Army Chief wanted Drone Support

http://www.dawn.com/2011/05/20/army-chief-wanted-more-drone-support.html

KARACHI: Secret internal American government cables, accessed by Dawn through WikiLeaks, provide confirmation that the US military’s drone strikes programme within Pakistan had more than just tacit acceptance of the country’s top military brass, despite public posturing to the contrary. In fact, as long ago as January 2008, the country’s military was requesting the US for greater drone back-up for its own military operations.

Previously exposed diplomatic cables have already shown that Pakistan’s civilian leaders are strongly supportive – in private – of the drone strikes on alleged militant targets in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), even as they condemn them for general consumption. But it is not just the civilian leadership that has been following a duplicitous policy on the robotic vehicles.

In a meeting on January 22, 2008 with US CENTCOM Commander Admiral William J. Fallon, Army Chief General Ashfaq Kayani requested the Americans to provide “continuous Predator coverage of the conflict area” in South Waziristan where the army was conducting operations against militants. The request is detailed in a ‘Secret’ cable sent by then US Ambassador Anne Patterson on February 11, 2008. Pakistan’s military has consistently denied any involvement in the covert programme run mainly by the CIA.

The American account of Gen Kayani’s request for “Predator coverage” does not make clear if mere air surveillance were being requested or missile-armed drones were being sought. Theoretically “Predator coverage” could simply mean air surveillance and not necessarily offensive support. However the reaction to the request suggests otherwise. According to the report of the meeting sent back to Washington by Patterson, Admiral Fallon “regretted that he did not have the assets to support this request” but offered trained US Marines (known as JTACs) to coordinate air strikes for Pakistani infantry forces on ground. General Kayani “demurred” on the offer, pointing out that having US soldiers on ground “would not be politically acceptable.”

In another meeting with US Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen over March 3-4, 2008, Kayani was asked for his help “in approving a third Restricted Operating Zone for US aircraft over the FATA.” The request – detailed in a cable sent from the US Embassy Islamabad on March 24 – clearly indicates that two ‘corridors’ for US drones had already been approved earlier.

In secret cable on October 9, 2009 (previously published by WikiLeaks), Ambassador Patterson reports that US military support to the Pakistan Army’s 11th Corps operations in South Waziristan would “be at the division-level and would include a live downlink of unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) full motion video.” In fact, in November 2008, Dawn had reported then commander of US forces in Afghanistan, General David McKiernan, telling its reporter that US and Pakistan also share video feeds from Predator drones that carry out attacks. “We have a Predator feed going down to the one border coordination centre at Torkham Gate thats looked at by the Pakistan Military, Afghan Military, and the International Security Assistance Force,” General McKiernan had said.

Sharing of video feeds does not imply operational control by Pakistan’s military, however, and even this sharing may have subsequently been suspended.

Despite the occasionally disastrously misdirected attacks which have fed into the public hue and cry over civilian casualties, there is, in private, seeming general acceptance by the military of the efficacy of drone strikes. In a cable dated February 19, 2009, Ambassador Patterson sends talking points to Washington ahead of a week-long visit to the US by COAS Kayani. Referring to drone strikes, she writes: “Kayani knows full well that the strikes have been precise (creating few civilian casualties) and targeted primarily at foreign fighters in the Waziristans.”

Another previously unpublished cable dated May 26, 2009 details President Zardari’s meeting on May 25 with an American delegation led by Senator Patrick Leahy. “Referring to a recent drone strike in the tribal area that killed 60 militants,” wrote Ambassador Patterson in her report, “Zardari reported that his military aide believed a Pakistani operation to take out this site would have resulted in the deaths of over 60 Pakistani soldiers.”

The general support for drone strikes from both the military and civilian leadership is also evidenced by the continuous demand, documented over numerous cables, from Pakistan Government officials to American interlocutors for drone technology to be placed in Pakistani hands. The issue conveyed to the Americans is not so much that of accuracy as that of managing public perceptions.

In the meeting with Senator Leahy, Zardari is directly quoted telling the US delegation to “give me the drones so my forces can take out the militants.” That way, he explains, “we cannot be criticized by the media or anyone else for actions our Army takes to protect our sovereignty.”

General Kayani also “focused on the need for surveillance assets” in the meeting with Admiral Fallon according to Patterson’s cable. “Kayani said he was not interested in acquiring Predators, but was interested in tactical Unmanned Air Vehicles (UAVs).” Predators are considered ‘theatre-level’ technology able to cover wide regions such as the whole of Afghanistan and Pakistan through remotely stationed operations rooms while ‘tactical’ drones are less wide-ranging and can be operated by forces on the ground.

After the first US drone strike outside the tribal areas, in Bannu on November 19, 2008 which killed four people including an alleged senior Al Qaeda member, Ambassador Patterson had presciently noted in another previously unpublished cable (dated November 24, 2008) the dangers of keeping the Pakistani public misinformed. “As the gap between private GOP acquiescence and public condemnation for US action grows,” she wrote back to Washington, “Pakistani leaders who feel they look increasingly weak to their constituents could begin considering stronger action against the US, even though the response to date has focused largely on ritual denunciation.”

Re: Army Chief wanted Drone Support

Again just confirmation of what people here already believe (other than jiyalas of course), drone attacks can’t occur if military and government don’t agree with it. Now wait for jiyalas to say how wikileaks is liar and how it is “establishment” conspiracy to defame PPP.

Re: Army Chief wanted Drone Support

well i dont think its a complete lie, i believe that its american government who provides these leaks to settle some scores...as you would have observed none of these leaks are that much detrimental to American interests...

i am thankful to the wikileaks that they have shown all the faces of our political class and military...

Re: Army Chief wanted Drone Support

Look at the statements of Kiyani after the abbotabad raid, and he had to visit 5 garrisons to soothe the forces, but visit of Kerry and Grosman has done the trick. :wink:

The good will from Pakistan is prevailing, every other day a drone attack is being carried out, even two soldiers were killed or injured by a NATO incursion, but nothing from the Army as such and then they think people will believe the handouts that ISPR reads out after each Wikileak.

Re: Army Chief wanted Drone Support

http://www.dawn.com/2011/05/21/cables-reveal-role-of-us-troops-in-pakistan.html

Cables reveal role of US troops in Pakistan
By Madiha Sattar | From the Newspaper

KARACHI: Confidential American diplomatic cables obtained by Dawn reveal new details about the activities of US forces on the ground in Pakistan, an issue that has gained heightened sensitivity in the aftermath of the Raymond Davis incident in Lahore and the American raid on Osama bin Laden’s compound in Abbottabad.

The reports reveal that US special operations forces were embedded with Pakistani troops for intelligence gathering by the summer of 2009 and deployed with them on joint operations in Pakistani territory by September that year.

“We have created Intelligence Fusion cells with embedded US Special Forces with both SSG and Frontier Corps (Bala Hisar, Peshawar) with the Rover equipment ready to deploy,” reported then US Ambassador Anne Patterson to the State Department in May 2009. “Through these embeds, we are assisting the Pakistanis collect and coordinate existing intelligence assets.”

At the time she noted that the US had “not been given Pakistani military permission to accompany the Pakistani forces on deployments as yet.”

By September, plans for the joint intelligence activities had been expanded to include army headquarters. “Pakistan has begun to accept intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance support from the US military for COIN operations,” Ms Patterson wrote. “In addition … intelligence fusion centers” had been established “at the headquarters of Frontier Corps and the 11th Corps and we expect at additional sites, including GHQ and the 12th Corps in Balochistan.”

In April 2009, the cell at Bala Hisar assisted with the Pakistan military operation then taking place in Lower Dir. “US Special Operations Command Force are assisting the FC at the Intelligence Fusion Cell at FC Headquarters with imagery, target packages, and operational planning,” a cable written that month reveals.

Meanwhile, joint operations on the ground were also in the pipeline. One previously unpublished cable describes how a deployment with US forces in Pakistani territory was planned for April 2009 before being called off at the last minute.

“The 3rd Commando Group of the Pakistan Special Services Group (SSG) exploited the weakened state of the Taliban surrounding Daggar, the main city within Buner, to secure the city early on April 29,” the Islamabad embassy wrote.

“Although reported [earlier] that US officials would accompany the FC deployment to Daggar, a late-night decision on April 28 by the Pakistan Military General Headquarters (GHQ) denied the joint deployment, saying the FC had all the assets needed. Embassy will work with GHQ to determine the reason for the late change and to promote integrated operation support.”

Although the presence of US trainers has been publicly acknowledged, joint operations have not. Questions about American boots on the ground inflamed public sentiment after CIA operative Raymond Davis shot dead two Pakistanis in Lahore, and Senator John Kerry admitted on Monday that US troops levels had been reduced in response to a Pakistan military request in the aftermath of the bin Laden operation.

A number of the leaked reports reveal, however, that the US had been eager to embed American troops with Pakistanis soldiers.

“On a brighter note,” Ms Patterson wrote in a November 2009 cable, “there is the possibility that operations in the northern FATA may provide additional opportunities to embed US Special Operations Forces with FC units to provide ISR [intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance] support and general operational guidance.

“If we can expand on what we have recently been doing in Bajaur Agency … with our embeds, it would be a significant opportunity to contribute to the pursuit of the TTP.”

The Bajaur operation with the FC that Ms Patterson refers to is likely one that took place in September 2009 and was described in an October 2009 cable previously published in the media, which also mentioned that US troops had been deployed in Wana in South Waziristan and Miram Shah in North Waziristan with the Pakistan Army’s 11th Corps and that the FC had requested a further deployment in Bajaur.

“Previously, the Pakistani military leadership adamantly opposed letting us embed our special operations personnel with their military forces,” the cable noted. “The recent approval by GHQ … appears to represent a sea change in Pakistani thinking.

“These deployments are highly politically sensitive … Should [they] receive any coverage in the Pakistani or US media, the Pakistani military will likely stop making requests for such assistance.”

Another previously published cable had described how, in a January 2009 meeting with Chief of Army Staff Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, then CENTCOM commander Gen David Petraeus explained he “had given instructions that Special Operations Forces would be deployed regularly and constantly, and the US ‘needed to move their soldiers in here, so they could engage productively with the Frontier Corps.’
**
“Petraeus noted that the 11th Corps Chief of Staff Brigadier Amir was less cooperative with US forces, and Kayani took note of that.”**

The cable does not clarify whether Gen Petraeus was referring to training or other activities.

Cables referenced: WikiLeaks # 207373, 226157, 204260, 204652, 236332. All cables can be viewed at Dawn.com.

Re: Army Chief wanted Drone Support

I often wonder, if Army and Political leadership is so much against the people of Pakistan and they hate us to the degree that they want us to be killed then why the hell they don't leave Pakistan and get settled somewhere else??

or

Or what are they upto?

Re: Army Chief wanted Drone Support

^ they are interested in the $$$$ that they receive in return, they have nothing to do with the country...

I was listening to a program about Yemen (from BBC) and they were saying that Americans are supporting ABDULLAH Saleh, and thats causing chaos and providing fodder to Alqaeda. In Yemen also Abdullah Saleh allows Americans to carry out drone/operations there and in his absence the Americans are nervous that the next govt might not be that friendly or accomodating to them...

Re: Army Chief wanted Drone Support

^^ How they are going to save that dollars, Husni Mubarak's wealth has been seized by the very west who encouraged him... he is on his death bed watching all the dollars taken away from him...

Re: Army Chief wanted Drone Support

^ i hope so that the same happens to our rulers and military as well

Re: Army Chief wanted Drone Support

I've been saying this all along and I will reiterate it yet again...Kiani is the biggest sellout douche going around in Pakistan....Zardari is a principled patriot in comparison...

Re: Army Chief wanted Drone Support

you mean to say after all these years we have got someone who can compete Zardari???

Re: Army Chief wanted Drone Support

When Musharraf had made up his mind to leave do you think the Americans would have let him go without giving them a replacement? Kiyani is a replica of Musharraf, maybe a little more weak and accommodating to the Americans. Why do you think Kayani and Shuja Pasha got extensions?

Re: Army Chief wanted Drone Support

It is sad that nobody even notices that generals are the one formulating foreign, defense and national security policies. Instead of Kayani, it should have been the president, prime minister or defense minister deciding these things.

Re: Army Chief wanted Drone Support

Yes all these policies should be 'decided' by government, but lets say that the govt 'agreed' to let army make these policies, did our government demand any "change"? Was there any disagreement between army and government in the policy? Did they want to make any changes which was denied by army? The only one I can remember is government trying to take over ISI from military which was declined.

Re: Army Chief wanted Drone Support

wait a second.. shouldnt this be good news for the national sovereignty crowd?

Re: Army Chief wanted Drone Support

:smack:As usual the first post is without any comments. Moderators, is he allowed to cut and paste here the news where as others’ such threads are closed immediately?

Re: Army Chief wanted Drone Support

who is responsible for drone attacks? I personally consider our military more responsible as compared to the Americans for their occurrence. As they have been carried out with their tacit approval. Which army of a sovereign country would allow a foreign army a license to kill its citizens? The time has now come to question the generals and punish them for their crimes.

Was the whole village mentioned in the news article taleban?

Drone attack orphaned whole village, says Waziristan resident

****PESHAWAR: **Noor Khan, a resident of North Waziristan, is determined not to let the killing of his father in a US drone strike go unquestioned.

**
Lawyer Shahzad Akbar, acting on behalf of Noor Khan, has sent a legal notice to British Foreign Secretary William Hague, to question the role of Britain in providing intelligence to the CIA-backed drone campaign.

Khan’s father was killed in March this year in what was said to be the deadliest US drone strike since 2006. The attack killed 50 people, including five members of the local police, and a child.

In the legal notice made public on Wednesday, Noor Khan questions the UK’s use of telephonic or other electronic interception to provide “information to the United States which may have been used in drone strikes in the Pakistani border region.”

Addressing his first press conference at the Peshawar Press Club alongside members of the Foundation for Fundamental Rights, an NGO supporting drone attack victims and their families, Khan said a petition against US drone strikes had been filed at the Peshawar High Court.

Akbar said it was on record that the British government endorsed the CIA campaign in Pakistan. “If they gave intelligence about British nationals killed in a drone strike in Waziristan, it means information was exchanged,” he said.

**The legal notice cites media reports that there have been around 309 drone strikes in Pakistan since June 2004, resulting in 2,337 – 2,997 reported deaths.

“My father was at a jirga to settle a dispute of a chromite mine. The problem was almost resolved, but during this time there was a drone attack and he was killed. Our whole village was orphaned because all the elders were killed,” Noor Khan told The Express Tribune.

**
The legal notice states that the practice by UK to share intelligence to the US has contributed to the death of Noor Khan’s father and several other members of his community. The UK is contributing to the risk that our client continues to face from US drones in his area, it said.

British law firm Leigh Day & Co, in collaboration with British legal charity Reprieve, is handling the case in Britain.

British Foreign Secretary William Hague has been asked to submit his reply by January 12. “If the foreign office fails to reply then the case will be taken to court,” said Shahzad Akbar.

Published in The Express Tribune, December 22[SUP]nd[/SUP], 2011.

Re: Army Chief wanted Drone Support

Who are responsible ?
Simple
Mush and his people
His juniors , PMLQ,PTI and MQM. Also MMA

Re: Army Chief wanted Drone Support

Yes you are right, PTI is responsible for drone attacks (PPP has got nothing to do with it as they have surrendered the defence to the army).

Re: Army Chief wanted Drone Support

Remember PPP does not control the military and thus has no control over drones or stopping supplies. The PPP is no democracy its a pathetically weak government all controlled by the Military. Indeed the Bhutto clan is once again losing out to the military because they just don't know what the hell they are doing. The military is evil and trying to kill Bilawal and Zardari.

I think i covered all the bases.