO headquarters in Kabul. U.S. officials blamed those attacks on the Haqqani network.

U.S. officials said there was intelligence, including intercepted phone calls, suggesting those attackers were in communication with people connected to Pakistan's principal spy agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) directorate.

In the most blunt remarks by a U.S. official since Pakistan joined the U.S.-led war on militancy in 2001, the outgoing chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, on Thursday testified before the U.S. Senate that the Haqqani militant network is a "veritable arm" of the ISI.

He also for the first time held Islamabad responsible for the Kabul attack, saying Pakistan provided support for that assault.

The Pakistan government as well as the army rejected the allegations. On Saturday night, Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani rejected U.S. allegations as a sign of American "confusion and policy disarray."

(Writing by Michael Georgy; Editing by Chris Allbritton and Daniel Magnowski)