Recently in Pakistan's double game Category

It seems all but miraculous that no one has claimed "Pakistanophobia" as the root of these reports of Pakistan's double game. "Secret NATO Taliban report revives Pakistan fears," by Nick Paton Walsh for CNN, February 1:

Kabul, Afghanistan (CNN) -- Pakistan continues to support the Taliban in Afghanistan, a secret NATO report says, according to a journalist who has read it, despite years of Pakistani denials and American pressure to stop backing the insurgency

The Taliban depend on Pakistan for support, even though they do not necessarily welcome it, Times of London reporter Jerome Starkey said Wednesday, citing the report.

The leaked NATO document revives the longstanding accusation that elements in Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence agency are aiding the insurgency in Afghanistan.

It says the ISI knows the whereabouts of all senior Taliban commanders, Starkey said.

"It is a marriage of convenience," he said. The Taliban see Pakistan as manipulative, but they see no alternative to accepting its support, he said.

The Taliban are absolutely confident of victory, he said the report found, based on 27,000 interviews with more than 4,000 detainees ranging from senior Taliban commanders to Afghan civilians.

They also include mid- and low-level Taliban, al Qaeda, and foreign fighters, he said.

NATO downplayed the importance of the report Wednesday, after it was leaked, while Pakistan rejected key conclusions entirely....

Pakistan's number-one export in 2011 was angry denials.

Indeed. It defies imagination that a secretive group holed up in a meticulously controlled compound in close proximity to the Pakistani military never made them wonder who their neighbors were. Panetta's observations echo what he said after the bin Laden raid in May: either the Pakistanis were incompetent, or complicit, though Panetta now seems to be leaning more toward the latter assessment.

"Pakistan knew where Bin Laden was all along, Leon Panetta admits as he reveals intelligence source for Osama raid," by David Baker for the Daily Mail, January 28:

Pakistan officials must have known that terror chief Bin Laden was holed up in a remote compound in Abbottabad, claims Pentagon chief Leon Panettta.

The Defence Secretary has publicly hit out at the Pakistani government who he says 'must have had some sense' of Osama Bin Laden's whereabouts.

He said he remains convinced they must have known someone of interest was hiding out in the safe-house in an interview for CBS's '60 Minutes', but added he has no proof.

The explosive interview, to be broadcast tomorrow, also saw Panetta acknowledge for the first time that Pakistani doctor Shakil Afridi had provided key information about the former Al Qaeda frontman's whereabouts.

Afridi ran a vaccination program for the CIA to collect DNA and verify Bin Laden's presence in the hideout and Panetta confessed he is 'very concerned' for the doctor who has been charged by Pakistan with treason.

Since the May 2 attack on Bin Laden's compound, last year, Pakistani leaders have continued to deny they had any idea Bin Laden was staying in the city.

This is despite revelations that he had been hiding at the site for as long as five years.

For months the CIA knew of his presence there and spied on him from its own top-secret safe-house next door to the terror leader's fortified compound, before Navy Seals were sent in. [...]

Shortly after the raid security forces announced they had arrested 40 people in Abbottabad, suspected of having connections to Osama Bin Laden.

This gave rise to growing accusations the Pakistani government must have been aware he was using the base as a safe house, given the network of support he had there....

The Obama administration believed Syed Saleem Shahzad's killing was ordered by Pakistani intelligence, and Pakistan angrily denied the outgoing Joint Chiefs chair's allegations that Islamabad sanctioned the killing.

Shahzad's final article was on failed talks between the Pakistani navy and al-Qaeda, which sought to secure the release of al-Qaeda-linked naval officers. He then disappeared. The most curious evidence of high-ranking involvement that has been made public has been the fact that Shahzad's cell phone records were completely wiped from from 18 days before his death to the time he disappeared. Your garden variety criminal thugs can't pull that off.

"Pakistan probe draws a blank on journalist killing," from Agence France-Presse, January 13:

An investigation into the killing of a Pakistani journalist who reported that Islamist militants had infiltrated the military has not been able to find his murderers, an official report shows.

Saleem Shahzad, a 40-year-old father of three, vanished in May last year after leaving his home in Islamabad to appear on a television talk show, two days after writing an article about links between rogue elements of the navy and Al-Qaeda following an attack on a naval base.

The journalist, who worked for an Italian news agency and a Hong Kong-registered news site, told Human Rights Watch he had been threatened by intelligence agents.

The Inter-Services Intelligence directorate, Pakistan's main spy agency, has denied as "baseless" allegations that it was involved in his murder.

A government commission set up to investigate the death and comprised of senior judges, provincial police chiefs and a journalist representative was unable to trace Shahzad's killers, said its concluding report released Friday.

The report said the inquiry had met 23 times and interviewed 41 witnesses, as well as examining a large batch of relevant documents.

In concluding remarks, the report said that Shahzad's death should be examined in the context of the "war on terror".

"The Pakistani state, the non-state actors such as the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, and foreign actors" could all have had a motive to commit the crime.

But "the commission has been unable to identify the culprits", it said.

The report said investigators would continue to look into Shahzad's death, while his family would be given generous government compensation.

Blood money.

His relatives had demanded a full investigation but have not apportioned blame for his killing, which came five years after he was briefly kidnapped by the Taliban in Afghanistan and accused of being a spy.

Shahzad's widow would be given three million rupees ($33,000), a government teaching job near her home and his children would be given free education, she said.

Shahzad's body was found south of the capital, bearing marks of torture.

Two days earlier he had written an investigative report in Asia Times Online saying Al-Qaeda carried out a recent attack on a naval air base to avenge the arrest of naval officials held on suspicion of Al-Qaeda links.

The US military's then top officer, Admiral Mike Mullen, said Pakistan authorities may have sanctioned Shahzad's killing.

The accusation was a major setback for relations between the United States and Pakistan, coming shortly after US troops killed Osama bin Laden in a covert raid in the garrison city of Abbottabad.

The commission also made recommendations to the press and intelligence agencies to be more "law abiding and accountable" in future and suggested the creation of a human rights ombudsman.

According to press watchdog Reporters Without Borders, Pakistan was the deadliest country for the media in 2011 with at least eight journalists killed in connection with their work.

It is a curious coincidence, at the very least, that just as al-Qaeda and the Pakistani Taliban are both apparently feeling the heat, America's hands are tied on drone strikes. "Al-Qaida, Taliban seek Pakistani militants' help," by Ishtiaq Mahsud and Sebastian Abbott for the Associated Press, January 2:

DERA ISMAIL KHAN, Pakistan -- Prominent al-Qaida and Afghan Taliban fighters asked Pakistani militants in a pair of rare meetings to set aside their differences and step up support for the battle against U.S.-led forces in Afghanistan, militant commanders said Monday.

The meetings were held in Pakistan's tribal region in November and December at the request of the Afghan Taliban's leadership council. They could indicate the militants are struggling in Afghanistan, or conversely, that they want to make sure they hit U.S. forces hard as the Americans accelerate their withdrawal this year. That could give the Taliban additional leverage in any peace negotiations.

"For God's sake, forget all your differences and give us fighters to boost the battle against America in Afghanistan," senior al-Qaida commander Abu Yahya al-Libi told Pakistani fighters at a meeting on Dec. 11, according to a militant who attended.

Pakistani militants have long been split over where they should focus their fighting. The Pakistani Taliban have concentrated on toppling their own government, although they have sent some fighters to Afghanistan. Other Pakistani groups based in the tribal region have almost exclusively directed their attacks against foreign forces in Afghanistan.

The Pakistani Taliban, an umbrella organization set up in 2007 to represent roughly 40 insurgent groups, has also been split by infighting over turf and leadership positions after commanders were killed by the Pakistani military and U.S. drone strikes.

The group has fractured into more than 100 smaller factions, a process that some analysts have suggested would take a toll on militants fighting in Afghanistan by making it increasingly difficult for them to find recruits, as well as restricting territory in Pakistan available to them.Pakistani Taliban chief Hakimullah Mehsud attended the two meetings on Nov. 27 in Wana, the main town in South Waziristan, and Dec. 11 in the Datta Khel area of North Waziristan, Pakistani Taliban spokesman Ehsanullah Ehsan told The Associated Press....

Does Pakistan think it makes its Islamic republic look strong and powerful to persecute this woman and reduce her to this state? Quite to the contrary, it conveys a sense of fear, both that Islam cannot stand on its own merits in the free market of ideas, and of angering violent Islamic supremacists who may turn on the state that has allowed them to run amok.

As with the recent roundup of Ethiopian Christians in Saudi Arabia, Pakistani authorities' display of power here is ultimately a display of weakness.

"Christmas in prison for Asia Bibi, sentenced to death for blasphemy," by Jibran Khan for Asia News, December 20:

Islamabad (AsiaNews) – Her only hope for the future is to return to her family, to embrace her daughters, so she asks for our prayers while praying that other "brothers and sisters" will not go to prison on false charges of blasphemy. It will be another Christmas in jail, away from her loved ones, for Asia Bibi, the Christian mother of five children, locked in the women's prison Sheikpura (Punjab), sentenced to death by the " black law" pending appeal, still awaiting for the High Court of Lahore to set a date. Yesterday a delegation of the International Masihi Foundation, an NGO that deals with the legal protection of women, visited her to exchange greetings on the eve of the festive season. And for the first time since the assassination of Punjab Governor Salman Taseer, who was killed by his bodyguard in January last year, Asia has found herself before a large group of people so far, in fact, she could only speak with her husband and the lawyer during the weekly interview with relatives.

It was Taseer who called the law a "black law" before he was assassinated.

In her isolation cell, looking tired and aged, beyond her 46 years, fragile and very weak, she can barely stand up. Entering the room reserved for meetings escorted by two guards, she appears confused and her eyes run from right to left for the duration of the meeting, about 2 hours and 20 minutes, with alternating emotions ranging from tears to laughter, as well as long periods of silence. Her voice is weak, for the first 10 minutes she can not figure out if the members of the delegation are "friends or enemies." She stops talking when a prison guard enters the room and when they ask how she is treated by the prison authorities she looks away, as if she had not heard the question and closes in a stubborn silence.

Our AsiaNews correspondent attended the meeting with Asia Bibi and spoke with her. Here, below, the responses of a woman who - even in a situation of extreme difficulty –has not lost hope and her desire to fight for her freedom and for her family.

Asia Bibi, on the eve of Christmas, what are your hopes and expectations?

I will answer honestly, I do not know. What do you think will happen? I continue to pray and fast for my family. I wish with all my being to be with my family. I want to hug my daughters. And I still cherish the hope that one day I will be freed.

What message would you like to give to Pakistani Christians and those around the world who pray for you?

Please continue to pray for my return to my family. And I am immensely grateful for the prayers.

Do you have a special day, which breaks the daily monotony of prison?

I lost all sense of celebration, the only day I know, hate and - unfortunately - remember clearly is June 9, the darkest and most painful day of my life when I was arrested. I would not wish even my worst enemy to suffer what I myself have had to endure, what both I and my family have experienced since that terrible June 9. For us it was a nightmare and from then on I lost track of time. In prison you lose track of time, time, day, month. I am illiterate and do not enjoy special concessions in prison, the only thing I can do is participate in Sunday school lessons.

Have you forgiven the people who caused your arrest?

At first no, I could not. And how could I ? [She says this with great anger and then, almost sinks breathing heavily] Although illiterate, I remain deeply Christian and my religion has taught me the value of forgiveness. [she smiles ...] At first, when I was thrown into prison, I was angry and meditated revenge, because I had been ripped from my family. Then I started to pray and fast and it may seem strange, I have noticed that I have forgiven those people who charged me with blasphemy. This is a chapter in my life that I would love to shut behind me and forget.

What do you think of the situation of Christians in Pakistan?

[His [sic] face darkens, then suddenly she begins to speak quietly ...] How many more brothers and sisters are still unjustly accused ... will be mistreated, abused, defendants in mock trials as happened to me.

Asia Bibi understands that the meeting is about to end and seems terrified to see friends leave. "When will you come back again to see me?" And then she asks those present: "What will you do now?". Her voice rises to a pitch, like a cry for help ... "When will I be released ..."

But it will probably thaw out eventually

This is long overdue. The only problem with it is that probably the money will go through eventually. A freeze is not what it should be: a cancellation.

"US Congress freezes $700 million in aid for Pakistan," by Lillian Rizzo for Global Post, December 13 (thanks to Kenneth):

A US Congressional panel froze $700 million in aid to Pakistan until the country gives assurances it is joining the fight against the spread of homemade bombs in the region, Reuters reported.

The Pakistanis, surprise of surprises, claimed victim status and issued threats:

The latest move by the United States may only further hurt ties with Pakistan and contribute to the growing sense of anti-Americanism in the population, a senior Pakistani official told NBC News. The relationship between the two counties suffered greatly in May when US forces killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan....

Still, the freeze in aid, which is a part of a defense bill expected to be passed by Congress later this week, could cause further cuts, the BBC reported. The US has given about $20 billion in security and economic aid to Pakistan since 2001, mostly in the form of reimbursements for assistance in fighting militants. Congress says Islamabad has not only failed to act against the militant groups, it has actively provided help to them in some cases, the BBC reported.

After news of the US cut in aid, members of the Pakistani government immediately said this will further hurt the relationship between the US and Pakistan....

Nothing hurts that relationship more than the Pakistani involvement in the global jihad, but as always, that remains unstated.

So, does anyone still say "friend and ally?" "Pakistan says U.S. drones in its air space will be shot down," from MSNBC, December 11:

ISLAMABAD -- Pakistan will shoot down any U.S. drone that intrudes its air space per new directives, a senior Pakistani official told NBC News on Saturday.

According to the new Pakistani defense policy, "Any object entering into our air space, including U.S. drones, will be treated as hostile and be shot down," a senior Pakistani military official told NBC News.

The policy change comes just weeks after a deadly NATO attack on Pakistani military checkpoints accidentally killed 24 Pakistani soldiers, prompting Pakistani officials to order all U.S. personnel out of a remote airfield in Pakistan.

Pakistan told the U.S. to vacate Shamsi Air Base by December 11.

A senior military official from Quetta, Pakistan, confirmed to NBC News on Saturday that the evacuation of the base, used for staging classified drone flights directed against militants, “will be completed tomorrow,” according to NBC’s Fakhar ur Rehman.

Pakistan's Frontier Corps security forces took control of the base Saturday evening after most U.S. military personnel left, Xinhua news agency reported. Civil aviation officials also moved in Saturday, Xinhua said.

Pakistani Military Chief Gen Ashfaq Pervez Kayani had issued multiple directives since the Nov. 26 NATO attack, which included orders to shoot down U.S. drones, senior military officials confirmed to NBC News on Saturday.

It was unclear Saturday whether orders to fire upon incoming U.S. drones was part of the initial orders.

Cutting off their noses to spite their faces:

The Pakistani airbase had been used by U.S. forces, including the CIA, to stage elements of a clandestine U.S. counter-terrorism operation to attack militants linked to al-Qaida, the Taliban and Pakistan's home-grown Haqqani network, using unmanned drone aircraft armed with missiles.

President Barack Obama stepped up the drone campaign after he took office. U.S. officials say it has produced major successes in decimating the central leadership of al-Qaida and putting associated militant groups on the defensive.

Since 2004, U.S. drones have carried out more than 300 attacks inside Pakistan.

Pakistani authorities started threatening U.S. personnel with eviction from the Shamsi base in the wake of the raid last May in which U.S. commandos killed Osama bin Laden at his hide-out near Islamabad without notifying Pakistani officials in advance.

Daryl Cagle captures the ridiculous kowtowing and ongoing jizya payments to the double-dealing jihad state of Pakistan. (Thanks to Maxwell.)

While Pakistan's interior minister thanked the Taliban for not causing bloodshed there, Afghanistan was not so lucky, and a Pakistan-based jihadist group claimed responsibility. In addition to the slaughter carried out yesterday, the jihadists are knowingly inviting -- and hoping for -- a wave of retribution in blood. "Afghanistan to consult Pakistan over claim for Kabul massacre," from CNN, December 7:

Kabul, Afghanistan (CNN) -- Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai said Wednesday his government will discuss with Pakistan a militant group's reported claim of responsibility for a deadly suicide strike at a Shiite shrine in Kabul.

An offshoot of the Pakistani-based Lashkar-e-Jhangvi claimed responsibility for the strike in a call to a radio station, according to news reports. Karzai's spokesman told CNN the Afghan government wants to huddle with Pakistan over the issue. It is not yet clear if the claim by the group was valid.

Afghanistan said it is investigating the mass-scale sectarian attack on Shiite worshipers, which was unlike anything the country has seen in its decade-long war -- in contrast to Iraq, where violence between Shiites and Sunnis has been a major feature of the conflict.

At least 56 people were killed and 193 were wounded, when a suicide bomber detonated a device at a Shiite shrine in Kabul on Tuesday, Afghan Health Ministry spokesman Kargar Norughli said.

Four people also were killed in a Tuesday explosion at a roundabout on a busy street in Mazar-e Sharif, the provincial capital of Afghanistan's northern Balkh province, police official Lal Mohammad Ahmadzai said. Another 21 were wounded in that attack.

"The enemies tried to spread fear in this important holiday in the city," Ahmadzai said.

It was not immediately clear whether the attack in Mazar-e Sharif was linked to the attack in Kabul.

Other violence raged in Afghanistan on Wednesday in the southern region. At least 19 people, including women and children, were killed when their bus hit a roadside mine Wednesday, said Daud Ahmadi, a spokesman for the governor of Helmand province. Their bus was traveling from provincial capital Lashkar Gah to Sangin district in the south of the restive province, he said. He said he did not know whether the civilians were the target of the roadside mine planted by the Taliban.

Karzai canceled a visit to the United Kingdom after the Tuesday blasts, which happened on the Shiite holy day of Ashura. A spokesman for the Afghan Embassy in London said Karzai had been due in London late Tuesday from Germany but was flying back to Afghanistan.

Megan Ellis, a U.S. Embassy spokeswoman in Kabul, said Wednesday that an American was among the dead. She added that consular officials were in touch with the family, who would need to consent to the release of further details.

The Taliban denied involvement in Tuesday's attacks.

A man identifying himself as a spokesman for Lashkar-e-Janghvi al Almi, a group with links to al Qaeda and the Pakistan Taliban, made the claim in a call to Radio Mashaal, a Pashto-language station in Pakistan sponsored by the U.S. government.

The group is an offshoot of the powerful Lashkar-e-Janghvi, which has a record of high-profile suicide bombings in Pakistan, including the attack on the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad in 2008.

Afghanistan has seen previous attacks on mosques. In 2006, rioting broke out between Shiites and Sunnis at an Ashura festival in Herat, leading to several deaths. But the country has not seen sectarian attacks of the scale that occurred Tuesday.

Ashura commemorates the martyrdom of Hussein, grandson of the Prophet Mohammed. Hussein's death in battle in Karbala, Iraq, in 680, is one of the events that helped create the schism between Sunnis and Shiites, the two main Muslim religious movements. Shiites are a minority presence in Afghanistan, which is predominantly Sunni.

"There's still a tendency to see these things in Sunni-Shia terms. But the Middle East is going to have to overcome that." - Condoleezza Rice, January 2007.

It's not just the Middle East that's having a hard time "overcoming" a hatred over thirteen centuries in the making. The Sunni-Shi'ite jihad is not limited to one region.

Hallmark doesn't make a card for that. One must consider the source, however. Interior Minister Rehman Malik is the same official who has ordered the blocking of "un-Islamic" web sites and text messages, demanded the pope and Interpol denounce the Florida Qur'an burning, and said he would shoot a person who committed blasphemy against Islam in his presence.

That's the Interior Minister of Pakistan. "Pakistani minister thanks Taliban for not bombing," from the Associated Press, December 6:

ISLAMABAD – Pakistan's interior minister thanked the country's Taliban militant movement Tuesday for not staging attacks during this year's Shiite ritual of Ashoura, a remark likely to draw criticism as the country grapples with how to subdue the extremists.

The Pakistani Taliban and other Sunni extremist groups have frequently bombed Shiite processions during Ashoura.

The government has declared war on the group, but in recent weeks there have been unconfirmed reports of peace talks with at least some factions within the Taliban.

Unlike in neighboring Afghanistan, where a suicide bomber killed more than 50 Shiites earlier Tuesday, the Ashoura observances passed peacefully in Pakistan this year.

Speaking to reporters in the capital, Islamabad, Interior Minister Rehman Malik said he had appealed to the Taliban to "respect" the Shiite observances and "I want to thank them for doing that."

It was unclear whether Malik, who has a history of making controversial, insensitive or wrong statements, was referring to a formal appeal to the Taliban. He has previously denied the reports of peace talks with the group. The government's official line is that it will talk to any militant outfit if it renounces violence and lays down its arms.

The Pakistani Taliban and allied groups have claimed responsibility for hundreds of suicide bombings over the last five years that have killed thousands as part of a campaign to replace the secular government with a hard-line Islamist one. They regard Shiites as infidels, and believe killing them is a religious obligation.

The army has attacked its strongholds in the northwest close to the Afghan border.

Despite the Taliban's violence, there is political and public support for a peace deal with the group.

Many Pakistanis share its hard-line religious views and anti-American stance, and believe the militants could be brought into the fold if only Islamabad severed its alliance with Washington, which they blame for the insurgency.

"This will come back at us, and at a time and a place of their [the ISI's] choosing."

"Nato braces for reprisals after deadly air strike on Pakistan border post," by Julian Borger and Saeed Shah for the Guardian, November 27:

Nato forces in Afghanistan were braced on Sunday for possible reprisals from Pakistani-backed insurgents following the coalition air strike along the border that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.

Senior officers from the Nato-led International Security Assistance Force (Isaf), were scrambling to resume contacts with their Pakistani counterparts in the hopes of setting up a joint investigation into the incident.

But Pakistani officers severed communications and Islamabad cut Isaf's two supply routes running through Pakistan.

It also gave the US two weeks to vacate the Shamsi airbase in Balochistan, which has been used to launch American drone aircraft.

One Isaf source voiced concern that the Pakistani intelligence agency, the ISI, could go much further and use its suspected influence over insurgent groups in the tribal areas along the Afghan border to launch reprisal attacks on Nato. "This will come back at us, and at a time and a place of their [the ISI's] choosing," the source predicted. In September the chairman of the US joint chiefs of staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, said the ISI was using insurgent groups such as the Haqqani network to wage a "proxy war" in Afghanistan....

This account supports a senior Western official's statement that the airstrikes were a defensive measure, and suggests another case of curiously close proximity between jihadists and Pakistani military posts. U.S. officers reportedly also believed the Pakistani military was providing cover for jihadists in a firefight in late October, along with other recent allegations of jihadists' operating in the sight of the Pakistani military.

Once again, this may have been a tragic accident. Or jihadists may have tried to draw fire in the direction of Pakistani bases to create an incident. Or, it may have been the inevitable outcome of collaboration between Pakistan and its jihadist clients, and recent reports such as the ones linked above make the last scenario all too plausible. "Afghan officials: Fire from Pakistan led to attack," by Rahim Faiez and Sebastian Abbott for the Associated Press, November 27:

ISLAMABAD (AP) — Afghanistan officials claimed Sunday that Afghan and NATO forces were retaliating for gunfire from two Pakistani army bases when they called in airstrikes that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers, adding a layer of complexity to an episode that has further strained Pakistan's ties with the United States.

The account challenged Pakistan's claim that the strikes were unprovoked.

The attack Saturday near the Afghan-Pakistani border aroused popular anger in Pakistan and added tension to the U.S.-Pakistani relationship, which has been under pressure since the secret U.S. raid inside Pakistan that killed Osama bin Laden in May.

Pakistan has closed its western border to trucks delivering supplies to coalition troops in Afghanistan, demanded that the U.S. abandon an air base inside Pakistan and said it will review its cooperation with the U.S. and NATO.

A complete breakdown in the relationship between the United States and Pakistan is considered unlikely. Pakistan relies on billions of dollars in American aid, and the U.S. needs Pakistan to push Afghan insurgents to participate in peace talks.

Afghanistan's assertions about the attack muddy the efforts to determine what happened. The Afghan officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue, said it was unclear who fired on Afghan and NATO forces, which were conducting a joint operation before dawn Saturday.

They said the fire came from the direction of the two Pakistani army posts along the border that were later hit in the airstrikes.

NATO has said it is investigating, but it has not questioned the Pakistani claim that 24 soldiers were killed. All airstrikes are approved at a higher command level than the troops on the ground....

After all, the truce with the Taliban in North Waziristan in October of 2006 was such a smashing success -- for the Taliban.

The risks are clear: Pakistan would have an excuse not to take action against the Taliban as long as "talks" are pending, or may enter into another disastrous agreement. The Taliban would have a means of buying time while playing both sides of the issue, continuing to fight, plot, and acquire more firepower while attempting to blackmail Islamabad with the threat of abandoning negotiations and unleashing a wave of attacks.

"Exclusive: Taliban, Pakistan said to have started peace talks," from Reuters, November 21:

(Reuters) - Pakistan's Taliban movement, a major security threat to the country, is holding exploratory peace talks with the government, a senior Taliban commander and mediators told Reuters on Monday.

The United States, the source of billions of dollars of aid vital for Pakistan's military and feeble economy, is unlikely to look kindly on peace talks with the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), which it has labeled a terrorist group.

Past peace pacts with the TTP have failed to bring stability, and merely gave the umbrella group time and space to consolidate, launch fresh attacks and impose their austere version of Islam on segments of the population.

The discussions are focused on the South Waziristan region on the Afghan border and could be expanded to try to reach a comprehensive deal if progress is made.

The Taliban, who are close to al Qaeda, made several demands, including the release of prisoners and the withdrawal of Pakistani forces from South Waziristan, said the commander.

In other words, an end to Pakistani sovereignty in Pakistani territory. That should be a non-starter.

An ethnic Pashtun tribal mediator described the talks as "very difficult." Pakistani military and government officials were not immediately available for comment.

"Yes, we have been holding talks, but this is just an initial phase. We will see if there is a breakthrough," said the senior Taliban commander, who asked not to be identified.

"Right now, this is at the South Waziristan level. If successful, we can talk about a deal for all the tribal areas," he said, referring to Pashtun lands along the Afghan border.

The Taliban will break the deal, and accuse Pakistan of doing so if challenged. It will keep the concessions it has won, and resume fighting for more.

The TTP, allied with the Afghan Taliban movement fighting U.S.-led NATO forces in Afghanistan, is entrenched in the unruly areas along the porous frontier....

"The memo sent to Adm. Mike Mullen, the top U.S. military officer at the time, reportedly offered to curb support to Islamist militants from Pakistan's military intelligence service, the ISI."

"Pakistani ambassador to US caught in controversy," by Chris Brummitt for the Associated Press, November 17:

ISLAMABAD (AP) — The Pakistani government said Thursday that it has not decided whether to accept a resignation offer from its ambassador to the U.S. over a reported attempt to enlist Washington's help to rein in the country's military after the raid that killed Osama bin Laden.

The government has summoned Ambassador Husain Haqqani to Islamabad to question him about any role he may have played in the growing controversy, which was first disclosed in an Oct. 10 column in the Financial Times, said Farhatullah Babar, a Pakistani presidential spokesman.

Mansoor Ijaz, a U.S. citizen of Pakistani origin, said in the column that a senior Pakistani diplomat asked him on May 9 — a week after U.S. commandos killed bin Laden in a Pakistani garrison town — to pass a message from President Asif Ali Zardari to the U.S. asking for help. Ijaz did not name the diplomat.

Zardari was reportedly worried that the U.S. raid had so humiliated his government, which did not know about it beforehand, that the military may stage a coup — something that has happened repeatedly in Pakistan's history, said Ijaz.

The memo sent to Adm. Mike Mullen, the top U.S. military officer at the time, reportedly offered to curb support to Islamist militants from Pakistan's military intelligence service, the ISI, in exchange for American assistance, Ijaz said.

The Pakistani Foreign Ministry has called the Financial Times column "a total fabrication."

But Mullen's spokesman, Capt. John Kirby, confirmed to Foreign Policy's website Wednesday that Mullen did receive the memo from Ijaz, but he did not find it credible and ignored it.

Haqqani said Thursday that he did not write or deliver the memo, but offered his resignation to end the controversy.

"I do not want this non-issue of an insignificant memo written by a private individual and not considered credible by its lone recipient to undermine democracy," Haqqani told The Associated Press.

Haqqani is expected to travel to Islamabad in the next few days so that the government can determine who should be blamed for the incident, Babar said. He said the government has not received a formal letter of resignation from Haqqani, and talk of what would happen to him was "premature."

Funny how this keeps happening. "On Afghan-Pakistan border, suspicions reign," by Joshua Partlow for the Washington Post, November 14:

FORWARD OPERATING BASE SHARANA, AFGHANISTAN — One Tuesday evening last month, while patrolling along Afghanistan’s border with Pakistan, American soldiers came under a flurry of gunfire and rocket-propelled grenades from the vicinity of a Pakistani military checkpoint known as Border Post 4.

The soldiers with the 3rd platoon launched a warning flare, called a “red star cluster,” to identify themselves. For a moment, according to a U.S. military summary of the incident, the firing stopped; then it resumed. The U.S. soldiers shot back with their rifles and handheld 60mm mortars — a rare direct-fire engagement with a Pakistani border post.

But as with much concerning Pakistan’s role in the Afghan war, this firefight has left American soldiers at a loss for a clear explanation. It could have been a case of Pakistani soldiers firing on U.S. troops to provide cover for insurgents maneuvering nearby, as some U.S. soldiers initially concluded. Or, insurgents could have been firing from a checkpoint that had already been abandoned by Pakistani troops.

The murky episode is one small illustration of the challenge in defining Pakistan’s involvement with insurgents who are fighting U.S. troops. The longer the Afghan war drags on, the more suspicion mounts that Pakistan’s security services provide a wide range of support for the Taliban and its allies. And with this suspicion, Afghan and American relations with Pakistan continue to deteriorate.

There is no shortage of accusations flying across the border. On the Afghan side, officials regularly accuse Pakistan’s military and intelligence services of using the Taliban to fight a proxy war against the United States, their nominal ally. Afghan leaders say Pakistan’s spies meet with the Taliban leadership, and fund and equip them for the fight in Afghanistan.

With equal conviction, Pakistani officials deny harboring or helping the insurgency in any way and blame U.S. and Afghan officials for allowing insurgent sanctuaries in Afghanistan. Pakistan’s president vowed this month to “eradicate” the Haqqani network, the insurgent group that the U.S. military’s highest-ranking officer this year called a “veritable arm” of Pakistan’s spy agency, the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI.

On the border, the situation does not become much clearer. U.S. soldiers in Paktika, a province the size of New Jersey that is across from the Pakistani tribal area of North Waziristan, see the role of Pakistan as a somewhat abstract question — they do not let it distract them from the daily requirements of fighting the insurgency.

Several U.S. soldiers here said they believed it was likely that Pakistan’s government was complicit with the Taliban and Haqqani fighters in the province but that they could not prove that connection. Accusing Pakistan of helping to kill U.S. troops — while at the same time receiving billions in American aid — is a politically touchy issue that many U.S. soldiers would rather avoid.

“There’s a lot of smoke. Is there fire?” said one U.S. military officer about possible Pakistani complicity with the insurgents. “It’s a very strong circumstantial argument at this point.”

Inside Forward Operating Base Tillman, in eastern Paktika province, Pakistani soldiers share office space with U.S. troops at a border coordination center that is intended to help bolster efforts against insurgents on both sides of the border. At this base, and others along the border, U.S. troops regularly come under attack from rockets fired from Pakistani territory. About half of all indirect insurgent fire — rockets, mortars or artillery — in the province is launched from within a mile of the border, and 10 to 12 percent of it comes from the Pakistan side, said Maj. Eric Butler, the intelligence officer with the U.S. brigade in Paktika.

American soldiers said the sophisticated and coordinated nature of some rocket-fire suggests extensive training, and perhaps Pakistani military involvement.

Butler said there is “no real, hard evidence that anybody is being complicit.” But he added: “I personally find it very difficult to believe that there’s not some kind of knowledge.”

Lt. Col. Curtis D. Taylor, who commands an American battalion in western Paktika, said there are regular rumors about Pakistan’s involvement with insurgents but that those are unconfirmed.

“If you talk to the people who are connected to the insurgency, they tell you that the insurgent activity . . . the intensity of activity, is modulated by Pakistani ISI,” Taylor said. “That’s consistent across the board. What they tell you is the ISI has control over the intensity of the insurgency.”

The firefight on Oct. 25 remains something of a mystery. After the first few minutes of firing from the Pakistani Frontier Corps checkpoint, U.S. aircraft spotted a group of insurgents about 200 yards to the west firing rocket-propelled grenades at the American soldiers. U.S. military aircraft dropped two 500-pound bombs and killed the insurgents.

When the fighting first broke out, an officer at FOB Tillman asked the Pakistani liaison officer to call his Frontier Corps counterparts, but the Pakistani major was “hemming and hawing,” one U.S. military officer said. When he eventually called, there was no answer.

A report written a day after the fighting suggested that U.S. officers believed Pakistani troops were providing cover for the insurgents by firing at the American soldiers. “It is likely PAKMIL were facilitating [insurgents’] maneuver on [coalition forces] positions,” it read. “It is my assessment that conducting coordinated PAKMIL operations will most likely remain problematic due to perceived support and/or tolerance of [insurgent] forces operating in and around PAKMIL [checkpoints].”

But a few days after the fighting, a group of U.S. Special Operations soldiers went to a hilltop about 400 yards from Border Post 4 and surveyed it with a night-vision scope. It appeared as if it might be abandoned, one U.S. military official said.

The insurgents might have used the checkpoint, if it had been abandoned, for the potential political benefit of ratcheting up tension along the border, the U.S. military official said. Others believe that the checkpoint was occupied and that there had been a Pakistani flag flying from it the day of the attack.

Butler, the brigade intelligence officer, said there is no evidence to prove that Pakistani soldiers were firing that day, but he said it is possible they were.

“I can see how it could have been two different groups of insurgents — one to cover the other — or Pak Mil doing it,” he said. “I have no evidence either way.”

A prior report on this story, referenced below, described multiple gunmen in a "complex, calculated assault," and stated:

"Pakistani officials first attributed the attack to militants, then, when pressed to investigate, to a single rogue soldier from the Frontier Corps, the poorly controlled tribal militia that guards the border region. To this day, none of the governments have publicly clarified what happened, hoping to limit damage to relations. Both the American and Pakistani military investigations remain classified."

The Pakistani version of a single rogue "gunman" seems to have won in the official story, which, however official, leaves many unanswered questions.

"US probe says border attack was not Pakistani plot," from Agence France-Presse, October 31:

An attack on US troops in 2007 that left an American officer dead was the act of a rogue Pakistani gunman and not a plot by the country's military, according to a US probe released Monday.

For years, details of the shooting on Pakistan's border with Afghanistan have been shrouded in secrecy amid speculation US officials were anxious to avoid aggravating tensions with Pakistan.

A US military investigation into the shooting had remained secret until Monday.

The Pentagon released a two-page unclassified excerpt from the probe into the May 14, 2007 shooting, in which US Major Larry Bauguess was killed when a militia member opened fire on American officers who had just finished a meeting with their Pakistani and Afghan counterparts.

The probe concluded that Bauguess was shot at close range with a volley of AK-47 automatic fire by a man wearing a militia uniform from Pakistan's Frontier Corps, which is stationed along the Afghan border.

But there was no proof that the shooter was helped by Pakistani forces, it said.

"There is little evidence to support collaboration within the Pakistani militia or military," said the report.

"The initial shooter caused all of the casualties incurred on the (NATO-led) coalition forces," it added.

The probe found no sign of coordinating fire from Pakistani forces in support of the gunman.

However, some "sporadic" fire from the Pakistani troops was likely a response to cover fire from US troops trying to withdraw from the area to a helicopter landing zone, the report said.

The 10-minute gun battle that erupted after the shooting by the gunman left seven Pakistanis dead, it said.

The investigation appeared to contradict an extensive New York Times report last month that suggested the Americans and Afghans had been targeted in an ambush in collaboration with Pakistani forces, possibly in retaliation for previous incidents in which Pakistani troops were mistakenly fired on by US forces.

The Times' account quoted Afghan officers who witnessed the shooting as well as US military officers and an unnamed UN source.

An Afghan officer at the meeting, Colonel Sher Ahmed Kuchai, told the newspaper that senior Pakistani officers left the meeting place minutes before the shooting erupted without saying goodbye, which he believed showed they knew an attack was coming....

As of last month, Pakistan had decided not to undertake an operation against the Haqqanis for the time being, likely hoping to continue delaying until right around the time the ski slopes open in Jahannam.

Speaking of unpleasantly elevated temperatures, the U.S. has reportedly rewarded Pakistan's intransigence by "warming" to the idea of negotiating with the Haqqanis. An update on this story. "Haqqani network sends message with Kabul attacks," by Rod Nordland for the New York Times, October 30:

Kabul, Afghanistan - Every bomb, they say, has a return address.

When car bombs blew up in West Beirut, or explosions cut down worshipers in Sadr City mosques, survivors generally knew who was to blame, and more or less why — even when no one claimed responsibility.

So, too, with the suicide car bomb that on Saturday delivered the worst blow that NATO forces have suffered yet in Kabul, smashing into an armored bus full of troops and killing 13 foreigners, most of them Americans, and at least four Afghans.

The Taliban immediately took credit, but Afghan and American officials here strongly suspect that, more specifically, it was the fearsome Haqqani faction, whose fighters have proved better trained and organized than many Taliban, and which in recent months especially has focused its attacks on military targets rather than civilian ones.

The message the Haqqanis are sending — to the world and, especially, to the Afghan public — is that they are willing and able to kill foreign troops. And with the Haqqani bombs comes a particularly troublesome return address: Pakistan, where the group is based.

One Western diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity under diplomatic ground rules, said it was clear that if the Haqqanis were behind the attack, the militants were reacting to Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s recent trip to Pakistan. During the visit, she again demanded that the government do something about the Haqqanis, whose bases are in the Pakistani territory of North Waziristan.

"No one goes to this much trouble if they don’t think you’ll get the message," the diplomat said.

An Afghan political analyst, Haroun Mir, agreed. "These are planned attacks in response to the pressure from the United States on Pakistan against the Haqqani network," Mir said. Beyond that, he added, "the Pakistanis are sending another message, too: They are not willing to abandon their support of the Taliban."

Brig. Gen. Carsten Jacobson, the spokesman for the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force, said Sunday in an interview that many of the so-called "spectacular" attacks in Kabul in recent months had been clearly linked to the Haqqani network. He described the group as "a criminal clan, like a Sicilian family clan, who are into criminal activity of all types, drug dealing, smuggling as well as insurgency." He added that it had been badly hit by coalition raids and arrests this year.

Lutfullah Mashal, the spokesman for the National Directorate of Security, the Afghan intelligence service, said about the bombing on Saturday: "Usually these things are the Haqqani network. Kabul is their area of operation, and all the signs and indications point to the Haqqani network." [...]

Since the summer, there has been a string of such attacks in the Kabul region, most characterized by complex assaults using suicide bombers or multiple attackers and acting on considerable intelligence about the target. [...]

On Thursday, another complex attack was launched in Kandahar on the Provincial Reconstruction Team, a largely American group that is helping to distribute aid money as part of the war effort.

Afghan officials have blamed all of those save the Rabbani assassination directly on the Haqqanis.

As a diversionary tactic, Pakistan has tried to accuse Kabul and NATO of doing the same thing they have been accused of for years. Pakistani officials save their outrage for jihadist attacks that come back across the border into Pakistan, even when the attacks are organized by jihadist groups that are based in Pakistan.

Officers in the U.S. military have detailed the extent of Pakistani complicity in attacks originating on Pakistan's side of the border, and there is ample evidence of Pakistan's tipping off jihadists: most recently, it was reported that drone strikes became more successful after the U.S. withheld intelligence information from Pakistan.

Pakistan, for its part, will likely act insulted, make some threats, say now is just a terrible time to exacerbate "tensions," and generally play the victim.

"Pakistan safe havens challenge U.S. Afghan effort," by Susan Cornwell for Reuters, October 28:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Even as the United States begins to withdraw from Afghanistan, insurgents abetted by Pakistan pose the major threat to U.S.-led forces, the Pentagon said on Friday.

Security has improved in recent months and enemy attacks are down in Afghanistan compared to a year ago, the Pentagon said in a twice-annual report to the U.S. Congress.

NATO and Afghan forces largely "stunted" the Taliban's spring and summer offensive, although the insurgency remains adaptive and resilient, with a "significant regenerative capacity," the report said.

But attacks from across the eastern border were up because of the support the insurgency received from safe havens in Pakistan, it said.

"Safe havens in Pakistan remain the insurgency's greatest enabler," the report said.

These havens have grown more "virulent" in recent months "and are the most significant risk" to NATO's campaign, it said.

The report comes as President Barack Obama's administration has begun pulling surge forces from Afghanistan -- withdrawing 10,000 this year and the remaining 23,000 by the end of September 2012.

Critics of Obama's plan fear it could undermine the progress surge troops have made and point to faltering security in attacks in Afghanistan's volatile east, along the porous border with Pakistan.

The Afghanistan NGO Safety Office (ANSO), which advises aid and other groups on security, warned this month that the war appeared to be "escalating, not diminishing."

The Pentagon said that recent high-profile attacks in Kabul, including a bold September 13 strike on the U.S. Embassy that rattled perceptions about security in the capital, were carried out by the Pakistan-based Haqqani network and "directly enabled by Pakistan safe haven and support." [...]

Iran also continues to provide lethal aid to insurgents, including weapons and training, the report said....

The Pakistani response depends heavily on the argument that "Hey, we're the victims here!" But Pakistan's double game and policy of steam control with jihadists and Islamic supremacist sympathizers have created the environment for more jihadist attacks, and more Pakistani casualties. An update on this story. "Pakistan denies BBC report on Taliban links," by Chris Allbritton for Reuters, October 27:

RAWALPINDI, Pakistan (Reuters) - Pakistan strongly denied Thursday a BBC report that alleged the Pakistani military, along with its intelligence arm, supplied and protected the Afghan Taliban and al Qaeda.

A number of middle-ranking Taliban commanders detailed what they said was extensive Pakistani support in interviews for a BBC documentary series, the first part of which was broadcast Wednesday.

Pakistan's Interior Minister Rehman Malik, on a visit to Britain, criticized the program, telling a London news conference that the Taliban were trying to create a wedge between their adversaries by making such allegations.

Which Rehman Malik? That Rehman Malik.

"We are victims, victims of war, we have lost over 35,000 innocent people, including senior officers, policemen, and normal foot soldiers. I think doubting us is really heartbreaking ... We have stood in the front line," Malik said, referring to Pakistan's fight against militant groups.

"We are facing daily these suicide bombers. If they had been trained by us, we should not be getting ourselves killed," he said.

A former Afghan intelligence head also told the BBC that Afghanistan gave former Pakistani president General Pervez Musharraf information in 2006 that Osama bin Laden was hiding in northern Pakistan, but the intelligence was not acted on. The al Qaeda leader was killed in the same area by U.S. special forces in May this year.

Pakistan's military denied the BBC report.

"We consider that this report is highly biased, it is one-sided, it doesn't have the version of the side which is badly hit or affected by this report," Major General Athar Abbas, spokesman for the Pakistani military, told Reuters.

"So therefore, other than that, it's factually incorrect."

One Taliban commander, Mullah Qaseem, told the BBC that Pakistan had played a significant role in providing supplies and a hiding place for Afghan Taliban fighters.

Abbas denied this, questioning Qaseem's credibility.

He said the head of Pakistan's spy agency, the Directorate of Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), had already said "not a single bullet or financial support" had been given to groups named in the BBC report....

Still more evidence of Pakistan's double game. "Afghanistan: Pakistan accused of backing Taliban," by Sam Collyns for BBC News, October 26:

Pakistan has been accused of playing a double game, acting as America's ally in public while secretly training and arming its enemy in Afghanistan according to US intelligence.

In a prison cell on the outskirts of Kabul, the Afghan Intelligence Service is holding a young man who alleges he was recruited earlier this year by Pakistan's powerful military intelligence agency, the ISI.

He says he was trained to be a suicide bomber in the Taliban's intensifying military campaign against the Western coalition forces - and preparations for his mission were overseen by an ISI officer in a camp in Pakistan.

After 15 days training, he was sent into Afghanistan.

"There were three of us. We were put into a black vehicle with black windows. The police did not stop the car because it was obviously ISI. No-one dares stop their cars. They told me... you will receive your explosive waistcoat, and then go and explode it."

Taliban bases in Pakistan

The man recruited to be a suicide bomber changed his mind at the last minute and was later captured by the Afghan intelligence service.

But his story is consistent with a mass of intelligence which has convinced the Americans that, as they suspected, for the last decade Pakistan has been secretly arming and supporting the Taliban in its attempt to regain control of Afghanistan.

These suspicions started as early as 2002, when the Taliban began launching attacks across the border from their bases in Pakistan, but they became more widely held after 2006 when the Taliban's assault increased in its ferocity, not least against the ill-prepared British forces in Helmand province.

The final turning point in American eyes was the attack on Mumbai when 10 gunmen rampaged through the Indian city, killing 170 people - two weeks after Barack Obama's US presidential election victory in November 2008.

Despite Pakistan claiming it played no part in the attack, the CIA later received intelligence that it said showed the ISI were directly involved in training the Mumbai gunmen.

President Obama ordered a review of all intelligence on the region by a veteran CIA officer, Bruce Riedel.

"Our own intelligence was unequivocal," says Riedel. "In Afghanistan we saw an insurgency that was not only getting passive support from the Pakistani army and the Pakistani intelligence service, the ISI, but getting active support."

Evidence of Pakistan's support for the Taliban is also plain to see at the border where insurgents are allowed to cross at will, or even helped to evade US patrols.

There have been other reports of jihadists operating in sight of, and even with the help of the Pakistani military.

And the recent drone attacks in Pakistan have become increasingly effective as intelligence has been withheld from the Pakistanis, claims Mr Riedel.

"At the beginning of the drone operations, we gave Pakistan an advance tip-off of where we were going, and every single time the target wasn't there anymore. You didn't have to be Sherlock Holmes to put the dots together." [...]

But those who claim that Pakistan's hidden hand has shaped the conflict fear the same is now true of the negotiations for peace. Last year, in the Pakistani city of Karachi, Mullah Baradar, the Taliban's second-in-command, was captured by the ISI.

Secretly, Baradar had made contact with the Afghan government to discuss a deal that would end the war. He had done so without the ISI's permission and he was detained "to bring him back under control" according to one British diplomat....

Who benefits? The Pakistanis, who would obtain a tool for buying time indefinitely, saying they need to see the "dialogue" through, and that now is not the time (it never is) for firmer action that could upset a delicate situation. They don't need to do much to look busy.

Who else benefits? The Haqqanis, who can also buy themselves time and an air of legitimacy, playing to false hopes that there is a "pragmatic" element that can be split off and a working relationship established through "engagement." All the while, they will continue fighting and plotting attacks, and they will use the prospect of cutting off talks as an instrument of blackmail.

"US warms to idea of Pakistan talks with militants," by Sebastian Abbott for the Associated Press, October 23:

ISLAMABAD (AP) — Despite some tough talk, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's recent visit to Pakistan seemed to subtly soften Washington's stand on a key point of contention between the two countries: whether Islamabad should take military action against Pakistan-based insurgents fighting American troops in Afghanistan, or try to engage them in peace talks.

Clinton seemed to acknowledge during her two-day visit that ended Friday that help with a negotiated settlement is perhaps the best the U.S. can hope for from Pakistan. This shift in the U.S. stance could give Washington and Islamabad new room to cooperate on ending the Afghan war.

But serious barriers to negotiations remain. The U.S. believes that military force is still needed to push the Taliban and their allies to make concessions. Pakistan, which Washington alleges supports some of the militant groups, prefers on the other hand to reduce violence to induce the insurgents to come to the table.

Islamabad is also worried about being blamed if peace talks fail. It has long-standing ties with the armed groups, but the militants are unpredictable and resistant to pressure. Pakistan is furthermore unsure of exactly what kind of deal the U.S. and Afghan governments might strike with the insurgents, and the atmosphere is permeated by feelings of distrust on all sides.

The U.S. has long demanded that Pakistan take greater military action against Taliban militants and their allies who use Pakistani territory to regroup and to send fighters to attack forces in Afghanistan. Recently, the U.S. has pushed for an assault on the Haqqani militant network, which the U.S. alleges is supported by the Pakistan military's spy agency, the ISI. The U.S. deems the Haqqanis the greatest threat to American troops in Afghanistan.

Pakistan has denied supporting the Haqqanis, but has also made clear that it will not conduct an offensive against the group's safe haven in the North Waziristan tribal area, a position that has not changed despite the two-day visit by Clinton and other senior national security officials, including CIA chief David Petraeus and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey.

Many analysts believe Pakistan's refusal is driven by its belief that the Haqqanis could be key allies in Afghanistan after foreign forces withdraw, especially in countering the influence of archenemy India.

The Pakistani military, however, says that its failure to act against the Haqqanis is just a question of limited resources. It claims its troops are stretched too thin by operations in other parts of the tribal region of northwest Pakistan that are deemed a higher priority — a stance reiterated by the Pakistanis following talks with Clinton's delegation.

"There is limited capacity, and if the organization is overstretched and starts to develop cracks, that is counterproductive," said a senior Pakistani security official, speaking on condition of anonymity to comment on the outcome of the closed-door talks.

Clinton seemed to soften the U.S. stance during a town hall meeting in Islamabad. When asked whether the U.S. expects Pakistan to militarily tackle the Haqqani network or force them to the negotiating table, she said, "It's more the latter."

Clinton also confirmed that the U.S. had tried to reach out to the Haqqanis directly in peace efforts. She is the first U.S. official to publicly acknowledge the overtures, which were first reported by The Associated Press in August. She said the meeting was organized by the ISI. [...]

Pakistan doesn't believe the U.S. plan to use military action to force militants into peace talks will work — a disagreement that has bedeviled the process.

"In our culture, it may not work if you want to negotiate with the same adversary you are fighting," said the Pakistani security official. "You have to declare a pause in fighting if you want to give peace a chance."

Clinton made clear the U.S. feels otherwise, saying during the town hall meeting that experience has shown that only a combination of fighting and talking "will convince some to come to negotiations and will remove others who are totally opposed to peace and want to continue their violent attacks."

Pakistan is open to approaching the Taliban and their allies about participating in peace talks, but can't provide any guarantees that its efforts will succeed, said the security official.

"Contact does not mean that they are in our pockets," said the official. "Contact means we will suggest to them that they participate."

Both the Taliban and the Haqqanis have been difficult partners for Pakistan over the years....

One can only imagine that the contrast in private and public discourse on this visit with our "Frenemy" and Ally is particularly stark. Whether what is said after the photo-ops will get Islamabad to lift a finger (no, not that finger) is another matter altogether. "Effigy of Hillary Clinton is burned by baying mob in Pakistan after America demands crack down on Islamist militants destabilising Afghanistan," by Leon Watson for the Daily Mail, October 21:

A mob burned an effigy of Hillary Clinton today after she intensified pressure on Pakistan to crack down on militants destabilising Afghanistan.

The U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned America and Pakistan cannot walk away from their relationship despite frustration on both sides.

She said: 'There is frustration on both sides, which I recognise.

'We are going to stay the course, and do everything we can to try to overcome the difficulties that we have faced together. Because we both have too much at stake. We cannot walk away.'

For the second time in two days, Clinton pressed Pakistani authorities to step up efforts against the Haqqani militant network, which is based in the country's rugged tribal region, and is blamed for attacks both inside Pakistan and neighboring Afghanistan.

After leading an unusually large and powerful U.S. delegation, including CIA director David Petraeus and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey, for four hours of talks with Pakistani officials last night, Clinton met with Pakistan's president and foreign minister to make the case.

'We should be able to agree that for too long extremists have been able to operate here in Pakistan and from Pakistani soil,' she said. 'No one who targets innocent civilians, whether they be Pakistanis, Afghans, Americans or anyone else should be tolerated or protected.'

Following Clinton's comments, protesters belonging to the United Citizen Action group burnt an effigy of the U.S. Secretary of State in Multan, in Pakistan's Punjab Province.

The U.S. has grown increasingly impatient with Pakistan's refusal to take military action against the Taliban-linked Haqqani network and its ambivalence, if not hostility, to supporting Afghan attempts to reconcile Taliban fighters into society.

Clinton made clear that that was no longer acceptable while American officials warned if Pakistan continued to balk, the U.S. would act unilaterally to end the militant threat.

'Pakistan has a critical role to play in supporting Afghan reconciliation and ending the conflict,' Clinton told reporters at a joint press conference with Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar.

'We look to Pakistan to take strong steps to deny Afghan insurgents safe havens and to encourage the Taliban to enter negotiations in good faith.'

The Haqqani group is considered the greatest threat to American troops in Afghanistan, and U.S. officials have accused Pakistan's military spy agency, the ISI, of providing it with support - an allegation denied by Islamabad....

“Contact with the [Pakistani military] when these incidents are going on is often nonexistent. We usually can’t get a hold of these guys. When we do get a hold of these guys, they say they are not aware or can’t see it. Looking at the terrain, it is very hard to believe.”

"Tensions Flare as G.I.’s Take Fire Out of Pakistan," by C.J. Chivers for the New York Times, October 16:

FORWARD OPERATING BASE SHARANA, Afghanistan — American and Afghan soldiers near the border with Pakistan have faced a sharply increased volume of rocket fire from Pakistani territory in the past six months, putting them at greater risk even as worries over the disintegrating relationship between the United States and Pakistan constrain how they can strike back.

Ground-to-ground rockets fired within Pakistan have landed on or near American military outposts in one Afghan border province at least 55 times since May, according to interviews with multiple American officers and data released in the past week. Last year, during the same period, there were two such attacks. [...]

In this climate, American officers were in a difficult position when describing the attacks. Many, especially those who might be identified, painstakingly tried not to blame Pakistan directly.

“I don’t have the smoking gun,” said Col. Edward T. Bohnemann, who commands the 172nd Infantry Brigade, which has hundreds of American soldiers in outposts near the border. “Do I have my thoughts, just because it happens so often? Yes, I have my thoughts. But there isn’t a smoking gun.”

But other officers viscerally rejected Pakistan’s official position, and said elements of the Pakistani military or intelligence service were most likely involved.

“The level of command and control, and the level of sophistication of the IDF, is showing that there is some type of expertise being employed,” said one American officer, using the acronym for indirect fire, the term the military uses for mortar, artillery and rocket attacks. The officer spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the diplomatic tensions.

The precise reasons for the increase in rocket fire are unclear. Whether the surge in attacks indicates Pakistani military retaliation, an emboldened insurgency, some degree of both or some other factors cannot be determined from the data alone.

The attacks covered by the military’s data included those on three American-Afghan outposts — Forward Operating Base Tillman, Combat Outpost Boris and Combat Outpost Margah — and usually involved two to four rockets each, officers said. The incoming fire has continued through recent days, including an attack last Friday that set buildings ablaze at Forward Operating Base Tillman.

The data release does not include attacks against American military positions in provinces other than Paktika or against Forward Operating Base Lilley, in the same province, which is used by the C.I.A.

But it does include attacks from several insurgent positions just inside Afghanistan, some within 200 yards of the border, from where rocket crews fire and then rush to Pakistan. [...]

The perils and sensitivities surrounding the rocket fire starkly underscored the longstanding difficulties faced by the latest rotation of soldiers in the Afghan war, who are in front-line positions built by previous units, under fire, but with restrictions on firing back or when planning operations to deter more attacks.

Another officer, who analyzed each incident, said attacks often come from positions next to Pakistani military or Frontier Corps border posts. He said there has been no sign of Pakistani units trying to stop the firing, or of willingness to help American units identify who is shooting at them.

He offered a commonly held assessment: “They are getting help,” the officer said of the insurgents. “It’s PakMil,” he added, using the acronym for Pakistani military.

Asked what evidence supported this claim, he said: “Contact with the PakMil when these incidents are going on is often nonexistent. We usually can’t get a hold of these guys. When we do get a hold of these guys, they say they are not aware or can’t see it. Looking at the terrain, it is very hard to believe.”

The officer pointed on a map to several frequently used firing sites. Then he pointed to Pakistani military positions. Some Pakistani military positions were less than a mile from insurgent firing positions — and had clear line of sight. The officer asked not to be identified....

There would be no crisis for Islamabad if Fazlullah's attacks were not coming back over the border, but staying on the other side. Pakistan is again attempting to avoid international pressure over its double game by trying to create the impression that, hey, everybody's doing it. "Pakistan wants Afghan action on Taliban cleric," by Qasim Nauman for Reuters, October 17:

ISLAMABAD (Reuters) - Pakistan said Monday that Afghan and U.S-led forces had failed to hunt down a Taliban cleric responsible for a spate of cross-border raids despite repeated requests from Islamabad, a complaint likely to deepen tension between the neighbors.

The attacks in which militants loyal to Maulvi Fazlullah took part killed about 100 members of Pakistan's security forces, angering the army which faces threats from multiple militant groups.

"We have given locations and information about these groups to the Afghanistan government and ISAF (International Security Assistance Force), but apparently there has been no action," Pakistani army spokesman, Major-General Athar Abbas, told Reuters.

"The problem refuses to go away."

Fazlullah was the Pakistani Taliban leader in Swat Valley, about 100 miles northwest of Islamabad, before a 2009 army offensive forced him to flee.

Also known as FM Mullah for his fiery radio broadcasts, he regrouped in Afghanistan and established strongholds, and poses a threat to Pakistan once again, said Abbas.

Fazlullah, a leading figure in the Pakistani Taliban insurgency, is based in Kunar and Nuristan provinces in Afghanistan, said Abbas. [...]

The Taliban capitalized on a widely criticized government peace deal with the Taliban to take control of Swat, home to more than a million people. In April 2009, the United States termed the agreement an abdication to the Taliban.

Shut up, the Pakistani senator explained. "Pakistan says Obama pressure on militants hurts Afghanistan," by Augustine Anthony for Reuters, October 7:

ISLAMABAD (Reuters) - President Barack Obama's warning to Islamabad over suspected ties to militants will only fuel anti-Americanism and make it harder for Pakistan to support U.S. efforts to stabilize Afghanistan, a senior senator said Friday. Pakistan is seen as critical to bringing peace to neighboring Afghanistan, but the United States has failed to persuade it to go after militant groups it says cross the border to attack Western forces in Afghanistan.

"This is not helping either the United States, Afghanistan or Pakistan," Salim Saifullah, chairman of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, told Reuters.

"There will be pressure on the (Pakistan) government to get out of this war," he said, referring to the U.S. war on militancy.

Obama warned Pakistan Thursday that its ties with "unsavory characters" had put relations with the United States at risk, as he ratcheted up pressure on Islamabad to cut links with militants mounting attacks in Afghanistan.

His comments are likely to deepen a crisis in the strategic alliance between the United States and Pakistan.

Obama accused Pakistan's leaders of "hedging their bets" on Afghanistan's future, but stopped short of threatening to cut off U.S. aid, despite calls from lawmakers for a tougher line over accusations that Pakistani intelligence supported strikes on U.S. targets in Afghanistan.

Pakistan says it has sacrificed more than any other nation that joined America's global "war on terror" after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States, losing 10,000 soldiers and security forces, and 30,000 civilians.

Pakistan's double game, a hands-off policy of steam control against Islamic supremacists, and attempts to leverage jihadist groups to Islamabad's own purposes have only increased the losses suffered by its own citizens.

But its performance against militants operating from its unruly tribal northwest border region is a frequent source of tension between Washington and Islamabad.

Pakistan is often accused of playing a double game, vowing to help the United States fight some militant groups while using others as proxies in Afghanistan....

As U.S.-Pakistani relations have been circling the drain in recent weeks over the connections between Pakistani intelligence and the Haqqani network, Pakistan made a major show of its friendship and strategic partnership with China (never mind the Pakistani connections of jihadists in China's west).

Now, as Afghanistan pushes back against Pakistan for its double game, which has been instrumental in destabilizing the country, allowing the Taliban to regroup, and allowing al-Qaeda to survive, it has boosted its relations with India. There are, of course, many more economic, cultural, and strategic reasons for Afghanistan to cultivate that relationship, along with signaling that it has alternatives to the status quo, as Pakistan attempted with China.

But Pakistan, which is slowly destroying itself by allowing itself to be overrun by jihadists and Islamic supremacists amid its dual obsession with fighting India over Kashmir and projecting its influence into Afghanistan, can't have that. Kabul is to be a docile satellite of Islamabad, or else.

"Pakistan warns Afghanistan after pact with India," by Munir Ahmed for the Associated Press, October 6:

ISLAMABAD (AP) — Pakistan warned Afghanistan to behave responsibly Thursday following Kabul's move to sign a strategic pact with Islamabad's archenemy, India, at a particularly sensitive time in relations between the two countries.

Afghanistan's interior minister recently accused Pakistan's powerful spy agency, the ISI, of being involved in last month's suicide bombing in Kabul that killed former Afghan President Burhanuddin Rabbani — an allegation denied by Pakistan. Rabbani was working as chief envoy in peace talks with the Taliban.

Pakistan's protests along these lines always include the complaint that it is the worst possible time for whatever provocation has irked them. When would be a good time?

"At this defining stage when challenges have multiplied, as have the opportunities, it is our expectation that everyone, especially those in position of authority in Afghanistan, will demonstrate requisite maturity and responsibility," Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Tehmina Janjua told reporters.

"This is no time for point-scoring, playing politics or grandstanding," she said in her weekly press briefing.

Then go back to your office.

Her comments seemed more confrontational than Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani's statement Wednesday that Afghanistan and India have the right to maintain bilateral relations as sovereign nations. His comments were reported by the state-run Associated Press of Pakistan.

The agreement, which was signed Tuesday, outlined areas of common concern including trade, economic expansion, education, security and politics. It was the first of its kind between Afghanistan and any country.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai tried to assuage concern over the pact Wednesday, saying it was not intended as an aggressive move against Pakistan. He said the agreement simply made official years of close ties between India and Afghanistan's post-Taliban government.

You can't choose your relatives:

"Pakistan is a twin brother. India is a great friend," said Karzai during a visit to New Delhi, according to the Press Trust of India news agency. "The agreement that we signed yesterday with our friend will not affect our brother."

But Karzai's words likely carried little weight in Pakistan, which is sandwiched between Afghanistan to its west and India to its east. Pakistani officials, especially in the country's powerful army, have long viewed policy in Afghanistan through one lens: countering the perceived danger of Indian influence in the country.

"The agreement will heighten Pakistan's insecurities," said Talat Masood, an analyst and former Pakistani general. "Pakistan has always felt that it is being encircled by India from both the eastern and western borders."

Pakistan and India have fought three major wars and have been at each other's throats since the two were carved out of British India in 1947.

Pakistan carved itself out, and has kept wielding the carving knife against everyone on its borders, not to mention the former East Pakistan, now Bangladesh.

Relations between Pakistan and Afghanistan have also been rocky, and many Pakistani officials view Karzai as too close to India, where he attended university.

Is that why someone tried to have him whacked?

To check India's power in Afghanistan, Pakistan has historically supported Islamist militants like the Taliban who are also opposed to its majority Hindu neighbor. Islamabad has also allegedly backed militants who have carried out attacks in Kashmir, an area claimed by both Pakistan and India.

Pakistan maintains it cut off ties to the Taliban and other militants following the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in 2001. But Washington and Kabul say otherwise....

As seems to be the case with almost every recent attack, the Haqqanis appear to be connected to it in some way. Surely, behind closed doors, there is some sense of alarm in Pakistan about the Haqqani network.

The assassination of a sitting head of state would be an escalation of staggering proportions, with a range of potential consequences Pakistan cannot predict. Whether even that gets Islamabad to lift a finger (no, not that finger) remains to be seen, as Pakistani authorities have already publicly ruled out an operation against the Haqqanis "for the time being." "Afghans say Karzai assassination plot foiled," from BBC News, October 5:

Afghan intelligence officials say they have arrested six people who they believe were planning to assassinate President Hamid Karzai.

The alleged plotters had recruited one of Mr Karzai's bodyguards and had possible links to the militant Haqqani network, the officials said.

Analysts say the arrests may be seen as part of a plan to discredit Pakistan.

Relations between the two countries are tense over alleged links between Pakistan and Haqqani militants.

Militants have killed a string of high-profile figures in Afghanistan in recent months.

A blow to the "poverty causes jihad" theory:

"A dangerous and educated group including teachers and students wanted to assassinate President Hamid Karzai," National Directorate of Security (NDS) spokesman Lutfullah Mashal told a news conference.

"Unfortunately they infiltrated the presidential protection system and recruited one of the president's bodyguards."

Mr Mashal said those arrested had ties with a member of al-Qaeda and the Haqqani network based in North Waziristan, in Pakistan's restive tribal belt.

The group was arrested a week ago after members of the elite Afghan forces raided two locations in Kabul's district 15 and in the eastern city of Jalalabad, officials said.

The six had carried out training for the attack last month, they added.

The BBC's Bilal Sarwary, in Kabul, says that according to counter-terrorism sources, $150,000 (£97,000) had been wired to the group from outside the country. Laptops had been seized showing proposed targets and locations in Kabul, and also movements inside key government institutions, they said.

Our correspondent says security officials believe the group had been trained by two Arab instructors in North Waziristan....

"The Pakistan Islamic government has not co-operated with us to ensure peace and security in Afghanistan, which is disappointing for us."

You and millions of other people. "Karzai accuses Pakistan of 'double game' over militants," from BBC News, October 3:

Afghan President Hamid Karzai, in a thinly veiled attack on Pakistan, has said a "double game" is being played in the fight against militants.

Mr Karzai said Pakistan had not co-operated on security issues "which is disappointing for us", but insisted talks with Islamabad should continue.

He said he would convene a loya jirga (Afghan assembly) following the killing of peace envoy Burhanuddin Rabbani.

Afghan investigators say Rabbani's killer was a Pakistani.

They have laid the blame on the Taliban-affiliated Haqqani network and also accused Pakistan's intelligence agency, the ISI, of involvement - a charge Islamabad denies.

Rabbani had been tasked with negotiating with the Taliban, but was killed by a suicide bomber claiming to be a peace envoy from the insurgents.

After the killing on 20 September, Mr Karzai said Kabul would no longer hold peace talks with the Taliban but would instead focus on dialogue with Pakistan.

'Sacred hope'

In his televised address on Monday, he described Afghanistan and Pakistan as "inseparable brothers" but added: "Despite all destructions, calamities and problems, faced by both our country and Pakistan, a double-standard game and [the use of] terrorism as a tool continued.

"The Pakistan Islamic government has not co-operated with us to ensure peace and security in Afghanistan, which is disappointing for us."

He said peace was "the sacred hope" of the Afghan people but "it should be defined whom should we make peace with".

"In reality we are confronted with governments not the forces which are dependent on them. Therefore we should talk to the main side, which has got the authority."...

That may have been Pakistan's aim all along, in order to maintain influence on any potential deal with the Taliban.

The Haqqani network is currently denying involvement in the Rabbani assassination. Claiming responsibility now would create problems for their handlers, and paste an even bigger target on their organization. In any case, Afghanistan has presented Pakistan with what appears to be highly specific evidence of the Pakistani origin of the attack -- even phone numbers.

All the better for Pakistan to track down the plotters, or perhaps to tip them off, as has also been known to happen depending on which way the wind is blowing in Islamabad. "Afghanistan says Rabbani's killer was Pakistani," by Hamid Shalizi and Omar Sobhani for Reuters, October 2:

KABUL (Reuters) - Afghanistan said on Sunday that the suicide bomber who posed as a Taliban envoy to assassinate Afghan peace negotiator Burhanuddin Rabbani was a Pakistani national.

Tensions between the neighbours have been rising amid allegations from Afghan officials that Pakistan and its powerful ISI intelligence agency masterminded the former president's September 20 killing and are seeking to destabilise Afghanistan.

Hundreds of Afghans took to the streets of Kabul on Sunday to condemn recent shelling of border towns by Pakistan's army and the killing of Rabbani, accusing Pakistan of trying to sabotage his attempts to end the 10-year war.

An investigative delegation established by President Hamid Karzai said evidence and a confession provided by a man involved in Rabbani's killing had revealed that the bomber was from Chaman and the assassination had been plotted in Quetta -- both on the Pakistani side of the border.

"It proves that the assassination of Professor Rabbani was hatched in Quetta and the man who carried out the suicide bombing is a Pakistani national," the delegation, led by Defense Minister Abdul Rahim Wardak, said in a statement issued by the presidential palace.

"The documents and evidence in hand, details of other accomplices and their phone numbers have been handed over to Pakistan to make arrests."...

"But sometime before he disappeared on 29 May the order changed from kidnap and hurt to kill."

The newly retired Joint Chiefs chair, Admiral Mullen, had also implicated the ISI in Shahzad's murder, which they angrily denied, of course. Below is still more disturbing information about the circumstances of his disappearance and death. "Pakistan: AKI reporter Shahzad 'was initially supposed to be beaten, not killed'," from AdnKronos International, September 29:

New York, 29 Sept. (AKI) - Pakistani journalist Saleem Shahzad was probably killed by his country’s powerful Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) spy agency, but the initial order was to rough him up and give him a scare, according to a recent article in The New Yorker magazine.

But sometime before he disappeared on 29 May the order changed from kidnap and hurt to kill, Pulitzer-prize winning journalist Dexter Filkins wrote, citing an unnamed senior American official.

Shahzad disappeared in Islamabad on 29 May. His body was recovered two days later in the remote rural area of Mandi Bahauddin, 150 kilometres southwest of the capital Islamabad, bearing signs of torture.

Shahzad's cell phone records were also completely purged back to three weeks before he disappeared. His murderers had very substantial means to cover their tracks.

Pakistan's powerful military spy agency ISI has denied any involvement in Shahzad's abduction and murder, which occurred just days after he published an article in Asia Times Online alleging links between Al-Qaeda and officials in the Pakistani navy. He was also a contributor to Adnkronos International (AKI).

That report can be found here.

Shahzad upset the ISI for his articles that shed light on alleged ties between the Pakistani spy agency and Al-Qaeda. One article said Al-Qaeda, not the Taliban, attacked the Mehran base as punishment for the military’s crackdown on Al-Qaeda affiliates within the Pakistani navy.

Shahzad also seemed to have contact with Al-Qaeda’s chief of global military operations Muhammad Ilyas Kashmiri, who he wrote was responsible for the Mehran attack. Previously he got a major scoop by reporting that Kashmiri was actually not killed in a 2009 drone attack, as reported by US intelligence sources. When Kashmiri actually was killed by a drone days after Shazad’s murder, it raised suspicion that Shahzad caved in under torture and revealed the militant’s location to his interrogators, the New Yorker said.

His trouble with the ISI started months earlier on 25 March after he published an article that Osama Bin Laden was on the move, he told Filkins nine days before he disappeared, during meeting at an Islamabad coffee shop near Shahzad’s home.

He got a phone call from an ISI officer, “summoning him to the agency’s headquarters, in Aabpara, a neighbourhood in eastern Islamabad. When Shahzad showed up, he was met by three ISI officers. The lead man, he said, was a naval officer, Rear Admiral Adnan Nazir, who serves as the head of the ISI’s media division,” the article said. They asked him to retract the story and Shazad refused.

“We want the world to believe that Osama is dead,” Nazir said, according to Shahzad’s account. “They were obviously trying to protect bin Laden,” he told Filkins. A book written by Shahzad was to be published that explored the links between Al-Qaeda, the Taliban and the ISI and the Pakistani journalist thought this would further anger his country’s intelligence agency.

Shahzad was vocal about his opposition to terror. But while in university he was involved in the student wing of Jamaat-e-Islami, an Islamist party that recruited thousands of people for armed groups. He told journalists that some of his contacts were the same people he met in Jamaat-e-Islami.

Filkins said there are other reason’s the ISI may have wanted Shahzad dead. He may have been a suspected foreign agent.

Even so, Pakistan has "decided not to take action against the Haqqani network for the time being." "US confronts Pak with proof of ISI's terror link," from the Press Trust of India, September 28 (thanks to K):

Washington: The US confronted Pakistan with "concrete evidences" of links between the ISI and extremist organisations like the Haqqani network and LeT, before it launced [sic] a frontal attack on the spy agency for its terror ties, Pentagon officials have said.

"They (ISI) provide financial support (to extremist organisations). It provides technical support. It provides physical support. They (Pak officials) are allowing the safe heavens [sic] to operate," a defence official said on condition of anonymity as he is not authorised to speak to the media.

Another defence department official said that Pentagon has been providing such evidences to Pakistan "since ages" but it is only after the recent attack on a hotel in Kabul and the US Embassy in Kabul that this crossed all limits and the Defence Department decided to go public.

But the senior defence official maintained that these evidences gives concrete proof of the relationship between ISI and the extremist organisations including Haqqani network and LeT.

The senior defence official familiar with it refused from giving further details of the type of evidences that the US has provided to Pakistan, based on which Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a key Congressional committee, last week that the Haqqani network "acts as a veritable arm" of Pakistan's ISI.

Officials said Mullen shared his thoughts and text of his remarks with Defence Secretary Leon Panetta, before he went to make such a strong comment against Pakistan in a public hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee.

"Even at the time it was seen as a turning point by officials managing day-to-day relations with Pakistan," but attack was "glossed over" to maintain the relationship with Islamabad. A fine lot of good that did. "Pakistanis Tied to 2007 Border Attack on Americans," by Carlotta Gall for the New York Times, September 27:

KABUL, Afghanistan — A group of American military officers and Afghan officials had just finished a five-hour meeting with their Pakistani hosts in a village schoolhouse settling a border dispute when they were ambushed — by the Pakistanis

An American major was killed and three American officers were wounded, along with their Afghan interpreter, in what fresh accounts from the Afghan and American officers who were there reveal was a complex, calculated assault by a nominal ally. The Pakistanis opened fire on the Americans, who returned fire before escaping in a blood-soaked Black Hawk helicopter.

The attack, in Teri Mangal on May 14, 2007, was kept quiet by Washington, which for much of a decade has seemed to play down or ignore signals that Pakistan would pursue its own interests, or even sometimes behave as an enemy.[...]

Though both sides kept any deeper investigations of the ambush under wraps, even at the time it was seen as a turning point by officials managing day-to-day relations with Pakistan.

Pakistani officials first attributed the attack to militants, then, when pressed to investigate, to a single rogue soldier from the Frontier Corps, the poorly controlled tribal militia that guards the border region. To this day, none of the governments have publicly clarified what happened, hoping to limit damage to relations. Both the American and Pakistani military investigations remain classified.

“The official line covered over the details in the interests of keeping the relationship with Pakistan intact,” said a former United Nations official who served in eastern Afghanistan and was briefed on the events immediately after they occurred.

“At that time in May 2007, you had a lot of analysis pointing to the role of Pakistan in destabilizing that part of Afghanistan, and here you had a case in point, and for whatever reason it was glossed over,” he said. The official did not want to be named for fear of alienating the Pakistanis, with whom he must still work.

Exactly why the Pakistanis might have chosen Teri Mangal to make a stand, and at what level the decision was made, remain unclear. Requests to the Pakistani military for information and interviews for this article were not answered. One Pakistani official who was present at the meeting indicated that the issue was too sensitive to be discussed with a journalist. Brig. Gen. Martin Schweitzer, the American commander in eastern Afghanistan at the time, whose troops were involved, also declined to be interviewed.

At first, the meeting to resolve the border dispute seemed a success. Despite some tense moments, the delegations ate lunch together, exchanged phone numbers and made plans to meet again. Then, as the Americans and Afghans prepared to leave, the Pakistanis opened fire without warning. The assault involved multiple gunmen, Pakistani intelligence agents and military officers, and an attempt to kidnap or draw away the senior American and Afghan officials. [...]

To stem the flow of militants, the Afghan government was building more border posts, including one at Gawi, in Jaji District, one of the insurgents’ main crossing points, according to Rahmatullah Rahmat, then the governor of Paktia Province in eastern Afghanistan.

Pakistani forces objected to the new post, claiming it was on Pakistani land, and occupied it by force, killing 13 Afghans. Over the following days dozens were killed as Afghan and Pakistani forces traded mortar rounds and moved troops and artillery up to the border. Afghanistan’s president, Hamid Karzai, began to talk of defending the border at all costs, said Gen. Dan K. McNeill, the senior American general in Afghanistan at the time.

The border meeting was called, and a small group of Americans and Afghans — 12 men in total — flew by helicopters to Teri Mangal, just inside Pakistan, to try to resolve the dispute. They included Mr. Rahmat. The Afghans remember the meeting as difficult but ending in agreement. The Pakistanis described it as cordial, said Mahmood Shah, a retired brigadier and a military analyst who has spoken to some of those present at the meeting.

The Americans say the experience was like refereeing children, but after five hours of back and forth the Pakistanis agreed to withdraw from the post, and the Afghans also agreed to abandon it.

Then, just as the American and Afghan officials were climbing into vehicles provided to take them the short distance to a helicopter landing zone, a Pakistani soldier opened fire with an automatic rifle, pumping multiple rounds from just 5 or 10 yards away into an American officer, Maj. Larry J. Bauguess Jr., killing him almost instantly. An operations officer with the 82nd Airborne Division from North Carolina, Major Bauguess, 36, was married and the father of two girls, ages 4 and 6.

An American soldier immediately shot and killed the attacker, but at the same instant several other Pakistanis opened fire from inside the classrooms, riddling the group and the cars with gunfire, according to the two senior Afghan commanders who were there. Both escaped injury by throwing themselves out of their car onto the ground....

Read it all.

"We are not in a position to undertake an operation at this point."

Great. When will you be in control of your country again so we can pencil that in on our calendar? More on this story. "Officials: No action against Haqqani network by Pakistan military," from CNN, September 26:

Islamabad, Pakistan (CNN) -- The Pakistani Army has decided not to take action against the Haqqani network for the time being despite a fresh wave of intense pressure from Washington for a military offensive against the Pakistani-based militant group, two military officials told CNN on Monday.

The decision was made by senior Pakistani generals on Sunday in an impromptu meeting called by Pakistan's army chief, Gen. Ashfaq Kayani, the officials said.

The military has decided not to target the Haqqani network because the army is stretched too thin with several other operations against militants in northwest Pakistan, one of the officials said. "We are not in a position to undertake an operation at this point," he said.

The meeting of Pakistan's top generals comes days after the chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen, accused Pakistan's top intelligence agency of supporting the Haqqani network and its attacks against U.S. targets in Afghanistan, including the attack two weeks ago on the U.S. Embassy in Kabul.

Mullen's statement has further ratcheted up tensions between Islamabad and Washington and sparked a bitter war of words.

"The allegation of Pakistan's involvement in the attack on the U.S. Embassy in Kabul is just a conspiracy against us," one of the officials said. [...]

[Pakistani Prime Minister] Gilani has instructed Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar to forcefully project Pakistan's point of view when she addresses the U.N. General Assembly on Tuesday, according to a statement from Gilani's office.

Our friend and ally Pakistan is holding anti-American rallies. From Reuters (thanks to Maxwell):

Girls hold placards while standing on a U.S. flag during an anti-U.S. rally in Hyderabad, Pakistan, September 25, 2011. REUTERS/Akram Shahid

"Go America Go." Heh. Good advice. We should go, and leave the Pakistani jihadists to their own devices, without American funding for their jihad.

He also says it has become a "common practice." As long as the victims are lower on the totem pole than Sunni Muslim Pakistanis, Islamabad will not see a crisis. But the same supremacist conduct they look the other way from when it is perpetrated against non-Muslims or non-Sunnis is gradually eroding the stability of the entire society and its institutions. "Punjab: armed Muslims rape a Christian, a 'common practice'," by Jibran Khan for Asia News, September 24:

Lahore (AsiaNews) – The rape of Christian women in Punjab has become a "common practice" an "outrageous" phenomenon compounded by the fact that "the police protect the guilty" and not the victims. This is the bitter synopsis of Fr Jill John, of the Diocese of Lahore on the last recorded case of sexual violence against a Christian mother. The family calls for justice, but is struggling against a society in which the defenders of the law support the rapists. Even human rights groups like Masihi Life for All Foundation have intervened on the matter, asking government authorities to target the perpetrators of crimes and punish the corrupt and conniving police officers.

The incident dates back to Sept. 15, but the news filtered through only in recent days. Arifa Mushtaq (name changed for security reasons - ed) 32, mother of five was abducted and raped by three Muslims . Her husband Muashtaq Masih a worker at the Kasur sanitation department, in a devastated condition said, "Arifa use to work in a garment factory, on the y evening of 15 September she was coming home from work, she got off the bus, two local Muslims grabbed her from the back. Another armed accomplice came and put a gun on her head".

The woman began to scream, then asked the trio to leave her free to think their children who were waiting at home. Instead, the men took Arifa by force to a house and, one by one, they raped her. The family is in shock and even their attempt to report the rape has added insult to injury: the Muslims have threatened her husband, warning him to withdraw the lawsuit. Otherwise, his children will have to go through what his wife has gone through. The police has also protected the perpetrators, putting pressure on Muashtaq Masih.

Fr. Jill John confirms that "the police helps the guilty, with omissions and gaps in the compilation of complaints to favor their freedom." The family of the raped woman, added the priest, are now living in fear while criminals are free to roam the streets of the town. "How much longer - he asks – will we see the children of God suffer? And when will Mushtaq Masih's family get justice? ". He appealed to the police chief of Punjab and the Minister of Justice to target the corrupt police officers and protect the family.

In other words: Stop calling us out for not acting like friends, or we'll stop pretending to be friends.

The rhetoric from our Frenemy and Ally is escalating because Pakistan is cornered. They are reportedly intimidated by the monster they have created in backing the Haqqani network, but have also been caught out in their double game by the U.S. and have run out of excuses.

All they have left to do is to claim victim status and threaten to discard the entire alliance, such as it is. "US must not cross ‘red lines’, says FM Khar," from the Associated Press, September 24 (thanks to Sanjay):

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan’s foreign minister on Saturday warned the United States against sending ground troops to her country to fight an Afghan militant group that America alleges is used as a proxy by Pakistan’s top intelligence agency for attacks in neighboring Afghanistan.

The warning came as a top US military commander was in Pakistan for talks with the army chief at a time of intense strain between the two countries. The US Embassy said Gen. James Mattis, head of US Central Command, arrived in Pakistan late Friday, and that he will meet the army chief, Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani.

Ties between Islamabad and Washington are in crisis after American officials stepped up accusations that Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence was aiding insurgents in neighboring Afghanistan, including those who took part in an attack on the US Embassy last week in Kabul.

Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar said in an interview Saturday that there are red lines and rules of engagement with America, which should not be broken.

”It opens all kinds of doors and all kinds of options,” she told Pakistan’s private Aaj News TV from New York. The comment was in response to a question about the possibility of US troops coming to Pakistan.

When Pakistan is under scrutiny, it's a "blame game":

Khar, however, insisted that Pakistan’s policy was to seek a more intensive engagement with the US and that she would like to discourage any blame game.

”If many of your goals are not achieved, you do not make someone a scapegoat,” she said, addressing the US.

The US allegations have seen a strong reaction from Pakistan.

Kayani, the Pakistani army chief, said on Friday that the charges were baseless and part of a public ”blame game” detrimental to peace in Afghanistan. Other Islamabad officials urged Washington to present evidence for such a serious allegation. Khar warned the United States is risking losing an ally in the war on terror.

The row began when Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, on Thursday accused the ISI agency of supporting Haqqani insurgents in planning and executing last week’s 22-hour assault on the US Embassy and a truck bombing that wounded 77 American soldiers days earlier.

Kayani said the allegations were ”very unfortunate and not based on facts.”

The claims were the most serious yet by an American official against nuclear-armed Pakistan, which Washington has given billions in civilian and military aid over the last 10 years to try to secure its cooperation inside Afghanistan and against al-Qaeda.

The Haqqani insurgent network is widely believed to be based in Pakistan’s North Waziristan tribal area along the Afghan border. The group has historical ties to Pakistani intelligence, dating back to the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 1980s.

The relationship between the two countries has never been smooth, but it took one of its hardest hits when US commandos slipped into Pakistan on May 2 without informing the Pakistanis of their mission and killed al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden in a garrison town not far from Islamabad.

The "relationship" was already damaged. The need to keep the bin Laden raid secret was a result of that, and of well substantiated fears the Pakistanis would tip bin Laden off. Finding bin Laden where the Navy SEALs did just brought that reality out into the open.

Pakistan has overreached in its double game, and has been caught. About all they have left is to play the victim and make threats. More on this story. "Pakistan Scorns U.S. Scolding on Terrorism," by Jane Perlez for the New York Times, September 23:

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — The public assault by the Obama administration on the Pakistani intelligence agency as a facilitator of terrorist attacks in Afghanistan has been met with scorn in Pakistan, a signal that the country has little intention of changing its ways, even perhaps at the price of the crumpled alliance.

In injured tones similar to those used after the Navy Seals raid that killed Osama bin Laden in May, Pakistani officials insisted on Friday that theirs was a sovereign state that could not be pushed by America’s most senior military officials, Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Leon E. Panetta, the secretary of defense. [...]

The connection between the spy agency and the militants has been at the center of American complaints about Pakistan since the start of the war in Afghanistan, but never before has the United States chosen to expose its grievances in such unvarnished language in the most public of forums.

In his public reply, the chief of the Pakistani Army, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, said Mr. Mullen’s accusations were “not based on facts,” and suggested that they were unfair given “a rather constructive” recent meeting. The ISI did not support the Haqqanis, General Kayani said.

Similarly, the country’s defense minister, Ahmad Mukhtar, said Pakistan was a sovereign nation “which cannot be threatened.”

Put that fig leaf back:

The foreign minister, Hina Rabbani Khar, said it was “unacceptable” for one ally, the United States, to “humiliate” another, Pakistan. “If they are choosing to do so, it will be at their own cost,” Ms. Khar said.

Maleeha Lodhi, a former Pakistani ambassador to the United States who is close to the military, underscored that point. “Relations are headed towards a breakdown if the U.S. continues its coercive approach of threats and public accusations,” Ms. Lodhi said. “What is its plan B if there is an open rupture with Pakistan?”

The anti-American feeling in Pakistan, and within the army, surged after the raid that killed Bin Laden, which was kept secret from Pakistan’s leadership. It remains intense, making the idea of bowing to American demands to take on the Haqqanis almost unthinkable, Pakistani politicians, businessmen and analysts said.

They said General Kayani, who was under great pressure from his troops after the humiliation of the Bin Laden raid, had recovered some ground and recouped some prestige. He has no intention of giving in to the Americans now because he is betting that they still need Pakistan as the supply route for the Afghanistan war, they said.

But the larger reason is a divergence of strategic interests with the United States. The Haqqani network is seen as an important anti-India tool for the Pakistani military as it assesses the future of an Afghanistan without the Americans, a situation Pakistan sees as not far off.

Pakistan's obsession with extending its influence over its borders against India may yet cost it Pakistan itself.

General Kayani has said he fears that as the Americans exit, India will be allowed to have influence in Afghanistan, squeezing Pakistan on both its eastern and western borders, Pakistani analysts say. [...]

Losing control:

In talks with the Americans, the leader of the ISI, Lt. Gen. Ahmed Shuja Pasha, has said he has “contact” with the Haqqanis, a senior American official said. “But he denies he has command and control.” The official said it appeared that the Haqqanis had developed into such skilled fighters over several decades that they had the Pakistani Army cowed. [...]

According to American officials and Pakistani analysts, it appeared that the Pakistani Army had struck a bargain with the Haqqanis: The Haqqanis would be free to fight in Afghanistan, in part looking after Pakistan’s interests, and in return, the Haqqanis would not attack Pakistan.

If the Pakistani army attacked Haqqani fighters in their bases in North Waziristan, the blowback in the form of terrorist attacks in Pakistani cities and towns could be overwhelming, Pakistani military analysts say.

In a startling image of the apparent symbiosis between the Pakistani military — which controls the ISI — and the Haqqani fighters, both forces have bases in Miram Shah, the main town in North Waziristan. [...]

The Pakistani Army struggled to defeat the Pakistani Taliban in battles in the Swat Valley and South Waziristan in 2009 and 2010, but the Taliban are still present in both places, a senior American military official said. “So why would they take on the Haqqanis, who are world class fighters?” the official asked....

"She warned the U.S. that it risked losing Pakistan as an ally and could not afford to alienate the Pakistani government or its people." Go along with our covert pro-jihad activities and our duplicity and complete unreliability as an ally, and don't complain, or else. More on this story. "Don't humiliate Pak, it will be at your own cost: Hina Rabbani to US," from the Associated Press, September 23 (thanks to JW Watcher):

New York: Pakistan has lashed out at the U.S. for accusing the country's most powerful intelligence agency of supporting extremist attacks against American troops in Afghanistan - the most serious allegations against Islamabad since the beginning of the Afghan war.

Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar dismissed the claims as mere allegations. She warned the U.S. that it risked losing Pakistan as an ally and could not afford to alienate the Pakistani government or its people.

"If they are choosing to do so, it will be at their own cost," Khar told Geo TV on Thursday from New York City, where she is attending a U.N. General Assembly meeting. "Anything which is said about an ally, about a partner publicly to recriminate it, to humiliate it is not acceptable."

Khar's comments were first aired in Pakistan on Friday.

The foreign minister spoke following congressional testimony by the top U.S. military officer about Pakistan....

The relationship took one of its hardest hits when U.S. commandos sneaked into Pakistan on May 2 and killed al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden in a garrison town not far from Islamabad.

The covert raid outraged the Pakistani government because it was not told about it beforehand, while bin Laden's presence in Abbottabad raised further suspicions among U.S. officials about the country's duplicity in the anti-terror fight.

It was a 1500-pound truck bomb that left a 20 foot crater. For all the suicide bomber's trouble, no Americans were seriously wounded; all were expected to return to duty. The attack did kill 2 Afghans and wound 25 others, but there is scant outrage from Islamabad as long as the attacks are directed out of Pakistan and not into it, and as long as the victims are Americans, Christians, Ahmadis, Shi'ites, or over the border in Afghanistan.

But the state of affairs appears to be going downhill fast, as allegation after damning allegation piles up regarding the involvement of the Haqqani network jihadists in a series of high-profile attacks, reportedly urged on by Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence. "US bomb warning to Pakistan ignored," by Declan Walsh and Jon Boone for the Guardian, September 22:

The American commander of Nato in Afghanistan personally asked Pakistan's army chief to halt an insurgent truck bomb that was heading for his troops, during a meeting in Islamabad two days before a huge explosion that wounded 77 US soldiers at a base near Kabul.

In reply General Ashfaq Kayani offered to "make a phone call" to stop the assault on the US base in Wardak province. But his failure to use the American intelligence to prevent the attack has fuelled a blazing row between the US and Pakistan.

Furious American officials blame the Taliban-inspired group the Haqqanis – and, by extension, Pakistani intelligence – for the 10 September bombing and an even more audacious guerrilla assault on the Kabul US embassy three days later that killed 20 people and lasted more than 20 hours.

On Thursday the US military chief, Admiral Mike Mullen, described the Haqqanis as "a veritable arm of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence [spy] agency". He earlier accused the ISI of fighting a "proxy war" in Afghanistan through the group.

Pakistan's defence minister, Ahmed Mukhtar, rejected the American accusations of Haqqani patronage as "baseless". "No one can threaten Pakistan as we are an independent state," he said.

The angry accusations lift the veil on sensitive conversations that have heretofore largely taken place behind closed doors. On 8 September, General John Allen, the Nato commander in Afghanistan, raised intelligence reports of the impending truck bomb at a meeting with Kayani during a visit to Islamabad.

Kayani promised Allen he would "make a phone call" to try to stop the attack, according to a western official with close knowledge of the meeting. "The offer raised eyebrows," the official said.

But two days later, just after Allen's return to Kabul, a truck rigged with explosives ploughed into the gates of the US base in Wardak, 50 miles south-west of Kabul, injuring 77 US soldiers and killing two Afghan civilians.

Afterwards the US ambassador to Kabul, Ryan Crocker, blamed the Haqqanis. "They enjoy safe havens in North Waziristan," he said, referring to the Haqqani main base in the tribal belt.

Allen's spokesman said Nato "routinely shares intelligence with the Pakistanis regarding insurgent activities" but he refused to confirm the details of the conversation with Kayani.

The Pakistani military spokesman, General Athar Abbas, said: "Let's suppose it was the case. The main question is how did this truck travel to Wardak and explode without being checked by Nato? This is just a blame game."

US allegations of ISI links to Haqqani attacks stretch back to July 2008, when the CIA deputy director, Stephen Kappes, flew to Islamabad with intercept evidence that linked the ISI to an attack on the Indian embassy in Kabul.

But American disquiet has never been so uncompromisingly expressed as in recent days. The issue dominated three hours of talks between the secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, and the Pakistani foreign minister, Hina Rabbani Khar.

On Tuesday Mullen said he had asked Kayani to "disconnect" the ISI from the Haqqanis. In Washington the CIA chief, David Petraeus, delivered a similar message in private to the ISI chief, General Shuja Pasha. Even the soft-spoken US ambassador to Islamabad, Cameron Munter, has joined the chorus of condemnation, delivering a hard-hitting message through an interview on Pakistani state radio.

"We've changed our message in private too," one US official said. "Before, we used to make polite demands about the Haqqanis. Now we are saying 'this has to stop'."...

Pakistan appears to have finally overreached in its double game, and the tangled web it has woven is unraveling rather suddenly. Acting insulted just might not get Pakistan out of this one. "Pakistan 'backed Haqqani attack on Kabul' - Mike Mullen," from BBC News, September 23:

The most senior US military officer has accused Pakistan's spy agency of supporting the Haqqani group in last week's attack on the US Kabul embassy.

"The Haqqani network... acts as a veritable arm of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence Agency," Adm Mike Mullen told a Senate panel.

Some 25 people died in last Tuesday's 20-hour attack on Kabul's US embassy and other official buildings.

Pakistan's interior minister earlier denied links with the Haqqani group.

Rehman Malik told the BBC Pakistan was determined to fight all militants based on its border with Afghanistan.

Pakistani officials have consistently denied links with militant groups.

US-Pakistan ties deteriorated sharply after the killing of al-Qaeda chief Osama Bin Laden on Pakistani soil by US commandos in May.

The relationship was already shot. The raid, kept secret from the Pakistanis for fear that they would tip bin Laden off, was a result of the inability to trust Islamabad. Going in after bin Laden and finding him where they did, hiding under the noses of the Pakistani military establishment, just brought that reality out into the open.

'Credible intelligence'

The Kabul attack on 13 September left 11 civilians dead, as well as at least four police and 10 insurgents.

"With ISI support, Haqqani operatives planned and conducted a truck bomb attack [on 11 September], as well as the assault on our embassy,"said Adm Mullen.

"We also have credible intelligence that they were behind the 28 June attack against the Inter-Continental Hotel in Kabul and a host of other smaller but effective operations."

In July Adm Mullen, who steps down this month as chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, accused Pakistan's government of sanctioning the killing of investigative journalist Saleem Shahzad.

Pakistan called that statement "irresponsible".

Correspondents say that during his tenure, Adm Mullen has been a forceful advocate for maintaining dialogue with Pakistan and with its military establishment.

He was said to be close to the Pakistani army's chief of staff, Gen Ashfaq Kayani. Indeed, Adm Mullen is thought to have made more visits to Pakistan than any other senior US official or chief of staff in recent times.

But, correspondents say, the latest comments are yet more evidence of his patience wearing thin, and suggest he is prepared to be more outspoken as his term in office draws to a close.

Strained ties

The Haqqani network, which is closely allied to the Taliban and reportedly based in Pakistan, has been blamed for several high-profile attacks against Western, Indian and government targets in Afghanistan.

It is often described by Pakistani officials as a predominantly Afghan group, but correspondents say its roots reach deep inside Pakistani territory, and speculation over its links to Pakistan's security establishment refuses to die down.

US officials have long been frustrated at what they perceive to be Pakistani inaction against the Haqqani network, and analysts say US concern about the group's capabilities is particularly acute as Nato begins withdrawing troops from Afghanistan.

Earlier this month, Washington said it could target the Haqqani network on Pakistani soil if the authorities there failed to take action against the militants.

But on Thursday, Mr Malik told the BBC that Pakistan's government had taken "very, very strict actions" whenever it had received information about militant groups.

No, seriously.

"We will not allow any terrorist to operate from our area, from our side, irrespective of any country, including Afghanistan," he said. "I assure you that, if their presence is there and which is detrimental, action is going to be taken."...