| Submit your comments on this article | |
| India-Pakistan | |
| Mullah Omar not in Pakistan, Taliban commander says | |
| 2009-10-01 | |
The Washington Post said this week US officials had expressed concern over the ability of Omar and his lieutenants to launch attacks into Afghanistan from sanctuaries around the Pakistani city of Quetta. Pakistan has long denied that Omar or any of his commanders are based in Pakistan but it has been unable to dispel the suspicion in Washington and Kabul. Several Taliban members have been detained in Pakistan. Mounting US concern about Omar and his so-called Quetta shura, or leadership council, comes as the United States weighs options on how to deal with an intensifying Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. Possibilities include sending more combat troops and trainers for the Afghan army and stepping up strikes by pilotless drone aircraft on militants on the Pakistani side of the border. A Taliban commander, Hayatullah Khan, told Reuters by telephone that the entire Taliban leadership was in Afghanistan. 'Pakistan is not safe for us. More of our people have been captured in Pakistan than in Afghanistan so everybody is here including Mullah Omar,' said Khan, who said he was speaking from Afghanistan, although he declined to be specific. 'The Americans are making the Quetta shura an excuse for an expansion of their drone strikes to Balochistan, nothing else,' said Khan. Pakistan, battling al Qaeda-linked Pakistani Taliban militants in NWFP province, to the north of Balochistan, insists that the Taliban leadership is not in present in Queta. But many analysts say Pakistan is acting only against militants which are a threat to itself, like the Pakistani Taliban, while leaving alone those focused on fighting in Afghanistan or on targeting India. US Ambassador to Pakistan Anne W. Patterson told the Washington Post the Quetta shura was 'high on Washington's list'. The United States intensified its attacks by pilotless drones on militants in northwestern Pakistani border sanctuaries last year as the Afghan insurgency intensified. The United States has launched nearly 60 strikes in northwest Pakistan since the beginning of 2008, but none has been in Baluchistan. The strikes are deeply unpopular in a country where many people are suspicious of US designs in the region. Pakistan officially objects to the drone attacks, saying they violate its sovereignty and the civilian casualties they inflict inflame public anger. US officials say the strikes are carried out under an agreement with Islamabad that allows Pakistani leaders to decry the attacks in public. Pakistan is already facing a low-level insurgency by separatists Balochistan and has decried any suggestion of an expansion of the US drone war to the province. The US and Nato commander in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, said in an assessment leaked to the media last week the Afghan insurgency was clearly supported from Pakistan and senior leaders of insurgent groups were based there. | |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #9 You'll soon discover they are not illiterate village bumpkins who are oftentimes not easily replaced. True. And in some cases it takes a while to find another "retired/on-indefinite-leave leader with military experience" who'll be accepted by the locals. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2009-10-01 21:25 |
| #8 A hotel would be too obvious, I'm guessing. More like a compound where the coming and going of subordinates wouldn't be questioned. But yeah .... |
| Posted by: lotp 2009-10-01 19:13 |
| #7 I guess the government redrew the boundaries of the city to put the four-star hotel (Omar's not a member of the UN, after all) he's hiding in is "outside" the city limits. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2009-10-01 19:10 |
| #6 "There is no need for any further drone strikes because the man you are looking for is not here." |
| Posted by: gromky 2009-10-01 17:14 |
| #5 Who's to say they arent already there , and have been for quite some time Paul2 . Our intel is usually very positive , just the politics get in the way. We always have that disadvantage . |
| Posted by: Oscar 2009-10-01 12:45 |
| #4 Let British/American special forces into Quetta then if you have nothing to hide! |
| Posted by: Paul2 2009-10-01 11:10 |
| #3 'The Americans are making the Quetta shura an excuse for an expansion of their drone strikes to Balochistan, nothing else,' said Khan. Diversionary--Balochistan should definitely be the focus now. And bumpkins or no, evil is evil. |
| Posted by: Lumpy Elmoluck5091 2009-10-01 10:36 |
| #2 Historically, the leadership and it's cells within a counterinsurgency movement are absolutely critical to the tactical planning, coordination, resourcing, recruitment and reconstitution of the force. They are the knowledge link between the movement and it's sponsorship via state(s). It you've not done so already, have a look at the bio's of some of these people. You'll soon discover they are not illiterate village bumpkins who are oftentimes not easily replaced. |
| Posted by: Besoeker in Duitsland 2009-10-01 09:00 |
| #1 A question for you military types: in an outfit like the Taliban, fighting a decentralized war without a significant logistics component, how important are the upper echelon 'leaders'? What do they actually do beyond being figureheads? |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2009-10-01 07:51 |