Monday, February 13, 2012 - 12:05 PM
That's the charge the National Journal's Marc Ambinder makes in his very interesting new book on Joint Special Operations Command, coauthored with D.B. Grady.
They write:
The U.S. intelligence community took advantage of the chaos to spread resources of its own into the country. Using valid U.S. passports and posing as construction and aid workers, dozens of Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) operatives and contractors flooded in without the requisite background checks from the country's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency. Al-Qaeda had reconstituted itself in the country's tribal areas, largely because of the ISI's benign neglect. In Afghanistan, the ISI was actively undermining the U.S.-backed government of Hamid Karzai, training and recuiting for the Taliban, which it viewed as the more reliable partner. The political system was in chaos. The Pakistani army was focused on the threat from India and had redeployed away from the Afghanistan border region, the Durand line, making it porous once again. To some extent, the Bush administration had been focused on Iraq for the previous two years, content with the ISI's cooperation in capturing senior al-Qaeda leaders, while ignoring its support of other groups tha would later become recruiting grounds for al-Qaeda.
A JSOC intelligence team slipped in alongside the CIA. The team had several goals. One was prosaic: team members were to develop rings of informants to gather targeting information about al-Qaeda terrorists. Other goals were extremely sensitive: JSOC needed better intelligence about how Pakistan tranported its nuclear weapons and wanted to pentrate the ISI. Under a secret program code-named SCREEN HUNTER, JSOC, augmented by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and contract personnel, was authorized to shadow and identify members of the ISI suspected of being sympathetic to al-Qaeda. It is not clear whether JSOC units used lethal force against these ISI officers; one official said that the goal of the program was to track terrorists through the ISI by using disinformation and psychological warfare. (The program, by then known under a different name, was curtailed by the Obama administration when Pakistan's anxiety about a covert U.S. presence inside the country was most intense.)
Meanwhile, rotating teams of SEALs from DEVGRU Black squadron, aided by Rangers and other special operations forces, established a parallel terroris-hunting capability called VIGILANT HARVEST. They operated in the border areas of Pakistan deemed off limits to Americans, and they targeted courier networks, trainers, and facilitators. (Legally, these units would operate under the authority of the CIA any time they crossed the border.) Some of their missions were coordinated with Pakistan; others were not. As of 2006, teams of Green Berets were regularly crossing the border. Missions involved as few as three or four operators quietly trekking across the line, their movements monitored by U.S. satellites and drones locked onto the cell phones of these soldiers. (The cell phones were encrypted in such a way that made them undetectable to Pakistani intelligence.) Twice in 2008, Pakistani officials caught wind of these missions, and in one instance, Pakistani soldiers operating in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas fired guns into the air to prevent the approach of drones.
Forward intelligence cells in Pakistan are staffed by JSOC-contracted security personnel from obscure firms with insider names such as Triple Canopy and various offshoots of Blackwater, but it is not clear whether, as Jeremy Scahill of the Nation has argued, the scale of these operations was operationally significant or that the contractors acted as hired guns for the U.S. government. Sources say that only U.S. soldiers performed "kinetic" operations; Scahill's sources suggest otherwise. The security compartments were so small for these operations (one was known as QUIET STORM, a particularly specialized mission targeting the Pakistani Taliban in 2008) that the Command will probably be insulated from retrospective oversight about its activities. A senior Obama administration official said that by the middle of 2011, after tensions between the United States and the Pakistani government had reached an unhealthy degree of danger, all JSOC personnel except for its declared military trainers were ferreted out of the country. (They were easy to find using that same secret cell phone pinging technology.) Those who remained were called Omegas, a term denoting their temporary designation as members of the reserve force. They then joined any one of a dozen small contracting companies set up by the CIA, which turned these JSOC soldiers into civilians, for the purposes of deniability.
The ISI (as even the article says) is actively aiding and abetting terrorists on the Pakistani side of the Durand line to kill NATO troops and fellow Afghans.
We're dealing with an enemy that considers women and children to be fair game, for political assassinations to be par for the course.
We've got to do what we can to stop them. I'd say we're not going far enough.
God bless the United States of America
America's homeless resort to tent cities
'We don't have dinner at home'
Panorama's Hilary Andersson comes face to face with the reality of poverty in America and finds that, for some, the last resort has become life in a tented encampment.
Watch tonight BBC1@8.00pm
US had no other choice with a duplicitous ally
With an ally that shelters and supports the enemy, US did not have much choice but to do whatever it can to infiltrate Pakistan.
Former Pentagon official Gen (rtd) Jack Keane said at a discussion on Afghanistan organized by the Institute for the Study of War, a Washington-based think-tank on June 30, 2011 that "The truth is, the (Pakistani) ISI aids and abets the sanctuaries in Pakistan that the Afghan (Taliban) operate out of. They provide training for them, they provide resources for them and they provide intelligence for them. From those sanctuaries, every single day Afghan fighters come into Afghanistan and kill and maim us (US/NATO troops)". General Keane also added that “There are two ammonium nitrate factories in Pakistan. 80 per cent of the explosive devices that are used to kill our soldiers, kill Afghan security forces and kill Afghan people come from Pakistan."
Previous US ambassador Anne Patterson to Pakistan, wrote in a secret review in 2009 that ‘Pakistan's Army and ISI are covertly SPONSORING four militant groups - Haqqani‘s HQN, Mullah Omar‘s QST, Al Qaeda and LeT - and will not abandon them for any amount of US money‘, as diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks show.
Ambassador Patterson had NO reason to mislead her own State Department and U. S. government.
Pakistan's national security is intricately linked to India and Kashmir. After the Soviet defeat in Afghanistan, the ISI diverted its militant proxies to Kashmir hoping to replicate a popular insurgency and either wrest control from India or facilitate an independence movement in Indian-held Kashmir.
In Afghanistan, Pakistan effectively installed the Taliban regime and provided them with military and economic assistance to defeat the Northern Alliance (which is the current government in Kabul). 9/11 forced Pakistan to scale back these operations and in effect turn on their Taliban allies.
The current Pakistani strategy is aimed at removing the pro-India Karzai government, and forcing a US withdrawal from region - this is to prevent encirclement and to provide 'strategic depth' if war with India breaks out over Kashmir.
The US will not trust the Taliban for sheltering Al-Qaeda. Thus the US is presumably wanting to tackle the issue by: (a) Capture or Kill Al-Qaeda/affiliated remnants (using drones) and (b) Engaging the Taliban leadership to facilitate a withdrawal.
Pakistani and US interests will need to converge, and both sides will need to compromise on their 'national security' narrative.
For Pakistan, the results of this disastrous policy is evident. It's society is fraught with intolerance and extremism, it's economy is in free fall and Kashmir will not be wrested from India with an insurgency. The ISI surely realizes the folly in converting a once-progressive Muslim state into a massive Wahabbi madrassa. As a Pakistani, I hope that efforts are made by my government to deradicalize society and engage India through diplomacy (however naive this sounds). The Pakistani state cannot afford to neglect it's infrastructure and it's people for a failed military strategy - I hope some able politicians step up and wrest us out of this crisis. We're all sick of war.
Hope you get what you're hoping for, Hussain
Not many Pakistanis (at least those that write comments on various message boards) seem to think like you.
Hope there are more like you, where you come from.
Pakistanis want change and an end to this war.
Both the Americans and Pakistanis have played some disastrous hands in the Long War - the ultimate result is probably going to be a settlement/agreement between the US and Taliban, the annihilation of Al-Qaeda and it's affiliates (or perhaps a change in the theater of war) and either a more radical, reactionary Pakistan - or as I hope, a more introspective Pakistan that focuses on nation-building and finding more innovative ways of projecting power.
Using cold-hard logic, Pakistan's position makes perfect sense and it is persisting in efforts to bring the Pushtun Taliban back to mainstream Afghan politics. The Americans and Pakistanis are trying to find some common ground in their interests and there appears to be a growing realization in Pakistan's policy circles that confrontation over Kashmir needs to end and active, intelligent diplomacy must take center-stage. But first, the mess in Afghanistan needs to be sorted out, as I outlined earlier.
It is a difficult environment for more moderate forces to work in, but things are starting to move in the right direction in the country (although you can't see any results at this point). For now, we can just wait and see what happens next. .
grow up already...this is a WAR
@DR. KUCHBHI, @MARTY MARTEL you guys sound like extremists....
We're talking about an organization that aids and abets murder of innocent Afghans, Afghans who hold power and NATO troops through its proxies (and there are a long list of these proxies) and I'm not even talking about their proxies in India at this point.
Sane people would argue that we should do our utmost, to put such an organization and anybody who backs them, out of business.
If holding the opinion, that we should protect innocent Afghans and NATO troops from their perfidy, from their skullduggery and from their proxies, is a sign of an extremist, then I plead guilty.
How good are the people writing it? Simply being a journalist, sadly, isn't enough.
my questions are: Who cares? Why is this an issue...at all? Can we send more operatives in? And finally, why is this a surprise?
In civilized societies, it is considered near-taboo to take advantage of someone in deep distress. Nations do take advantage of other nations’ hour of need for their own strategic objectives but taking advantage of a nation devastated by an earthquake is nothing short of strategic callousness. As if the episode of Dr Shakeel Afridi was not enough, it has now been revealed that the US used Pakistan’s 2005 earthquake to send intelligence operatives into the country. U.S. intelligence community actually thrived on chaos. This is nothing short of strategic callousness. Read more at: http://passivevoices.wordpress.com/2012/02/14/strategic-callousness-deep-inside-the-presidents-secret-army/
Passport, FP’s flagship blog, brings you news and hidden angles on the biggest stories of the day, as well as insights and under-the-radar gems from around the world.
Read More
(13)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE