NP Rank:
Dealing with Pakistan
Get tough. Get even.
Not a single Middle Eastern nation wants an obtrusive USA on its sovereign turf. Americans understand that. In addition, Pakistan must understand that as long as it remains a safe-haven for anti-American terrorists, we will be there in spades. We will be there with complete cooperation. We will remain without it. It can be friendly, or it can be downright war-like. Pakistan, you pick it.
Right now, hostility resides within the fabric of the relationship and Americans will seek and destroy it. Understand our persistence to fight terrorism of all kinds and we will get to the heart of it even if it means camping out inside your government.
The only way to get us to stand down is for the Pakistan government to purge the terrorists of all kinds.
Don’t be surprised if suddenly the names of Pakistan “undercover” officials start showing up in the Pakistan community, especially those who have sold out Americans.
“Pakistanis disclose name of CIA operative
By Karin Brulliard and Greg Miller, Published: May 9
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — The public outing of the CIA station chief here threatened on Monday to deepen the rift between the United States and Pakistan, with U.S. officials saying they believed the disclosure had been made deliberately by Pakistan’s main spy agency.
If true, the leak would be a sign that Pakistan’s powerful security establishment, far fromfeeling chastened by the killing of terrorist leader Osama bin Laden in a Pakistani garrison city last week, is seeking to demonstrate its leverage over Washington and retaliate for the unilateral U.S. operation.
Less than six months ago, the identity of the previous CIA station chief in Islamabad was also disclosed in an act that U.S. officials blamed on their counterparts in Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence agency, or ISI.
The new station chief, who runs one of the largest U.S. intelligence-gathering operations in the world, played an instrumental role in overseeing efforts to confirm bin Laden’s location before last week’s raid.
The discovery of bin Laden’s presence in a Pakistani city was considered a huge embarrassment for Pakistan’s military. The United States viewed it as an opportunity to press Pakistan, the recipient of billions of dollars in annual American aid, to crack down harder on militants. Outrage among Pakistanis over the operation was also seen as a rare chance for the weak civilian government in Islamabad to stake its claim in foreign and security policy, long the domain of the army.
But the nation’s security establishment has reacted with furor, not humility, people familiar with top Pakistani generals’ thinking said Monday. Their response has been two-pronged: to shift blame for the bin Laden episode to the government ofPresident Asif Ali Zardari and, according to American officials, to strike back against U.S. allegations that Pakistani spies were either complicit in sheltering bin Laden or incompetent.
The CIA station chief’s name was first aired by a private Pakistani television station on Friday, and a misspelled version of the name was published the next day in the Nation newspaper, which is considered close to the security establishment. The Washington Post does not typically publish the names of intelligence officers working undercover.
Pakistani intelligence officials could not be reached for comment on the U.S. allegation. American officials acknowledged that they had no hard evidence, but a U.S. official said that the suspicion was “based on past history.” The official indicated that evidence has accumulated in recent months that the ISI was behind the exposure of the station chief last year.
In that instance, the CIA pulled the officer out of Pakistan. But it is not clear whether the agency will do the same now. The prior chief was nearing the end of his assignment in Pakistan when he was recalled to agency headquarters. The current CIA leader in Islamabad has been there only about five months. He was described as a veteran officer known for his blunt manner and extensive operations experience in Russia.”



Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (5)
at 06:11 on May 10th, 2011
Let US do such operation once again and super power wil be brought to feet now by Pakistan army after al-Qaeda.
at 06:24 on May 10th, 2011
The terrorists aren't necessarily anti-American. What they are by religious and political ideology is anti individual rights and freedoms, and anti-democratic. The U.S. just happens to be powerful enough to project both as a counter ideology. Making us a target, more in name than action, of their angst at not succeeding to dominate, especially through the use of acts of terror.
at 10:46 on May 10th, 2011
That's a sophisticated and sensitive viewpoint. I stumble on the anti-democratic part.
Yes, we are projecting and imposing our ideology that is part and parcel to their arming with nuclear weapons. We won't tolerate that threat and will seek to neutralize it politically before it becomes any more dangerous.
at 14:04 on May 10th, 2011
I wouldn't call the US democratic and pro freedom & individual rights. Gitmo - need I say more...
at 15:39 on May 10th, 2011
Yes, you would have to say more. Gitmo is a response to terrorist and terrorism as a ideal. Gitmo is not an "ideal". Pun intended. Then again exploring further the idea of imprisonment/punishment does not argue any standard of democracy. I would further argue that if the terrorist can claim the "right" and believe they ought to be "free" to terrorize, then others can claim the right to counter act that and be equally free to remove terrorism/terrorist from the global social and political expression.