Pakistani internal security (catch all)

[William F. Owen]

By this statement Wilf, are you saying that going after leadership is always worth the squeeze, even if it turns out to not be highly effective?

How will you know? What evidence is there to date, that it is counter-productive? I said not "highly effective."
That they get replaced is not a reason not to do it.
My sole point is that killing enemy leaders, usually makes life more difficult for the enemy.

At what point is a leader's death worth 1, 10, 100 civilian casualties? Not trying to apples and orange this issue, but this does go back to a potential collateral damage issue that I think always needs to be thought of.

Of course. You have to weigh the political objective/benefit, against the down side. Your never killing these folks for fun. Your killing them to advance your policy and make their life more difficult. How many civilians is Osama Bin Laden worth? I really don't know, but hopefully someone does.

[George L. Singleton]

HAKIMULLAH MEHSUD, brother of the late Batullah Mashud who was killed by missle strike this week, who was today named to replace his brother as top Taliban commander in Paksitan, may himself have been shot dead today. See below which is from Global Hujra Online today.

Originally Posted by wazir_gul (GLOBAL HUJRA source)
Hakimullah Mehsud killed in armed clash: sources
Updated at: 2120 PST, Saturday, August 08, 2009
SOUTH WAZIRISTAN: Spokesman of Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan Hakimullah Mehsud and another Taliban leader Wali-ur-Rehman have been killed in an armed clash erupted during the Tehreek’s Shura meeting, Geo TV reported Saturday.

At the meeting Hakimullah Mehsud was appointed as TTP Chief after the reported killing of Baitullah Mehsud, the state media reported.

The agenda of the meeting was to appoint successor of Baitullah Mehsud, sources said.

http://www.thenews.com.pk/updates.asp?id=84579

[davidbfpo]

Ironic that British Commonwealth status allows some of the actual terrorists more travel access from their native areas into UK and elsewhere worldwide in the Commonwealth, especially including Canada.

George,

The UK visa rules are now quite strict in theory; both Indian and Pakistani visitors need visas for example, whereas the 'Old Commonwealth' do not, so Australians have visa-free travel for example. For the current list see: http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/po...les/appendix1/

Yes, there are gaps and fraud can allow entry. For example an Indian national wanted for a Mumbai terror attack in 2006 got entry to work here and then disappeared: http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...ghlight=mumbai Post 5.

The US DHS regularly raises the issue of visa-less travel by UK nationals to the USA, not that they are worried about Mr & Mrs Smith.

davidbfpo

[George L. Singleton]

David, thanks for the travel v. visas clarification(s).

I suspected my post on this topic would get a comment or two from you.

[davidbfpo]

An assessment, pro & con on: http://counterterrorismblog.org/ (Currently first item).

Secondly there is an old thread on assassination of high value targets etc: http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...ead.php?t=4025 and a June 2009 update by Steve Metz, with a PPT on the topic: http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute...nterest-14.pdf

davidbfpo

[Bob's World]

Perhaps a better comparison is how many of a deployed SF A-TEAM would you have to kill for them to loose their effectiveness.

Killing enemy leaders works. It may not be highly effective, but I cannot think of any good reason to pass up the opportunity. Also from an intelligence perspective identifying and tracking enemy leaderships, usually brings a host full of other goodies.

The junior man of any ODA is quite capable of leading himself, and determining if he has the wherewithal to accomplish the mission or not.

But this is not the point I hoped to make. This focus on HVIs is more to the point that I am working through in my "Full-Spectrum Deterrence" and "Deterrence of Irregular Threats" work. Certainly there is a degree of "Prevent" when a key leader is taken out. There will be a short period of sorting out who steps up next for that one particular actor. But what provocative effect does this have elsewhere across a broad range of actors?

Now, I recognize this following fact cuts both ways: 50 years ago to take out such a guy in a COIN effort may well lead to temporary peace in his zone of influence. Today, word of this attack raced around the world in minutes. Some may well have been deterred by the news, for fear of suffering a similar fate. Many more were probably outraged and provoked by the news. What is the net gain or loss?? Hard to say. Generals like assessments, but there is no way to assess that. One man dead.

My strong suspicion is that such temporal, tactical gains produce far more strategic downside than upside on today's global "battlefield." Bragging about these hits to show how we are being effective is what is causing the strategic downside.

We need to just shut up, and be quiet professionals. Do the job and let those who choose to speculate speculate, but the ones we're really trying to influence know exactly what happened.

We are slipping into the same trap with unmanned aircraft and their missiles that we fell into with our bombers and guided munitions. Some news is best delivered in person. Short, violent raids with no post-op clamoring for glory will be less likely to produce the strategic downside, and probably be far more respected by those we target and thereby produce better results.

[Ken White]

We are slipping into the same trap with unmanned aircraft and their missiles that we fell into with our bombers and guided munitions. Some news is best delivered in person. Short, violent raids with no post-op clamoring for glory will be less likely to produce the strategic downside, and probably be far more respected by those we target and thereby produce better results.

Very much so.

However, I suspect that three things get in the way and in order of effect they are: Political will to launch and cope with the fallout; The issue of US casualties and potential prisoners to be exploited; The turf battle over who goes, who transports them, who extracts them, who's in charge and who's the backup and thus who gets the glory pre, during AND post op.

There are answers to all those, some easy, some less so. However, I have no doubt that's where we need to go. That's where we should have gone after Korea had we not gotten entranced with the flawed Massive Retaliation and then overeacted in response in typically American fashion and created Flexible Response predicated on an even more badly flawed philosophy of "we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty." Catchy but extremely short sighted and no strategy at all. Wasn't even really a policy, in fact, just political blather which is still causing problems today -- it did give you guys a catchy motto, though.

Strategic Raids will do far more good than interfering in other nations -- cost less, also...

In the new thinking department, I was pushing that 20 years before Eagle Claw and the Marines were doing it long before even I was born. They started on 3 March 1776 or 27 April 1805 or 18 November 1824, criteria dependent.

One of the young LTCs I pushed it to long ago and who agreed later became the DCSOPS of the Army and later named the first issue I cited as the killer. You and I have both watched the third issue and the second is part but not all of the reason for the first. Simply, the Pols will ask for a guarantee that cannot be given. Unless, of course, someone gets really innovative...

[jcustis]

My strong suspicion is that such temporal, tactical gains produce far more strategic downside than upside on today's global "battlefield." Bragging about these hits to show how we are being effective is what is causing the strategic downside.

We need to just shut up, and be quiet professionals. Do the job and let those who choose to speculate speculate, but the ones we're really trying to influence know exactly what happened.

We are slipping into the same trap with unmanned aircraft and their missiles that we fell into with our bombers and guided munitions. Some news is best delivered in person. Short, violent raids with no post-op clamoring for glory will be less likely to produce the strategic downside, and probably be far more respected by those we target and thereby produce better results.

This is why this news is odd, and makes me wonder what they are playing at. Why admit that he was killed? Why not revert to the practice of claiming civilian deaths, with the typical lack of proof? Letting on that a leader was killed in such an attack doesn't make much sense, based on what little has been provided so far.

[Surferbeetle]

Baitullah Mehsud's death is a public example of our hunting prowess, it will increase our chances of disrupting Taliban operations for a time, and good riddance to someone who has helped to kill our boys, but then again is it possible that the Afghani viewpoint on this is...so what?

If I am 'Albert-Afghani', who is allegedly the COG of this conflict, what does this death mean to me?

1) How does it make my village safer today?
2) Is it going to fix my irrigation canals?
3) Did it help me with this years harvests, or will it with next years?
4) What does this do for today's drinking water or electrical needs?
5) Will it help me make it through the coming winter?
6) How does it give me hope for a better future?

What is the return on this particular investment of effort and how will it turn the population of Afghanistan towards forwarding the coalitions objectives (and how are they aligned with the people of Afghanistan's?) within the next 12 months?


From VOA News: Pakistan Official: Taliban Rivals Involved in Shooting

Pakistan's interior minister says the government has received reports of a shooting between two rivals for leadership of Pakistan's Taliban, and that one of them may have been killed.

Rehman Malik told reporters Saturday that fighting reportedly broke out between Taliban commanders Wali-ur-Rehman and Hakimullah Mehsud, during a meeting to decide a successor to Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud.

[George L. Singleton]

http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/...n+fight--bi-08

Today, Saturday, August 8, both Hakeemullah Mehsud the younger brother of just killed two days ago Pakistan Taliban leader Batulah Mehsud and Hakeemullah's chief rival to replace Batulah Mehsud, Walur Rehman from another clan of the total Mehsud conglomeration of clans were killed in a hot argument and shoot out during a secret (now public, obviously) shura in Sara Rogha in S. Waziristan.

This leaves for the moment 50-year-old Azmatullah Mehsud as the next most likely Taliban to become leader of all Taliban in Pakistan...but Mullah Ohmar's grizzly gang could and may interfere now to place or pick another new leader of the Taliban for and in Pakistan.

See above DAWN Sunday Aug. 9 story for details. I suggest you believe the fact that all these guys are now dead in such a short period of time. The Mehsud clan allegedly does not support the use of suicide bombers, purportedly believing the use of suicide bombers is heretical to Islam.

[George L. Singleton]

For anyone reading this on SWJ, in posts on the deaths of these three murdering thugs, Islamist Taliban, I identified the two now dead Meshuds as brothers, and the third dead Taliban leader, Rehman, as their cousin.

In fact all three are of the Meshud tribe but may or may not be the type of kinship I presumed from reading a Pakistan NEWS initial bulletin(s) on them during the weekend.

Will be glad to be openly corrected by anyone who can factually correct my statements of kinship, which solely comes from reading the English daily Pakistan NEWS stories about them.

Thanks,
George Singleton

http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/...-turkistan-089

http://www.thenews.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=23778

Hakeemullah and Wali both dead: Turkistan

Monday, 10 Aug, 2009 | 07:25 AM PST ISLAMABAD: Baitullah Mehsud had been killed along with 40 militants in a drone strike last week and was buried in his house, says a commander of the rival group.

Haji Turkistan Bhittani, a commander of the Abdullah Mehsud group, told various TV channels on Sunday that Qari Hussain, mastermind of several suicide attacks, was seriously injured in the attack.

He said that Mufti Waliur Rehman and Hakeemullah Mehsud, the two leading contenders for the top slot, were also killed along with several aides when fighting erupted at a shura meeting held to choose new chief of the Taliban.—APP

[davidbfpo]

A very comprehensive review of how we got here and what might be next, Hat tip to Abu Muqawama: http://www.slate.com/id/2224668/

Now the hard part begins. Since the CIA has demonstrated its ability to pinpoint "high-level targets," it will want to go after other top Taliban leaders in Pakistan, such as Maulvi Nazir in South Waziristan and Jalaluddin Haqqani in North Waziristan. But Pakistan's military and security establishment perceives both men, who focus their fighting in Afghanistan and not in Pakistan, as national security assets more than threats. And there's no magic drone strike to fix that.

davidbfpo

[Valin]

Mehsud killed while getting 'leg massage'
AFP
8/10/09

WASHINGTON — US officials stuck to their belief that Pakistani Taliban chief Baitullah Mehsud was killed last week, amid reports a CIA drone fired missiles at him as he was getting a leg massage on the roof of his father-in-law's house.

A US counterterrorism official told AFP on Monday "there are strong indications (Mehsud) is dead" following a missile attack launched from unmanned aircraft.

"No one is expecting him home for dinner tonight," the official said.
(snip)

[davidbfpo]

A detailed look at what has been reported by Bill Roggio: http://www.longwarjournal.org/archiv...bunk_claim.php and a look at those reported dead before, mainly by Pakistani autorities, who were in fact alive: http://www.longwarjournal.org/archiv...akistani_c.php

Some of the comments are just as interesting as the Bill Roggio's.

davidbfpo

[George L. Singleton]

http://www.khyberwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7417

08-11-2009, 08:18 AM
Khan Baba
Moderator Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Still searching
Posts: 3,364

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erlangner
Gora dagdagae ka masaala hal kawallay na shee, no zandawallay kho ye shee. Ao bal da khabarra pa har soorat khkarra da, che dagdagae ba de talibano pa qatar ke zan la kalla ham zaee wrak na kree. Ao Dagdagae de senator saleh sha ao maulana noor muhammad and maulana fateh khan pa wajah pa S wazirsitan ke der asar laree, ao da dre wara mullayan pa talibano der ghat asar lareee. No pa de soorat da dagdagee role paida kegee.

[QUOTE by Khan Baba]As per my knowledge, Maulana Fazl Rehaman is the ruler of FATA. He is ruling FATA through Taliban. Almost all the madrassahs in South Waziristan are affiliated to Dagdagge, it also includes those madrassahs which are directly under control of Taliban.

Therefore, he will be the last man to support elimination of Taliban. He will always support them. When there are bombings, suicide attacks etc in the country, you will find him quiet but when govt start thinking on a possible operation against Taliban then he will come out as an arbitrator. He is the biggest bastard (with beard).
__________________
"Pa Jahan da Nangyaali wee daa duwa kara
Ya ba ukhree kakaray ya ba kamran shee"

[George L. Singleton]

http://asinstitute.org/node/275

This excellent recent article (Aug. 10, 2009) from the Lahore based ASIAN INSTITUTE on the supremacy of civil law over religious law is a must read for everyone interested in the total war on terrorism today.

[davidbfpo]

A report that the Pakistani Army will not take ground action in Waziristan, to the annoyance of the USA: http://watandost.blogspot.com/2009/0...aliban-in.html

The target being the Pakistan Taliban group, TTP.

davidbfpo

[Schmedlap]

My strong suspicion is that such temporal, tactical gains produce far more strategic downside than upside on today's global "battlefield."

I look at it this way: who do we want commanding our enemy's forces? To use an OIF example, I think that killing Zarqawi was wise. Likewise, I think that not killing al-Masri was wise. It was better to have al-Masri running the show than Zarqawi.

[davidbfpo]

An interesting BBC News report on the appearance of bound and blindfolded bodies in Swat Valley, not clear who is responsible - locals seeking revenge or the security forces: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/8230267.stm

We know from history the Pakistani Army can be ruthless.

Are these the right suspects?

davidbfpo

[tpjkevin]

Racquets, not AKs.

PESHAWAR, Pakistan (CNN) -- As a little girl, Maria Toor Pakay would beat up boys.

Now, she dispenses of anyone who takes her on within the walls of a squash court.

Pakay, 18, is Pakistan's No. 1-ranked women's squash player. But what makes her story remarkable is that she hails from the country's tribal region of South Waziristan.

The region, along the border with Afghanistan, is home to the Taliban.

There, suicide attacks are a way of life. And the militants, bent on imposing a strict form of Islamic law, punish girls who attend school -- let alone play sports.

"They have no future," Pakay said. "They spend their entire lives in four walls in their home. Their ability is destroyed."

But Pakay wasn't like most girls growing up. She sported a buzz cut and mixed with the boys.

"If someone argued with me, I used to beat them up," she said. "I wanted them to obey me all the time."

Her father, Shams-ul-Qayum Wazir, knew early on that his daughter was different.

"I didn't want her talent to go to waste," he said. "If I would've kept her in the village, all she could do was housekeeping."

So, Wazir packed up the family and moved to Peshawar, the capital of the North West Frontier Province.

Here, Pakay picked up the racquet and swatted down the competition with ease -- first winning the Under-13 championship, then the Under-15, then the Under-17.

In squash, players take turns hitting a ball to the front wall of a court, until one misses.

Pakay, it turned out, rarely did.

"I thought nobody could beat me," she said. "From the beginning when I played squash, I thought I could be a world champion."

Today, despite the lack of a sponsor and few resources, Pakay has gone pro -- and is ranked 91st in the world.

Her father's sacrifice, she said, made her success possible.

"I think I have a great father -- so broad-minded," she said.

For his part, Wazir -- a teacher -- was more circumspect.

"I sacrificed because I want to promote a message of peace," he said. "If the tribal people pick up a racquet instead of a gun, there would be peace.

Link