An interesting pair of Pakistan stories
(AP) "Pakistan's army spokesman says its forces have orders to open fire on U.S. troops if they launch another raid across the Afghan border."
But at the same time, (Reuters) "Pakistani aircraft bombed militant strongholds in a northwestern region on Tuesday while U.S. drones prowled the sky over another militant sanctuary on the Afghan border, a military official and residents said."
So, the US pressure, although officially rejected by Pakistan, does seem to have forced them to bomb off of a US request.
(This is a day after Pakistani troops fired over the heads of US troops on the border supposedly "turning back" a raid.
Pakistani PM Zardari is meeting with the British right now. I'm sure the British are passing some version of the American message.)
But at the same time, (Reuters) "Pakistani aircraft bombed militant strongholds in a northwestern region on Tuesday while U.S. drones prowled the sky over another militant sanctuary on the Afghan border, a military official and residents said."
So, the US pressure, although officially rejected by Pakistan, does seem to have forced them to bomb off of a US request.
(This is a day after Pakistani troops fired over the heads of US troops on the border supposedly "turning back" a raid.
Pakistani PM Zardari is meeting with the British right now. I'm sure the British are passing some version of the American message.)
posted by mikevotes at
7:08 PM
3 Comments:
It's a bit mistaken to think that Pakistan doesn't want to deal with the FATA, and that "pressure" is forcing them to take action.
The Pakistani military has been taking action for years in the FATA, but it's large, remote, and inhospitable to military campaigns.
Rather, the Pakistani military has realised how immense an effective FATA campaign would be, while the U.S. seems to hold to the Administration's characteristic optimism and eagerness to blunder into any hornet's nest.
It wouldn't be an exaggeration to say that clearing the FATA is as big an effort as Afghanistan itself. Air power doesn't control territory, boots on the ground do.
By
Todd Dugdale , at 8:34 AM
Good points todd. Plus the Pakistanis would be dealing with domestic terrorism on a huge scale. A problem the US does not have.
By
Anonymous, at 9:09 AM
Todd, I think part of the difference in perspective is that the US believes it can target just the leadership of the parts working across the border while the Pakistanis have to deal with the issues in total. They can't kill a few leaders and claim victory.
(Not to say the US can either, but that seems to be the principle they're working on, to temporarily debilitate the organization by capping the leadership.)
...
Anon, I think I matched your point.
(And sorry if the language is inexact, I'm still blogging in an awful hurry between things I gotta do.)
By
mikevotes, at 2:28 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home