Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
September 28, 2008
No More Ground Attacks on Pakistan?

It seems that the U.S. government finally understood that invading tribal areas in Pakistan will not help the situation there and in Afghanistan:

U.S. special operations forces have paused ground operations in Pakistan’s tribal areas, but military and civilian government officials differ over why the cross-border raids have been halted.

But this stay may only be a temporary:

“We are now working with the Pakistanis to make sure that those type of ground-type insertions do not happen, at least for a period of time to give them an opportunity to do what they claim they are desiring to do,” the Pentagon official said, adding that this did not apply to air strikes launched from unmanned aerial vehicles at targets inside the tribal areas.


[A] U.S. government official closely involved with policy in the Afghanistan-Pakistan region said the military had underestimated the Pakistani response and was reconsidering its options.

Really the military? It seems that someone who ordered the Joint Special Forces Command to do the raid has gone wild with these attacks and that there was no coordination with other forces in the area.

Jeff Huber points out that instead of unity of command there are at least four U.S. chains of fools that act independent of each other. ISAF/NATO is under the U.S. European command, the area logistics for Afghanistan and Pakistan fall under Central Command, the special forces that raided Pakistan are under Joint Special Forces Command and the drone flights that attempt targeted killing are a CIA operation with support from the U.S. Northern Command. There is also a split between the military and the State Department and a hodgepodge of uncoordinated aid agencies that trample on each other feet while ignoring the Afghan government.

This seems to be a somewhat intentional construct by the White House which wants real command power only for itself and thereby creates the typical mess:

The raid represented “a strategic
miscalculation,” the U.S. government official said. “We did not fully
appreciate the vehemence of the Pakistani response,” which included the
Pakistan government’s implication that it was willing to cut the
coalition’s supply lines through Pakistan. “I don’t think we really
believed it was going to go to that level,” the government official
said.

In the White House sits a gung-ho president who loves to hear Tom
Clancy like stories of special operations. It is he who ordered the
raids:

When
JSOC forces cross the border into Pakistan, they do so only after
receiving clearances from the highest levels of the U.S. government,
sources said. However, exactly who has the authority to approve JSOC’s
missions into Pakistan is shrouded in secrecy.

“Even a missile strike requires the highest level of authority,” a special operations officer with Afghanistan experience said.

Asked who would have to sign off on a mission into Pakistan, he replied: “The president, no doubt in my mind. The president.”

While
ground raids were halted for now, I expect that there will be continued
bombing from Unmanned Ariel Vehicles, like the one the Pakistanis shoot down last week. (Though maybe that one was a British drone.)

In other news the British Observer reports
on talks between the Afghan Government and the Taliban, supported by
Britain and most important by Saudi Arabia. The idea is to bring some
Taliban commander like Mullah Omar into the government. The Taliban
demand, while not yet sufficiently clear, includes an end of the
foreign occupation.

An accompanying piece finds it unlikely that the U.S. would agree to this:

Hekmat
Karzai, director of a think tank in Kabul, said that although
discussions with the Taliban ‘might not be too difficult… getting the
international community on board would be extremely hard’.

The Saudis will have to pressure Washington to give the plan some chance.

Comments

“We did not fully appreciate the vehemence of the Pakistani response” .
Did he really say that? If so, what did he mean by it? Had he said, for example, “We did not fully anticipate the vehemence, etc.”, or “We do not fully appreciate [i.e. understand] the vehemence, etc.”, then the comment would be crystal clear. Sort of.
Or did he mean “appreciate” in the sense of “to welcome”, “to receive with gratitude”–as in “We did not fully receive with gratitude the vehemence of the Pakistani response”?… If so, then he’s certainly signalling further American mischief on Pakistani soil.
If I were a Pakistani in “Pushtunistan”, I’d be rounding up all the Pathans I could find, and point them at every American I could find, and leave them to their own devices.
As for those drones, how do you shoot them down with groundfire? With SAMs,maybe? Just wondering. (The embedded Oliver North could help us with this one.)

Posted by: alabama | Sep 28 2008 22:25 utc | 1

when will the planet rise up and just slay every single amerikan ( tourist, business person, diplomat, military, etc etc ) on their soil ?? could amerika attack every single country in retaliation ?? does the planet really need amerika that much / badly ?? and when do Iraq, Germany, Japan, Korea, etc etc say ‘time for you to leave our soil. amerikans’ ??

Posted by: At The Gates Of Stalingrad | Sep 28 2008 22:40 utc | 2

Good point about the ‘appreciate’ alabama. I suppose we are so used to language being mangled by everyone considered a spokesman, low level technocrat all the way to the prez, that the routine misuse of appreciate went un-noticed.
It would be my wish that what has happened is that the Pakistani military have developed a method for knocking drones out of the sky and they will to use this unless USuk run all operations past them for approval. I realise that is very likely not what has happened, which leaves one still as perplexed as ever about how the disconnect which says unmanned bombing with high collateral damage is OK, but ground invasions are not came about.
By that I mean obviously ground invasions are an egregious attack on a nation’s sovereignty yet somehow we are led to believe aerial attacks are not?
Long ago the world made an unfortunate differentiation between bombs dropped from several miles high and bombs detonated by the bomber holding them close. The first is fine and civilised but the second uncivilised and evil. A cynic such as myself might imagine that since the former requires millions $’s of hi tech destruction and the second can be achieved by any peasant with fertiliser, tractor fuel and the courage of his/her convictions, the distinction is really about the right of the rich to kill but the the poor do not have the right to defend themselves.
But back to the sovereignty issue. Apparently we are told that invasion of airspace, even if it is for the purpose of killing women and children is not a crime, but invasion of ground pace for the same reason is.
So let us hope that the Pakistani military have developed a way to shoot down these cruel and indiscriminate machines. If Pakistan has, it may be amerika is about to have reinforced on them that buying a figurehead commander-in-chief doesn’t buy the military.
Of course the whole strategy is as outlandish as it is impractical. Most of us here at MoA are well versed in the reasons why it is that Pakistan has avoided putting the mark of Islamabad onto the so called tribal areas. amerika attempting what Pakistan had always avoided, will create the very situation that amerika claims to want to stop.
Then they will encourage the Pathans to begin a Pashtun liberation movement. That will be easily as bad for everyone including amerika as the amerikan influence on kurdish self-determination has been. that is Afghanistan is a multi-cultural nation as well so the Pathans of Pakistan won’t be agitating for the right to join Afghanistan, Pathans on both sides of the border will be agitating for a new state carved outta both the others. Karzai will love that because once the Waziris have gotten their own self determination fight going once more, the Baluchis et al will get in on the act.
The positives alabama? Well if it is true that these murders on union hours including lunch breaks have to be individually approved by the prez, prosecuting shrub for war crimes should be straightforward.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Sep 29 2008 1:12 utc | 3