Nato enquiry report blames both US, Pakistan..

Looks like an attempt to reconcile, cover up..

Next step will be probably an soft apology by some low key Nato spokesman (Not US).. Probably the blockage of supplies have started to pinch them now..

Report blames both US, Pakistan for Nato attack

WASHINGTON: The US investigations into the Nov 26 border attack by Nato forces that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers has reportedly concluded that both US and Pakistan forces bear responsibility for the incident, The New York Times reported.

The report said: “Mistakes by both American and Pakistani forces led to airstrikes against Pakistani border posts that killed 24 Pakistani Army soldiers last month”.

Even though it spread blame between both countries, the key finding of the investigation is likely to further enrage Pakistan: that the airstrikes were ultimately justified because Pakistani soldiers fired first on a joint team of Afghan and American special operations forces operating along the often poorly demarcated frontier between Afghanistan and Pakistan, American and Western officials, who asked not to be identified because the report of the investigation had not yet been released, said Thursday.

The report says that the joint Afghan-American patrol, which was operating in a remote and mountainous area between the Afghan province of Kunar and the Pakistani tribal area of Mohmand, came under machine gun and mortar fire from at least one of the Pakistani border posts sometime around midnight on Nov. 26, American and Western officials said. The American official said the Afghan and American special operations forces believed they were being attacked by militants, at least initially, and called for air support.

Why the Pakistanis were firing remains unclear, the American official said. But in the days after the airstrikes, another American official in Washington provided part of an explanation: the Pakistanis apparently had intelligence that the Taliban was planning to attack the border posts and the Pakistani soldiers may have mistaken the Afghan and American troopers for militants.

The United States military report lends credence to that theory: the officials said it finds that NATO did not inform Pakistan that the operation on the border was taking place, and thus the Pakistani soldiers would not have known to expect allied forces near their posts. NATO and Pakistani forces are supposed to inform each other when launching operations on the border precisely to avoid the kind of mistake that took place on Nov. 26.

The second American mistake came when the airstrikes were called in. The Americans apparently gave the Pakistani Army the wrong coordinates that were to be struck by Apache attack helicopters and an AC-130 gunship, the officials said.

It wasn’t immediately clear whether the Pakistanis cleared the strikes after getting the wrong coordinates. They have said they did not; regardless, the strikes began before their officers based at NATO coordination posts in Afghanistan had a chance to check with superiors in Pakistan, according to the Pakistani account of what took place.

But, as the report shows, even if Pakistan did clear the strikes, the posts still probably would have been hit because the Pakistanis had been given the wrong coordinates.

Another safeguard also failed, according to the report: Pakistan never told NATO it had established the border posts, which had been up for about three months, said a Western official in Kabul. Both sides are supposed to inform each other when setting up new positions along the border, another measure intended to avoid strikes against each other.

Whether any American service members will be disciplined in connection with the incident has not been decided, the American and Western officials said.

NATO’s Afghanistan headquarters and the United States Embassy in Kabul declined to comment on the investigation, referring queries to the Defense Department and State Department in Washington. Pakistani officials did not offer any immediate reaction.

But given the indignant Pakistani response to the raid - “They killed our sons and we can never forgive this,” said one senior Pakistani defense official in a recent interview, speaking anonymously because he still works with Americans - Washington was bracing for another round of recrimination, said the American and Western officials.

A ban on the shipment of NATO supplies through Pakistan, which was put in place after the strike, is expected to remain for some time, the officials said. NATO officials have said the blockade is not affecting operations because less than 30 percent of supplies for coalition forces in Afghanistan are currently shipped through Pakistan.

More damaging is the faltering military and counter-terror cooperation between Washington and Islamabad after a year of crises that began with the shooting of two Pakistanis by a CIA contractor in the city of Lahore. The two sides no longer conduct joint operations along the border, which they had started doing a few years ago, and intelligence-sharing on a range of threats from al Qaeda to lesser known Islamist militant groups has also fallen off, the American and Western officials said.

@CM

Your topic now… to make us understand the technicalities of the report..!!!

U.S. Erred in Deadly Attack - Acknowledges U.S. Culpability.

U.S. Erred in Deadly Attack

*New Report on Pakistan Airstrike That Killed 24 Acknowledges U.S. Culpability

*WASHINGTON—The U.S. is poised to concede for the first time that it bears significant responsibility for last month’s American airstrike that killed 24 Pakistani troops, U.S. officials said, an admission that is expected to embarrass the American military but points to a way out of the deepening mistrust between the two countries.

A military investigation has found that U.S. and Afghan commandos incorrectly concluded there were no Pakistani forces in the Afghan border area where the coalition was conducting an operation on Nov. 26, according to U.S. officials familiar with the report. That assessment cleared the way for an airstrike that devastated Pakistani positions.

After the initial strike, the U.S. compounded its mistake by providing inaccurate data to a Pakistani military representative at a border-coordination center, missing an opportunity to stop the fighting, these people said.

The new report’s conclusions uphold key portions of Pakistan’s version of events. It also conflicts with some early U.S. accounts, which said Pakistanis gave an all-clear that opened the way for the most deadly friendly-fire incident of the 10-year Afghanistan war.

The earlier U.S. accounts were based on preliminary and incomplete debriefings of service members involved in the incident, officials said, while the complete investigation is based on computer records, radio reports and other documentation. U.S. military investigators were denied access to Pakistani officials, including the representative at the border center, officials have said.

The investigation, described by U.S. military officials familiar with the findings, is due to be presented Friday to U.S. defense leaders. “The overarching issue that surrounds this incident is a lack of trust” between U.S. and Pakistan that led to the incident, a military official said.

The attack infuriated Pakistanis and prompted Islamabad to close the Afghan-Pakistan border to military supply convoys. U.S. officials hope the results of the investigation will help ease tensions and lead to the reopening of border crossings as early as next week.

A key question is how the findings will be received by Pakistanis, who have been demanding a formal U.S. apology. Aides to President Barack Obama in the days after the incident considered having him transmit videotaped condolences but opted to wait for the results of the investigation. Such a step could be politically difficult by opening the president up to charges that he isn’t standing firmly enough behind the U.S. military. Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney has frequently criticized what he calls Mr. Obama’s practice of apologizing for America. Pakistani officials directly involved in discussing the incident with the U.S. said they have yet to see the contents of the U.S. investigation and stood by their account of the events.

Military officials said North Atlantic Treaty Organization forces should inform the Pakistanis about planned operations near the border. But NATO officials told investigators they believed Pakistanis had tipped off insurgents about previous missions. That prompted them to withhold information about the Nov. 26 U.S.-Afghan operation in the Mohmand tribal region, a lawless border area that abuts Afghanistan’s Kunar province.

The Pakistanis, the military official said, had meanwhile withheld information about the location of its border posts. NATO officials told investigators that insurgents sometimes operate from unmanned Pakistani military outposts, according to those familiar with the report.

The report says the 150-man U.S.-Afghan commando team came under attack from positions along a ridgeline. They requested a show of force by an F-15 fighter jet and AC-130 gunship, which launched warning flares toward the positions high above the commandos, the report concludes.

The ground forces asked NATO for a report on the area. “We are not tracking any pak mil in the area,” they were told in a radio transmission. The ground forces took that to mean there was no Pakistani military there, according to a military official familiar with the report.

That assessment was then typed into a electronic “chat room” that was following the firefight, causing U.S. officials to temporarily stop asking the Pakistani military whether they had forces in the area, the official said.

A second error came later in the firefight, when a U.S. military service member in eastern Afghanistan gave general coordinates for the fight to Pakistani representatives in a border-control center, which is also staffed by NATO and Afghan officials. The U.S. military in eastern Afghanistan had a practice of providing the Pakistanis with general, not specific, locations.

The U.S. report found that the U.S.-Afghan commando team on the ground reported the correct coordinates to their supervisors. Those coordinates were accurately relayed to the helicopters that conducted the strikes.

But according to the new U.S. account, a serviceman talking to the border-control center, attempting to make the coordinates more specific for the Pakistanis by pairing them with a map of the political border, applied an incorrect electronic overlay on his computer. That led the Pakistanis to conclude that the fight was about 9 miles from its true location.

That generally matches the account of Pakistani officials, who say their representative at the border center repeatedly told his NATO counterparts that their information was incomplete or inaccurate, and told them that he needed more detailed information before he could verify whether Pakistani troops were in the area.

Viewing the incorrect information, the representative couldn’t tell that the U.S. helicopters were firing on Pakistani troops.
In the days after the incident, U.S. officials cast doubt on Pakistani claims that incorrect coordinates were relayed to the border-control center. U.S. officials insisted that the helicopter strike began only after the Pakistani representative there gave them an all-clear. But the U.S. military’s report acknowledges conclusively that the location given to the Pakistani representative were off by nearly nine miles. Pakistani officials have denied that their troops on the ridge opened fire first on the U.S. and Afghan commandos. According to a senior Pakistani official, NATO’s top officer at the border-coordination center immediately acknowledged what happened, and repeatedly apologized to the Pakistani representative there “for providing wrong information.”

A former U.S. official confirmed that the NATO officer apologized to the Pakistani representative. Officials didn’t divulge the nationality of the NATO officer.

The U.S. government, however, has so far refused to issue an apology, one of Pakistan’s demands. Washington has repeatedly expressed its condolences for the loss of Pakistani life. U.S. military officials, while conceding the American mistakes, emphasized that the Pakistanis should have known from the fighter jets and gunships that they were not firing on insurgents. “It’s hard to mistake these units for insurgents,” said a U.S. official. “One of the gaps in this investigation is we don’t know why they came under fire by the Pakistani military.”

In retaliation for the killing, Pakistan closed its border with Afghanistan. The closure worries U.S. military commanders because they rely heavily on those crossings to bring in fuel, ammunition and other supplies needed by troops fighting in Afghanistan.
In the negotiations over reopening the border, the Pakistanis have asked the U.S. to pay customary cross-border transit fees in advance. Pakistanis have complained in the past about delays in payments. Islamabad also wants the U.S. to do more to help in managing the growing number of Afghan refugees on the border.

Pakistan also kicked the Central Intelligence Agency out of a base that the spy agency had long used as a launching pad for drone strikes against militant targets in Pakistani tribal areas bordering Afghanistan. Officials said it was unlikely Islamabad would allow the CIA to return to the Shamsi air base. Officials said the CIA no longer needs the base because it has moved its drones to Afghan air fields.

Still, the breakdown in relations with Pakistan appears to have had a chilling effect on the drone program, at least temporarily. The CIA hasn’t conducted strikes in Pakistan since the border incident, reflecting U.S. concerns about taking actions that could exacerbate tensions. Pakistani officials believe they have an understanding with U.S. officials to halt the strikes until relations have improved.

Pakistan turned down a U.S. offer to take part in the U.S. military investigation, underlining the breakdown in relations.

—Siobhan Gorman contributed to this article.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203686204577112970370376212.html?mod=WSJEurope_hpp_MIDDLETopStories

My Comments: NATO obviously knows it was in the wrong, was surprised by the formidable Pakistani reaction, so it should apologize so things can move forward.

Re: U.S. Erred in Deadly Attack - Acknowledges U.S. Culpability.

Move forward to what ?

Re: U.S. Erred in Deadly Attack - Acknowledges U.S. Culpability.

recently Javed Ch. wrote in his column that US is not going to apologize, simply because, they are not in mood to stop these cross border raids. Once the formally apologize it will be difficult for them to continue with these kind of cross border operations.

At best, Pakistani govt should raise this issue to highest level and demand an apology based on this report, good thing is, they already have got this issue raised in UNSC and after this report they can ask US to apologize... which simply means, US won't be repeating this kind of thing...

Re: U.S. Erred in Deadly Attack - Acknowledges U.S. Culpability.

If the investigation reveals US/NATO mistake US/NATO MUST apologize openly, compensate the families of the victims and put the matter to rest.

Re: Nato enquiry report blames both US, Pakistan..


Two US faults: Did not inform of operation so close to Pakistani border, gave wrong coordinates to Pakistan. According to Pakistani military, they already informed US/NATO of Pakistani posts, doesn't make sense that a post will exist for 3 months and neither US/NATO noticed nor Pakistanis informed them.

Re: Nato enquiry report blames both US, Pakistan..

To hell with their investigation. Were we expecting anything else out of their probe?

Re: Nato enquiry report blames both US, Pakistan..

Rubbish...they have ran out of even toilet paper... gas is already over $500 a gallon. Fighter planes have been grounded and only light helicopters are used for surveillance. Gas meant for Afghan people, is now being snatched to keep military vehicles moving. A C130 consumes as much gas as it carries to Afghanistan from ships. Other supplly routes of central Asia are snow-capped. The blockade is hurting them in all the wrong places. It's just that they won't acknowledge it.

Re: U.S. Erred in Deadly Attack - Acknowledges U.S. Culpability.

This morning the Department of Defense spokesperson gave out the following statement regarding Investigation results into Pakistan cross-border incident: The investigation into the 25-26 November engagement between U.S. and Pakistani military forces across the border has been completed. The findings and conclusions were forwarded to the Department through the chain of command. The results have also been shared with the Pakistani and Afghan governments, as well as key NATO leadership.

The investigating officer found that U.S. forces, given what information they had available to them at the time, acted in self defense and with appropriate force after being fired upon. He also found that there was no intentional effort to target persons or places known to be part of the Pakistani military, or to deliberately provide inaccurate location information to Pakistani officials.

Nevertheless, inadequate coordination by U.S. and Pakistani military officers operating through the border coordination center – including our reliance on incorrect mapping information shared with the Pakistani liaison officer – resulted in a misunderstanding about the true location of Pakistani military units. This, coupled with other gaps in information about the activities and placement of units from both sides, contributed to the tragic result.

For the loss of life – and for the lack of proper coordination between U.S. and Pakistani forces that contributed to those losses – we express our deepest regret. We further express sincere condolences to the Pakistani people, to the Pakistani government, and most importantly to the families of the Pakistani soldiers who were killed or wounded.

Our focus now is to learn from these mistakes and take whatever corrective measures are required to ensure an incident like this is not repeated. The chain of command will consider any issues of accountability. More critically, we must work to improve the level of trust between our two countries. We cannot operate effectively on the border – or in other parts of our relationship – without addressing the fundamental trust still lacking between us. We earnestly hope the Pakistani military will join us in bridging that gap.

Maj David Nevers
DET-United States Central Command
www.centcom.mil/ur

Re: U.S. Erred in Deadly Attack - Acknowledges U.S. Culpability.

^^ Apologize or just get lost ( not to you as member but as a nation)

Re: U.S. Erred in Deadly Attack - Acknowledges U.S. Culpability.

We had already told you the results of the investigations when you posted in another thread telling us about the formation of the investigation team. So nothing new there, no surprises!

Re: U.S. Erred in Deadly Attack - Acknowledges U.S. Culpability.


Try to pass the blame on "Pakistani liaison officer", keep trying. The truth is you deployed incompetent people in mapping, you did not care for confirmation/approval from Pakistani side, repeated pleas from the border post don't mean anything to you. This is the trust you have, we don't trust you either. Pack your bags and stay within Afghanistan, use rocks as locals do for 'cleansing' your behinds, use local produce for food. Bye bye.

Re: U.S. Erred in Deadly Attack - Acknowledges U.S. Culpability.

Pakistan army spokesman says that the army does not agree to American enquiry results.

Re: U.S. Erred in Deadly Attack - Acknowledges U.S. Culpability.

No apology, no remorse. Blatant stubbornness.

Re: U.S. Erred in Deadly Attack - Acknowledges U.S. Culpability.

why should they apologize when they say that Pakistan fired on them first.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/23/world/asia/pakistan-and-us-share-blame-in-strike-on-border-posts.html?_r=1&hp

**U.S. Concedes Error, but Says Pakistan Fired First at Border
**

The response from ISPR:

RAWALPINDI:** Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR) has rejected the findings of a US-NATO investigation into Mohmand Agency massacre of 26 Pakistani troops deployed on a border outpost, Geo News reported.****

Terming the report as biased as well as lacking in key facts, a statement issued here said it had holes in it, which need to be filled in.

A formal reply would be launched after ISPR would receive the details of it, the statement added. **

Re: U.S. Erred in Deadly Attack - Acknowledges U.S. Culpability.

didnt we already know the outcome of this usless investigation?

Re: U.S. Erred in Deadly Attack - Acknowledges U.S. Culpability.

ISPR already said that American findings will be biased. I hope these American soldiers burn in hell for killing our troops.

Re: U.S. Erred in Deadly Attack - Acknowledges U.S. Culpability.

[http://edition.cnn.com/2011/12/22/world/meast/pakistan-nato-airstrike/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

U.S., Pakistan, at odds over airstrike report](http://edition.cnn.com/2011/12/22/world/meast/pakistan-nato-airstrike/index.html?hpt=hp_t1)

Re: U.S. Erred in Deadly Attack - Acknowledges U.S. Culpability.

http://www.dawn.com/2011/12/23/us-centcom-briefing-to-pakistan-on-nato-attack-cancelled.html

US CentCom cancels briefing to Pakistan on Nato attack
**ISLAMABAD: A briefing by the head of the US Central Command to Pakistani officials on a Nov. 26 cross-border Nato air attack that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers and severely strained ties with Washington has been cancelled, a Pakistani official said on Friday.

**News that General James N. Mattis’ visit to Pakistan has been cancelled came a day after the United States announced that its investigation into the attack found both American and Pakistani forces were to blame for the border incident.%between%

Re: Nato enquiry report blames both US, Pakistan..

^^ So Pakistan is still not ready lift the sanctions?

General James would have only visited if Pakistani counter parts can assure him that after his visit, the sanctions will be lifted and it will be business as usual... but i think he didn't got those confirmations yet, so the whole trip of cancelled.