London's Telegraph Reports Divisions in Pakistani Leadership
Thread,
Here's an important, IMHO, insight into what is going on in Pakistan. The President of that country has been rumored to be on very thin ice regarding his decision to back the U.S. in our plans of attack.
[[Aside: One city that will play heavily in this engagement is Peshawar*. This is today in Pakistan, but historically has been a part of Afghanistan. The local Pathans have a clear allegiance to Afghanistan. While we may be able to fly sorties over Pakistan without undue harassment, a land force moving through Pakistan, as it must, will be harassed by the local population as it attempts to move into the Kyber, Bolan or other pass into the heart of Afghanistan.
*http://www.alephx.com/peshawar/html/p_trip01.htm (especially note the text on Darra Adam Khel... Dorothy, we aren't in Kansas any more. ]]
We have, TTBOMK, no friends in the region (I regard India as a different sphere, for present purposes). The logistics to mount an effective land assault from Tajikistan, a proposal that the Bush Administration is addressing with the Putin administration, seems to me to be a non-starter. I had a friend who was attempting a few years ago to find a market for trucks being manufactured in the region. It being 4 time zones from Moscow, let alone any Western market made the idea impossible on a logistical/economic basis.
If we consider the fact that a coup d'etat is imminent in Pakistan, to say that "Bush finalizes battle plan" may be a tad premature. I'm afraid he may be OTBEd (overtaken by events) even before we begin.
The fact that the French and Germans are offering only waffling co-operation is troubling to me. This isn't the grand coalition we mounted for the Gulf War, at least not quite yet. Our allies may be more concerned about their own cities and the reprisals that could be launched against them should they take too bold a step toward participating in an invasion force. Should we and the British go it alone, on a military basis, we shall bear the brunt of further reprisals from the "sleeper" cells who lie in wait.
I see a long period of uncertainty ahead, barring the acquiescence of the Taliban in handing over Bin Laden and closing the training camps. That would be the best denouement imaginable at this stage, IMO, but one that I can't realistically hold out any hope for. Just too sensible, practical and Western a solution.
Here's the Telegraph article:
portal.telegraph.co.uk
Bush finalises battle plan
(Filed: 16/09/2001)
AMERICA was last night assembling the biggest military strike force since the Gulf War as President Bush issued an ultimatum to Pakistan to back allied action or run the risk of being bombed.
George W Bush: planning a sustained offensive
In his bluntest terms yet, Mr Bush made clear that the United States was about to launch a sustained offensive against Osama bin Laden and his terror camps in Afghanistan.
The Saudi Islamic fundamentalist was named for the first time by the President as the prime suspect in the suicide hijack attacks on New York and Washington that left almost 5,000 missing.
American officials have made clear that they expect Pakistan, which is the nearest point for allied forces to attack bin Laden's base in neighbouring Afghanistan, to co-operate fully in the allied operation.
In an uncompromising list of demands made to Pakistan's military leaders, US officials called for Islamabad to close training camps used by Islamic militants.
The US demanded that Pakistan shares all its intelligence on bin Laden and the Taliban, an organisation which it created in 1994 and is still funding. Pakistan should also make available airspace to US warplanes and take action to cut off funding to any group allied to bin Laden, and to close its border with Afghanistan.
If Pakistan failed to comply, US officials warned that the country ran the risk of being bombed in any future military action taken against Islamic terrorists. "We have been left with no doubt," said a senior Pakistan official.
"We can no longer be a friend of bin Laden and the US. And if we don't opt for Washington then they will not only cut off economic funding, including that from the International Monetary Fund, but also see us as a potential target."
As Pakistani officials considered the demands US forces started flying reinforcements to bases around the Middle East. Twelve B2 stealth bombers were on standby to fly to the British Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia.
SAS troops are preparing to join US special forces for operations in Afghanistan. British security service officials believe that initial missile strikes will take place "within days", although the full operation will take longer to mount.
As Washington attempts to forge a broad alliance, Pakistan was warned that Islamic militant training camps on its territory would be targeted if it refuses to support strikes against bin Laden. Although President Pervez Musharraf promised full co-operation, his own powerful military intelligence is firmly opposed to Pakistani involvement.
America urged Russia to allow it to use Tajikistan, the former Soviet republic that borders Afghanistan and is still dominated by Moscow, as a platform for troops to move against their mutual enemy.
The Taliban told all foreigners to leave the country in view of a possible attack and threatened war against any of its neighbours that offers assistance to Washington. Mr Bush prepared Americans for conflict as he repeated "we're at war" in a radio address.
He said: "There's no question about it, this action will not stand. We're going to find those who did it, we're going to smoke them out of their holes, we will get them running and we will bring them to justice."
Before meeting security advisers at Camp David, he added: "If he [bin Laden] thinks he can hide and run from the US and our allies, he will be sorely mistaken."
Congress approved late on Friday a resolution allowing the President to strike both individuals and nations which he determines "planned, authorised, committed or aided the terrorist attacks".
American intelligence officials have intensified monitoring of suspected terrorist groups amid fears that further "sleeper" cells will launch fresh attacks in response to US military retaliation.
US military commanders plan a three-stage assault against training camps used by bin Laden, beginning with air strikes by cruise missiles, followed by carpet bombing and attacks by ground troops.
Six training camps and rebel bases used by bin Laden's supporters in Afghanistan are understood to have been identified as targets. "We are going to go in hard and we are going to get it right," one Pentagon official told The Telegraph.
John Gannon, a former CIA intelligence chief, warned that bin Laden supporters have been trying to develop nuclear and biological weapons for future attacks. Other reports say they are already in the process of making chemical weapons.
The Pentagon is also preparing to strike against Iraq after it emerged that Saddam Hussein has been providing bin Laden's terrorist network with funding, logistical back-up and advanced weapons training.
Over the past four months senior Iraqi intelligence officers have met representatives from al-Qaeda, bin Laden's international network, in Pakistan. They are believed to have transferred at least £2.7 million to his agents via diplomatic bags in cash or Lebanese bank accounts over the past year.
Pakistan's President Musharraf said yesterday that his country will co-operate with US demands. However, a meeting in Rawalpindi yesterday of corps commanders and intelligence chiefs was deeply divided as his own powerful military intelligence backed a new jihad (holy war) against the West.
Not only does Pakistan have plenty of Islamic militants of its own fighting in Afghanistan but there are millions of armed Afghans in Pakistan and millions of Pakistanis who see bin Laden as a hero. Moreover in the country's highly Islamicised armed forces many generals share the same strict vision of Islam.
Meanwhile, America's European allies, led by France, were backing away from offers of full military support after Nato's show of solidarity. "We know that we can only rely on Britain, not France and Germany" said a US official.
|
