显示标签为“Drone”的博文。显示所有博文
显示标签为“Drone”的博文。显示所有博文

2011年4月25日星期一

Pakistanis, Angered by US Drone Strikes, Block NATO Supply Route

 VOA News ?April 24, 2011

A rally against the U.S. drone strikes in Pakistani tribal areas, Peshawar, April 23, 2011


Pakistanis opposed to U.S. drone strikes on insurgent targets in Pakistan have blocked a road used by the NATO alliance to deliver supplies to neighboring Afghanistan.


Several thousand supporters of a Pakistani party led by former cricket star Imran Khan were staging a sit-in Sunday on the NATO supply route near the northwestern city of Peshawar. They began the protest late Saturday and planned to remain until Sunday evening.


NATO ships much of its non-lethal supplies for forces in landlocked Afghanistan to the Pakistani port of Karachi before delivering them by truck to the Afghan border. Militants often attack the convoys in Pakistan to stop them from reaching U.S.-led NATO forces fighting a Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan.


U.S. drone strikes against Taliban-allied militants in northwest Pakistan have been a source of friction between the two countries. Khan and his supporters at the protest site demanded that the United States stop the missile attacks, saying they say kill innocent Pakistanis.


U.S. officials have never publicly acknowledged the use of drones inside Pakistan, but privately they have confirmed the strikes to various news outlets, saying the operations have killed mostly militants.

[All VOA blogs...]

Going Green
Watch Rebecca Ward's report on the BP?Gulf oil spill - one year later.



 

Pakistanis End Strike to Protest US Drone Attacks

。 VOA News ?April 24, 2011

Supporters of a Pakistani religious party Jamaat-e- Islami arrive to join a rally against the U.S. drone strikes in Pakistani tribal areas, in Peshawar, April 23, 2011


Thousands of Pakistanis opposed to U.S. drone strikes on militants in the country's northwest have ended their two-day blockade of a key supply route for U.S.-led NATO troops fighting Taliban insurgents in neighboring Afghanistan.


The call for the blockade, which began Saturday on the outskirts of Peshawar, came from the Tehreek-e-Insaf (Movement for Justice) party led by former cricket star Imran Khan. ?


Khan demanded Sunday that the attacks end or there would be more demonstrations in various parts of the country aimed at blocking NATO supplies, including in the capital, Islamabad.


NATO ships much of its non-lethal supplies through Pakistan, but local militants often attack the convoys.


U.S. drone strikes against militants based in Pakistan's tribal belt have been a source of friction between the two countries. U.S. officials do not acknowledge the missile strikes, which are deeply unpopular among the local population.


The Pakistani government publicly condemns the drone strikes as undermining its sovereignty, but regional experts say Islamabad privately coordinates with the U.S. government on selecting targets.

24-04-2011 whiteraven (USA)

Yes, end all drone attacks and the production and use of drones on this planet for death and destruction. All these high tech weapons of destruction should be banned. How many useful things could be done with all the money wasted on these? And for what? The monopolies of the filthy greedy world trade banking system...these are the guys that call the shots that Obama sucks up to.

24-04-2011 whiteraven (USA)

Yes, end all drone attacks and the production and use of drones on this planet for death and destruction. All these high tech weapons of destruction should be banned. How many useful things could be done with all the money wasted on these? And for what? The monopolies of the filthy greedy world trade banking system...these are the guys that call the shots that Obama sucks up to.

25-04-2011 joel (usa)

its about time to get new ways or route in supplying the NATO troops, you cannot be :hostage" to those insane pakistanis, they had always been that way, India knows better about them!

25-04-2011 amar (pakistan)

it is impossbile to win war by killing innocent tribal citizens living in remote and rural areas.as much money america is spending for killing these people,if these funds have been used for prosperity of that people,amrican would have been loved and respected everywhere rather than being cursed.

* Required By using this form you agree to the following: All comments will be reviewed before posting. Be aware - not all submissions will be posted. VOA has the right to use your comments worldwide in any VOA produced media. Terms & Conditions

 

2011年4月23日星期六

Deadly Drone Strike by U.S. May Fuel Anger in Pakistan

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — An American drone attack killed 23 people in North Waziristan on Friday, Pakistani military officials said, in a strike against militants that appeared to signify unyielding pressure by the United States on Pakistan’s military amid increasing opposition to such strikes.


The strike came a day after the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen, met with the Pakistani military chief, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, and asked that Pakistan do more to fight militants who use North Waziristan as a base from which to attack United States and NATO forces in Afghanistan.


The assault was the second show of the United States’ determination to continue drone attacks since the head of Pakistan’s spy agency, Lt. Gen. Ahmed Shuja Pasha, met this month in Washington with Director Leon E. Panetta of the Central Intelligence Agency to request a halt to the strikes.


Friday’s attack could further fuel anti-drone sentiment among the Pakistani public. A government official in North Waziristan told Pakistani reporters that five children and four women were among the 23 who were killed.


The attack singled out forces of a militant commander, Hafiz Gul Bahadur, whose loyalists cross the border into Afghanistan to fight American and NATO soldiers, the government official said.


Mr. Bahadur operates under a peace accord with the Pakistani Army that ensures that militants under his control do not attack Pakistani soldiers but concentrate only on allied soldiers.


Those killed Friday were gathered in Spinwam, an area close to Mir Ali in North Waziristan that had become a hub for militants in the past several months, the official said.


In the increasing public war of nerves between the American and Pakistani armies, Pakistan’s government is allowing a planned anti-NATO protest to go ahead in Peshawar this weekend. A political leader, Imran Khan, has called on protesters to stage a sit-in on Saturday to block trucks carrying NATO supplies for the war in Afghanistan. The trucks travel through Peshawar from the seaport of Karachi to Torkham, the gateway to Afghanistan.


The drone strike on Friday came after Admiral Mullen delivered an unusually harsh message during his visit here, saying publicly that Pakistan’s spy agency, Inter-Services Intelligence, directly supported and abetted the Haqqani network of militants in North Waziristan. The network’s militants are responsible for many of the American casualties in Afghanistan, American commanders say.


The United States has long held that the Haqqani network was supported by the Pakistani spy agency, but it rarely says so publicly.


In a separate episode, between the Pakistani military and the Taliban, 16 soldiers from the Pakistani Frontier Corps were killed Thursday when their checkpoint was overrun by 150 militants near the Afghanistan border, a Pakistani security official said.


The battle continued for close to 12 hours at Kharkai in the northern district of Dir in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Province, formerly North-West Frontier Province. Two officers sent to reinforce the troops were killed in an ambush, the official said.


The attack by the militants on Pakistani soldiers came as the army embarked on a renewed assault in Mohmand, part of the tribal areas that have proved difficult for the Pakistani Army to hold.


In a report to Congress this month, the Obama administration complained that the Pakistani Army had “no clear path” toward defeating the insurgency inside Pakistan, and cited the failed efforts to eradicate the militants from Mohmand as an illustration. The army “was failing for the third time in two years” to clear militants from Mohmand, the report said.


The 150 militants who carried out the attack on Thursday appeared to have fled the army assault to Afghanistan and then re-entered Pakistan to strike at the soldiers.


General Kayani, the chief of the Pakistani military, visited Mohmand on Thursday for the second stage of a new assault focused on the Suran, a narrow valley on the border with Afghanistan.


In the last few months, American and NATO forces on the other side of the border of Mohmand have helped Pakistan to attack militants as they escaped into Afghanistan, the Pakistani security official said. But the Pakistani militants who attacked in Dir on Thursday appeared to have escaped before the assault on the Suran began and were allowed to re-enter Pakistan by elements in the Afghan Army who were assisting them, the official said.


Jane Perlez reported from Islamabad, and Ismail Khan from Peshawar, Pakistan.


 

2011年4月18日星期一

News Analysis: U.S. Relations With Pakistan Falter in Rift Over Drone Strikes

The rupture over Pakistan’s demands that the Americans end drone strikes — which the Obama administration rejected — and scale back their intelligence presence within Pakistan exposed the tentative nature of the alliance forged after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. And it is increasingly apparent that the two countries have differing, even irreconcilable, aims in Afghanistan.


With the Afghan endgame looming, suspicion is overwhelming faint cooperation between the United States and Pakistan, as each side seeks to secure its interests, increase its leverage to obtain them, and even cut out the other if need be, American and Pakistani officials say.


No one in Pakistan or in Washington now speaks of returning to the strategic alliance made by President George W. Bush and Gen. Pervez Musharraf immediately after the Sept. 11 attacks, when the primary goal was to operate joint intelligence efforts to capture operatives of Al Qaeda. Military officials from both sides say that arrangement was never bound to be a longstanding affair.


“There was never a level of trust,” said a former American military official who served in a senior position in Pakistan. “I’m convinced now they don’t want our help.”


The American official did not want to be identified while discussing the delicate nature of a relationship that, whatever its failings, both nations are reluctant to jettison completely.


But politicians on both sides are disappointed with the results of billions of dollars in American military and civilian assistance since 2001, and the Obama administration acknowledged to Congress in a report this month that the results of the spending fell short of expectations.


In any case, the money has done little to pave over the accumulating strategic differences between the two nations.


Broadly, the Americans seek a strong and relatively centralized Afghan government commanding a large army that can control its territory. Almost all those ends are objectionable to Pakistan, which while it calls for a stable Afghanistan, prefers a more loosely governed neighbor where it can influence events, if need be, through Taliban proxies.


The particular differences revolve around which Taliban factions should be included in any settlement; the role of India, an ally of the United States but the enemy of Pakistan; and the size of the new Afghan Army, which the Americans want big and the Pakistanis want small.


The situation is further complicated, American and Pakistani officials said, by discord within the Obama administration over how the United States should withdraw troops from Afghanistan, and what role, if any, Pakistan should play in the exit.


The overall commander in Afghanistan, Gen. David H. Petraeus, is determined to batter the Taliban as much as possible, a policy that the Pakistanis disagree with, both sides say. Pakistan prefers that the State Department tilt toward reconciliation between the Afghan government and the Taliban.


Even within the Pentagon, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen, who has met with the Pakistani military chief, Gen. Afshaq Parvez Kayani, on more than two dozen occasions, has more tolerance for the Pakistani point of view than does General Petraeus, a senior American official said. With his position in Washington, Admiral Mullen could still prevail on persevering with Pakistan.


These American nuances are well known at the Pakistani Army headquarters in Rawalpindi, where General Petraeus is referred to as Mr. Petraeus — a calculated omission of his military title as a way to mock his perceived political ambitions, according to a recent visitor to the headquarters.


For months, Pakistan’s diplomats and military officials have complained that they were being kept in the dark by the Obama administration’s maneuvering, no matter how preliminary, for a negotiated solution in Afghanistan.


“There is no transparency; they are not telling us who they are talking to,” a Pakistani government official said. Another official, in Pakistan’s security apparatus, said: “We don’t know what the Americans’ endgame is in Afghanistan.”


As their nervousness about American intentions have increased in recent months, the Pakistanis have sought to improve their leverage — threatening C.I.A. operations in Pakistan, cracking down on Taliban leaders to coerce their cooperation, and trying to befriend President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan, who has also felt on the outs with Washington.


In the latest iteration of this new Pakistani-Afghan relationship, General Kayani and the head of Pakistan’s intelligence agency, Lt. Gen. Ahmed Shuja Pasha, accompanied Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani on a visit to Kabul on Saturday, the most public of a number of visits to Afghanistan by General Kayani in the past year.


American diplomats in Islamabad and Kabul declined to comment on the Pakistani visit to Afghanistan, and appeared to know little about the intention of the Afghanistan-Pakistan Joint Commission unveiled with considerable fanfare by the two sides in Kabul as a vehicle to end the war.


Pir Zubair Shah contributed reporting from Washington, and Ismail Khan from Peshawar, Pakistan.