Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54777
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak and impact on India

Postby ramana » 26 Jul 2010 21:25

Arun posted...

Der Spiegel on the leak of 92,000 classified US documents regarding the Afghan insurgency which among other shows the Islamic Republic of Pakistan fomenting Islamic Terrorism in Afghanistan:

Explosive Leaks Provide Image of War from Those Fighting It

Der Spiegel has a specific section dealing with the role of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan’s ISI spy agency in fomenting Islamic Terrorism in Afghanistan. An excerpt:

The Secret Enemy in Pakistan

The Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), Pakistan's secret service, originally helped to build up and deploy the Taliban after Afghanistan descended into a bitter and fratricidal civil war between the mujahedeen who had prevailed over the Soviets and forced their withdrawal. Despite all of the reassurances from Pakistani politicians that the old ties are cut, the country is still pursuing an ambiguous policy in the region -- at once serving as both an ally to the US and as a helper to its enemy.
There is plenty of new evidence to support this thesis. The documents clearly show that the Pakistani intelligence agency is the most important accomplice the Taliban has outside of Afghanistan. The war against the Afghan security forces, the Americans and their ISAF allies is still being conducted from Pakistan.

The country is an important safe haven for enemy forces -- and serves as a base for issuing their deployment. New recruits to the Taliban stream across the Pakistan-Afghan border, including feared foreign fighters -- among them Arabs, Chechnyans, Uzbekis, Uighurs and even European Islamists.

According to the war logs, the ISI envoys are present when insurgent commanders hold war councils -- and even give specific orders to carry out murders. These include orders to try to assassinate Afghan President Hamid Karzai. For example, a threat report dated August 21, 2008 warned: "Colonel Mohammad Yusuf from the ISI had directed Taliban official Maulawi Izzatullah to see that Karzai was assassinated."


Read the section:

The Secret Enemy in Pakistan


Main Der Spiegel story:

Explosive Leaks Provide Image of War from Those Fighting It



SanjayM posted:

Here is the direct link to the WikiLeaks site, should any of you wish to peruse their cache of materials:

Wiki Leaks:Afghan War Diary 2004-2010


I would like members to link/post those reports that deal with India and attacks on Indian interests in Afghanistan.

Thanks, ramana

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Postby Lalmohan » 26 Jul 2010 21:55

ramana - at the time of the kabul embassy attack, there were reports of credible intel and pre-warnings, but not necessarily actionable. this is the first time i am seeing it ascribed to polish intel.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54777
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby ramana » 26 Jul 2010 22:16

NightWatch comments on the WikiLeaks.

FWIW... 25 July 2010...


WikiLeaks, The New York Times, The Guardian and Der Spiegel on Afghanistan: Special comment.

What has been published thus far is underwhelming. The items published to date contain many factual details, but little-to-no analysis that would change views about Afghanistan. The analysis by the New York Times and the Guardian analysts is unimpressive. A competent intelligence analyst could do much more with the information than these people have done, which is good news.

The news outlets have had the 92,201 reports for over a month, but The Guardian's people have managed to plot on a map and post 300. Experienced Defense Department analysts of Afghanistan regularly would read and analyze more than 2,000 such reports in every 12 hour shift and would plot the salient events on a map, connect the dots and make some inferences about the status of the insurgency by province or district … and do that every shift.

The sum of the parts is less than the whole. The number of leaked reports looks large to those not familiar with the enormity of the information flow. 92, 201 reports represent a tiny fraction of daily reporting between 2004 and 2009 and only at one classification level. There are more classification levels and the 92, 201 reports, as summarized, apparently do not include the most useful, fortunately.

A glimpse into the intelligence analysis challenge. The information leaked thus far is valuable for people who do not work in intelligence because it gives them an insight into the challenge of coping with this huge flow of information. The task is to evaluate it in order to provide actionable intelligence to policy makers or combat forces about the status of the fighting in Afghanistan.

It is an enormous information problem for which intelligence analysts have few useful tools or automated assists, despite 30 years of Intelligence Community investment in automated and computerized analytical support systems. The New York Times published one of the reports, as an exemplar. It describes one meeting of one group of Taliban at which retired Pakistan intelligence chief, Lieutenant Hamid Gul, was reported as present.

The Times did a great service in providing the reading public an example of what a low level human-source field intelligence information report might actually look like. For an Afghan desk officer it would be one of maybe 3,000 he needed to read that day.

The reports do not speak for themselves and cannot be taken at face value because honest people lie and dishonest people tell the truth.

Hamid Gul became an outspoken supporter of the Taliban and an enemy of the US after he retired. On active duty at Pakistani intelligence he enjoyed the access and preferential treatment CIA and other agencies gave his predecessors and successors.

His conversion in retirement to fundamentalism had more to do with internal Pakistan Army politics than Afghanistan or fervent devotion to Islam, many would argue.

He might well have attended the reported meeting, but the reported facts about other delegations are clearly exaggerated and not credible. Old hands will recognize the fraud in an instant. :?:

NightWatch is gratified. The one service for which NightWatch thanks The Times is the confirmation that the Taliban are using heat-seeking man-portable anti-aircraft missiles (manpads) against US aircraft. In the 1980s, the Afghan mujahedin were proficient in using these systems against the Soviets, owing to excellent CIA training and the provision of front-line STINGER missiles. It has been inconceivable that no US and NATO aircraft losses to manpads have been confirmed in open sources since 2001.

At last this issue has been clarified. The Taliban are following the path of the US-backed mujahedin, and that should surprise no one. Honest admission of this fact would have sharpened independent assessments of the air campaign and its risks.

The US introduced manpads into the Pashtun warrior culture during the Soviet occupation. These are the systems that led to the defeat of the Soviet forces by neutralizing air superiority. Millions are available for purchase internationally, but US spokespersons have never admitted that the Taliban might actually have been clever enough to buy some, along with IED supplies, perhaps.

{Would cause a blowback due to fratricide?}

In today's reports the new outlets did not reach the obvious conclusion that the increased use of manpads against US helicopters might have contributed to McChrystal's decision to limit tactical air support because aircraft losses were mounting, mimicking the Soviet experience. In other words, the deaths of innocent Afghan civilians might have been less significant than the rising losses of US airframes. That possibility needs follow-up research.

92,201 reports are not the same as 92,201 facts. In the NightWatch/KGS materials on Intelligence as Evidence the central theme is that every field report must be subjected to six foundation tests and two argument tests, after a filtering process that identifies it as having potential value. None of the news outlets did any of that difficult, tedious work.

Thus, it is only partially accurate to assert the reports provide new insights into how "grim" the war is. Some provide local insights that need to be matched to other reports. Some are fabrications. Many are time sensitive, with no enduring value except as time capsules.

Still others are local views of important but limited value. For example, The Guardian has posted an interactive map of 300 reports. It has taken the first analytical step, at least, in locating field data geographically. However, it has not collated the reports by time, actor, nature of action, outcome, Allied response or matched any of this to some meaningful geographic framework, such as the 400 districts in Afghanistan.

The real harm. Separated from source information, all of the information published today could have been released into the public domain as unclassified, but for the huge expense involved in the review process for such a large number of reports. Today's "sensational" revelations contained no themes or strategic insights that have not been reported in past NightWatch special editions on Afghanistan, which are based exclusively on open source materials and more than 30 years of study of Afghanistan. :mrgreen:

Experienced hands know that 92,200 documents represent a rather small data dump. Moreover, whoever kept this so-called log had no apparent logic or sophisticated knowledge of Afghanistan in including data. It is a data dump similar to the Washington Post report on US intelligence and contractors. It is data without analysis, similar to other intelligence data repositories.

The mantra of experienced analysts is that more is not better. Better is better.

The serious problem implied in the leak is the extent of demoralization it might manifest. If serious people are so disheartened by the Afghanistan war that they would risk clearances, reputation and criminal prosecution to engage in what they think is a large volume leak as an act of opposition, then the leaks will get worse as the war drags on inconclusively.

Almost all of what was published today is already in the public domain, but the next set of leaks might do real damage to national security. The real story is about what is prompting this hemorrhage of leaks.



Aboe post gives the US context of the leaks.

Dilbu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6461
Joined: 07 Nov 2007 22:53
Location: Deep in the badlands of BRFATA

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Postby Dilbu » 26 Jul 2010 22:20

Lalmohan wrote:ramana - at the time of the kabul embassy attack, there were reports of credible intel and pre-warnings, but not necessarily actionable. this is the first time i am seeing it ascribed to polish intel.

Even polish intel is in the thick of action in af-pak. :eek:

Muppalla
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7096
Joined: 12 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby Muppalla » 26 Jul 2010 23:33

HOW LONG WILL US COVER UP PAKISTAN? - By B.Raman

5. Though Wikileaks, the whistleblowers' web site, may not admit it, there are strong grounds for suspecting that Bradley Manning must have been the source of the nearly 90,000 classified documents, mainly relating to the war in Afghanistan, which were uploaded by Wikileaks on its web site on July 25. It had allegedly made many of them available in advance to the "New York Times", the "Guardian" of the UK and "Der Spiegal" of Germany.

6.Senator John Kerry, the Chairman of of the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who is close to President Barack Obama, has been quoted by the British Broadcasting Corporation as saying that the leak came at a "critical stage" for US policy in the region. He added: "However illegally these documents came to light, they raise serious questions about the reality of America's policy toward Pakistan and Afghanistan."

7.How long will the US cover up the misdeeds of Pakistan against India in order to protect American lives and interests? How long will India keep silent on the US cover-up of Pakistani misdeeds in the long-term interests of the developing strategic relations between India and the US? For an Indian, these are the two questions which assume even greater importance than in the past as a result of the leakage. The leaked documents confirm three facts which were already known---firstly, the role of Pakistan in training and arming the Taliban; secondly, the role of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and the Taliban in organising a car bomb explosion through a suicide bomber outside the Indian Embassy in Kabul on July 7,2008, and thirdly, the attempts of the ISI to use the Taliban to have the Hamid Karzai Government in Afghanistan destabilised. Fifty-eight persons, including India's Defence attache Brigadier R D Mehta and Counsellor Venkateswara Rao, were killed when the suicide bomber targeted the Embassy during the morning rush hour.

8.The leaked documents also show that the Taliban has shoulder-fired, heat-seeking missiles which it had been using against NATO planes and helicopters. During the 1980s, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) had trained the Afghan Mujahideen in the use of Stinger missiles against Soviet aircraft. It had issued a large stock of these missiles to the ISI for being given to the Afghan Mujahideen. The ISI issued some to the Mujahideen, gave some to Iran and one to North Korea for re-engineering purposes and kept some for use by the Pakistan Army against India. After the withdrawal of the Soviet troops from Afghanistan, the CIA asked the ISI to buy back the unused Stinger missiles from the Afghan Mujahideen and return them to the CIA. The ISI evaded doing so. On coming to office in January 1993, President Bill Clinton forced Mr.Nawaz Sharif, the then Pakistani Prime Minister, to sack Lt.Gen.Javed Nasir, the then Director-General of the ISI, and some other senior officers who had avoided returning the unused Stinger missiles. Till Mr.Nawaz sacked them. Mr.Clinton had placed Pakistan on a so-called list of suspected State-sponsors of terrorism. In 1994, when the Taliban was formed by the ISI, some of the unused Stinger missiles were given to it. The leaked documents only mention in passing that the Taliban has shoulder-fired missiles without mentioning all these details as to how the Stinger missiles reached the Taliban.

9. This is one of many such instances of the ISI training and arming the Taliban, the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) and other terrorist organisations for using them to advance its strategic agenda in Afghanistan and India. It has been brazenly doing this because of its confidence that the US would not take any punitive action against it and that the Indian leadership and bureaucracy would not have the courage to act against it----either on the diplomatic or military front or through appropriate covert actions. The ISI did have some fears when Indira Gandhi, Rajiv Gandhi and Narasimha Rao were Prime Ministers, but thereafter it lost all fears because of a succession of soft Prime Ministers we have had.

10. Will the revelations about Pakistan and the ISI in the documents leaked to Wikileaks lead at long last to Pakistan and its ISI being subjected to punitive action. I have serious doubts. After some strong statements, the US will hush up the matter once again and the Govt. of India will avoid pressing the US to act against Pakistan. It is a great national shame.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54777
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby ramana » 27 Jul 2010 00:00

Wasn't there a US diplomat in charge of buying back the Stingers and a big hulla was raised about how successful she was?

krisna
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5829
Joined: 22 Dec 2008 06:36

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby krisna » 27 Jul 2010 00:52

^^^^
was this christina Rocca.
http://911review.org/Sept11Wiki/Rocca,Christina.shtml
In the early 1990s, Rocca monitored the implementation of a plan for the buy-back by the CIA from the Afghan Mujahideen (->) groups and the Inter-Services Intelligence (See Isi) of Pakistan the unused Stinger missiles supplied by the CIA, free of cost during the 1980s, for use against the Soviet troops. Lt.Gen.Javed Nasir, the Director-General of the ISI during Mr.Nawaz Sharif's first tenure as the Prime Minister (1990-93), did not co-operate with the CIA in the implementation of this buy-back scheme. It was on the recommendation of Rocca that Mr.Clinton placed Pakistan in the so-called watch list of suspected State-sponsors of international terrorism in January, 1993, and demanded that Mr. Nawaz Sharif should remove from the ISI.

Muppalla
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7096
Joined: 12 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby Muppalla » 27 Jul 2010 00:55



This is specifically about political fallout due to Iranian and ISI funding Taliban. I never thought that Iran will fund Taliban.

Iran in the documents makes me this whole leak is deliberate to attack Iran before November.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54777
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby ramana » 27 Jul 2010 00:56

TOI says:
Leaks show up undeclared war by Pak on India

WASHINGTON: Pakistan's war by terrorism against India in Afghanistan is highlighted in the WikiLeaks cache, including a July 1, 2008, threat report issued by Polish intelligence in Kabul that warns of an attack on the Indian embassy, which was carried out a week later.

The report relating to the attack on the Indian Embassy reads: INS [insurgents] are planning to divide into two groups: first will attack Indian embassy building, whilst the second group will engage security posts in front of MOI [the Afghan ministry of interior], IOT [in order to] give possibility to escape attackers from the first group.

The main goal of this operation is to show TB's [Taliban's] ability to carry out attack on every object in Kabul."

The attack claimed more than 50 lives, including that of a young Indian diplomat from the foreign service and a senior Indian military attache.

In fact, so strong was the ISI fingerprint in the attack that the then-US President George Bush and CIA deputy director Stephen Kappes are said to have confronted Islamabad with evidence that ISI elements aided militants in the attack.

While the WikiLeaks cache of documents is replete with instances of Pakistani support and sponsorship of terrorism in Afghanistan, the most charitable explanation being trotted out by Pakistani apologists in Washington is that the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing in Pakistan. Another way of looking at it is Pakistan deliberately insulates a section of the ISI (called the S division) that controls and practices terrorism, to maintain what is called plausible deniability.

The expose also suggests that Pakistan uses its retired and former generals in pursuit of its policy of state-run terrorism. Among its proxies is Lt-Gen Hamid Gul, a favourite of television anchors even in India whose pro-Taliban stance and conspiracy theories are said to provide an alternative narrative in the war on terror. But according to the documents accessed by WikiLeaks, Gul, a former ISI chief and one of Pakistan's top generals, is an active terrorist. In the documents, Gul is depicted as an adviser and an important source of aid to the Taliban. One report even calls him "a leader" of the insurgents.

One threat report from January 14, 2008 claims that Gul coordinated the planned kidnapping of United Nations employees on Highway 1 between Kabul and Jalalabad. The memos also state that Gul ordered suicide attacks, describing the former intelligence chief as one of the most important suppliers of weaponry to the Taliban.

A threat report issued in Kabul on December 23, 2006, reveals monthly visits by Gen Gul to a madrassa in Khyber Pakhutnwa Province, in Pakistan, cited as a major provider of young buys for suicide missions in Afghanistan. The report includes a comment from the CIA Counterterrorism Center: "95% of the suicide attackers are trained in the 'Madrassa of Hashimiye' which is located in Peshawar district of Pakistan. Monthly, the former chief of ISI General Hamid Gul is visiting this madrassa."

Another threat report issued in Kabul on December 30, 2006, suggests Gen Gul, in a meeting earlier that month, directed three attackers to carry out IED attacks along the roads of the Afghan capital during the Eid ul-Fitr. The report reads: "Gul instructed two of the individuals to plant IEDs along the roads frequently utilized by government of Afghanistan (GOA) and ISAF [International Security Assistance Force] vehicles. The third individual is to carry out a suicide attack utilizing a suicide vest against GOA or ISAF entities. Reportedly, Gul's final comment to the three individuals was 'make the snow warm in Kabul', basically telling them to set Kabul aflame.


So Gul has been bad like his Hun ancestors.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54777
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby ramana » 27 Jul 2010 01:04

Has anyone looked at the Wikileaks documents at all? If so what od tey say baout India?

Muppalla
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7096
Joined: 12 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby Muppalla » 27 Jul 2010 01:09



Is that the reason for their lead on Aman Ki Asha.?

Anywhy here is another political fallout. Going forward it will be difficult for liberal journos to put their drivel of equal-equal.

What the WikiLeaks Documents Really Reveal - by Leslie H. Gelb

The extensive release of thousands of secret files shows basic and unsustainable contradictions in U.S. policy, says Leslie H. Gelb—and underscores why the administration needs to reconsider its Af-Pak policy.

What do the secret documents released by WikiLeaks tell us about U.S. policy toward Afghanistan and Pakistan? It has to be said right off that they don’t tell us anything important we didn’t already know. There have been “informed” stories for years detailing how Pakistani military intelligence has been providing arms, money, and intelligence to the Afghan Taliban, who in turn have been killing American soldiers.

So, why are these leaked military and intelligence documents now threatening to shake the very foundations of U.S. policy toward Afghanistan and Pakistan? Because it’s now much more difficult to deny or dodge the truths that we’ve all been well aware of.

No amount of rhetorical tap dancing will allow the White House to escape the fundamental contradictions that underlie U.S. policy toward Af-Pak.


Government officials can always deflect news stories simply by crossing their fingers and waiting for the story to sink in a haze of oil spills and Lindsay Lohan extravaganzas. Now, however, “proof” is there in the black-and-white of secret U.S. documents, compliments of anti-war WikiLeaks. Even if one does not believe that the information contained in every one of these reports is accurate (some do sound rather bizarre), and even if little in the reports can be corroborated independently, the very volume of the “secret” material is overwhelming and plausible—and yes, seductively “secret.”

This leaves the Obama administration with three tales it can tell, most of which it is already shoveling.

First, officials can say that the documents represented leaked material that reveal “only one side of the story.” It’s the story in some cases of rather hysterical soldiers with limited experience and access to wider secrets. We, the government, have other documents that tell another story—one that gives a mixed picture of the behavior of our complicated and loyal Pakistani friends. (I’d hate to be the official assigned to deliver this pile of manure.)

Second, the administration could say that yes, some rogue Pakistani intelligence officers have been carrying out operations in support of the Taliban, that President Obama and his top aides have already remonstrated with the Pakistani government about this, and the Pakistanis are now trying to do better. (That tends to contradict the first story that the leaks are misleading.)

Or third, officials could button their jackets, clear their throats, and say the war is the main thing and these difficult and complicated circumstances have to be put in the larger perspective. What counts is winning this war. Victory in Af-Pak, as it is fondly known, is a U.S. vital national interest; the officials could and probably will say.

But no amount of rhetorical tap dancing will allow the White House to escape the fundamental contradictions that underlie U.S. policy toward Af-Pak. In the first contradiction, the administration claims it’s fighting in Afghanistan to prevent al Qaeda from returning, and once again using Afghan soil to attack America. But now that al Qaeda can attack the United States, its friends and allies from Yemen or Somalia or Pakistan or London or New Jersey, it’s hard to claim any uniqueness for Afghanistan. So, why does the United States have to fight the war there with 100,000 troops?

In the second contradiction, the administration says that, deep down, the reason we’re fighting in Afghanistan is to help prevent an extremist takeover of Pakistan, an unstable Muslim country with nuclear weapons. And administration officials point to the fact that Pakistani officials tell us publicly and privately that the U.S. must stay the course in Afghanistan and stabilize the situation there—otherwise its ill effects will spill over into Pakistan and strengthen extremism there. And yet—and here’s where the new trough of secret WikiLeaks comes in—Pakistani military intelligence, known as Inter-Services Intelligence, is indeed helping the Taliban against Americans in Afghanistan. To boot, the Pakistani government is providing safe haven to the Taliban in Northwest Pakistan, thus making it militarily impossible for U.S. forces to smash them.

To put the issue somewhat melodramatically: The United States is giving “moderate” Pakistanis and the Pakistani military billions of dollars yearly in military and economic aid, which allows Pakistani military intelligence to “secretly” help the Taliban kill Americans in Afghanistan, which will drive America out of Afghanistan and undermine U.S. help for Pakistan.

All this flies in the face of the administration’s new line about an improving Af-Pak relationship. Yes, indeed, we’ve worked out a new trade agreement between these traditional adversaries. Yes, indeed, the Pakistanis are giving us the secret wink for our drone attacks against Taliban safe havens (even as they publicly condemn us for these drone attacks). Yes, indeed, Pakistanis are helping President Hamid Karzai talk with his fellow Pashtun Taliban. (Heaven knows what will come of this).

But let’s face it: Pakistan’s overriding interests in Afghanistan don’t have much to do with the United States. Their fixation is India, plain and simple. They don’t want India to gain any sort of foothold in Afghanistan and somehow encircle them. They’re pressing Washington for sophisticated American arms to fight India, not the Taliban. Some Pakistani leaders even worry of secret plotting between India and the United States against them, especially in Afghanistan.

Pakistani interests are not the same as America’s in Afghanistan, far from it. As it tries to explain away what these secret documents mean, the Obama administration should take time out to reconsider its basic policy toward Af-Pak.

A policy based on fundamental contradictions cannot stand.

Muppalla
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7096
Joined: 12 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby Muppalla » 27 Jul 2010 01:10

ramana wrote:Has anyone looked at the Wikileaks documents at all? If so what od tey say baout India?


We may have to wait for couple of days as I tried couple of times with a fast line. Those folks who downloaded midnight sunday may have got the copies.

KrishG
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 1290
Joined: 25 Nov 2008 20:43
Location: Land of Trala-la

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby KrishG » 27 Jul 2010 01:22

I have a question:

Whatever information that was leaked (wrt TSP supporting Taliban) was known to all the major stake-holders ie US, Indian, Afghanista and Pakistan. Even the public who closely follow the Af-Pak war wuld be well aware of these facts. Now the report may have been deliberately released into the public domain by the US to up the ante on Pakistan but are there any ways in which these leaks could be helpful for India ?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54777
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby ramana » 27 Jul 2010 01:37

Well it can claim no more talks! 8)

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54777
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby ramana » 27 Jul 2010 01:40

X-post from Ref Material thread....
ramana wrote:Thanks to Shiv!

Image

nithish
BRFite
Posts: 437
Joined: 02 Oct 2009 02:41

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby nithish » 27 Jul 2010 01:52

US gave heads up to India on Wikileaks
WASHINGTON: The United States gave heads up to India, besides Afghanistan and Pakistan, on the leak of more than 90,000 classified documents pertaining to the war against terrorism.

The documents released by Wikileaks, which the Obama Administration today said a federal violation, further strengthens what top Indian officials have been saying for quite some time now that ISI has links with al-Qaeda, Taliban and other extremist organizations.

"We also gave a heads-up to India," State Department spokesman P J Crowley told reporters at his daily news briefing as he said that the Governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan were also informed about the upcoming documents.

Both the White House and the State Department acknowledged that they are concerned about the links between ISI and the extremist elements.

"From the standpoint of India, India clearly, you know, wants to see, that Pakistan is taking steps to bring to justice those people that threaten neighboring states," Crowley said.

"So, clearly, as we've said many, many times, if Pakistan wants to convince India that it has made this kind of fundamental change, bringing to justice those who are responsible for the Mumbai attack would be a very, very constructive and important step," he said in response to a question.


Noting that combating terrorism is an element of its relationship with India, likewise with Pakistan and Afghanistan, he said the US strongly believes that the proof is in what people do, not what people say.

"As we've highlighted here, the fact that Pakistan is taking aggressive action against insurgents within its own borders reflects their understanding that now insurgents threaten Pakistan itself," Crowley said.

The spokesman said the US continues to have conversations with Pakistan on bringing to justice those responsible for the Mumbai attack.

Muppalla
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7096
Joined: 12 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby Muppalla » 27 Jul 2010 02:06

^^^^^ Whatever - lalalalalalala

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54777
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby ramana » 27 Jul 2010 02:27

Hindus quotes Indian officials saying they did get the Polish report and also had their own reports which led to installing the security blast barriers. Guess it wasn't enough to save the lives of those killed.

Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby Sanjay M » 27 Jul 2010 02:31

Maybe Wikileaks isn't working on behalf of the US govt at all.

Wikileaks owner Julian Assange has made lefty statements, such as alleging that the documents show "war crimes" - that's not something a pro-US flunky would say.


My question is - is Wikileaks a Tehelka? Working for whom?

Read this article:

http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/a ... e/19568637

"I do not believe that Private Manning had the technical expertise necessary to communicate this amount of information to the outside world without being detected on his own," Lamo told ABC. "And I don't believe he operated without guidance; rather, I think it's more likely that he was a personal shopper for classified data for the WikiLeaks apparatus."

And speaking to The Daily Beast, Lamo accused WikiLeaks of betraying the 22-year-old soldier by releasing the papers before his trial.

"For WikiLeaks to do this, it's transparently callous in its attitude toward [Manning]," Lamo told the site. "The information wasn't going to go away. WikiLeaks could have waited until after Manning was sentenced, after he was tried. WikiLeaks is just paying lip service to wanting to protect Manning as a potential source, while letting him get hit by a train over this."


The fact that Wikileaks turned Manning into their sacrificial lamb - to me, that smacks of Tehelka ethics.

Because of this, Manning will now face a stiffer sentence.

I'm wondering - if Manning had outside help, then who helped him? Was it a state-sponsor, or just some NGO?

With Wikileaks having scored so big on this event, will our own Tehelka be salivating at doing their own imitation of it?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54777
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby ramana » 27 Jul 2010 02:33

All that is nice but I want to explore leaks related to India.

ManjaM
BRFite
Posts: 1217
Joined: 15 May 2010 02:52
Location: Padvaralli

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby ManjaM » 27 Jul 2010 02:55

Sanjay M wrote:Maybe Wikileaks isn't working on behalf of the US govt at all.

Wikileaks owner Julian Assange has made lefty statements, such as alleging that the documents show "war crimes" - that's not something a pro-US flunky would say.


<snip>

The fact that Wikileaks turned Manning into their sacrificial lamb - to me, that smacks of Tehelka ethics.

Because of this, Manning will now face a stiffer sentence.

I'm wondering - if Manning had outside help, then who helped him? Was it a state-sponsor, or just some NGO?

With Wikileaks having scored so big on this event, will our own Tehelka be salivating at doing their own imitation of it?


Sanjay ji

It is not Wikileaks who turned Manning in, it was Lamo.
Manning supposedly spoke to Lamo under the assumption that Lamo represented wikileaks. Lamo has a prior history of cyber crimes and turned the chat logs over to investigating agencies to cover himself.
The psy ops has started. Lamo is now pretending to be the honest boy next door where as his history and his actions in the current case prove otherwise.

SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16148
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby SwamyG » 27 Jul 2010 03:15

Moreover, Wikileaks has offered Manning a legal team to defend himself.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54777
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby ramana » 27 Jul 2010 03:27

Changed the thread title to reflect my intentions.

enqyoob
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 20:25

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby enqyoob » 27 Jul 2010 06:08

So who leaked 90,000 Pentagon documents on an ongoing war to the "media", knowing fully well that if it wasn't authorized, they could go to jail for the rest of their lives?

If it was a US person, they face life in jail if it was actually illegal.
If it wasn't a US person, then it's espionage and will be tracked to the US persons who leaked it and (see above for the rest of the story).

So it had to be an authorized leak.

Why?

a) It puts heat on TSP's musharraf
OK, reject that. Why not just send a few Predators over Islamagood?
b) It puts heat on WHOTUS.

Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby Sanjay M » 27 Jul 2010 06:37

US Private Bradley Manning leaked the documents - it's already well known.

Anyway, here's some more commentary on the reports:



Notice that everybody keeps harping on the need for withdrawal. Nobody is now saying that the US can stay in Afghanistan.

BajKhedawal
BRFite
Posts: 1191
Joined: 07 Dec 2008 10:08
Location: Is it ethical? No! Is it Pakistani? Yes!

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby BajKhedawal » 27 Jul 2010 08:18

I guess as a preview of this coming 90k doc. release, less than couple of weeks ago NPR aired a full hour program dedicated to wikileaks and its reclusive creator Julian Assange. I think this whole thing is orchestrated so that the west could manipulate the world with doctored media releases. First they create a no touch zone for journalists in Iceland in exchange of bail-outs, and then fill it with mercenary media to wage a media jihad on their enemy. When confronted west can always throw up their hands in despair and claim that the said media has Icelandic immunity.

If they can use jihadic taliban to wield geopolitical power (as opposed to using nuclear weapons: I think Rajesh said that here) they will need a jihadic media to back it up, no?

Airavat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2326
Joined: 29 Jul 2003 11:31
Location: dishum-bishum
Contact:

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby Airavat » 27 Jul 2010 08:57

Larry King discussion on Wikileaks

Some of the comments:

White House spokesperson Gibbs is stating 'the present administration' has been fully aware of the US military information that was leaked to Wikileak. Really? You knew Billions of free American taxpayer dollars had been funneled by the Pakistani ISI to the Taliban??!

Doesn't this directly contradict the sworn oath CIA employees take to protect America? Here are US Military documents showing the CIA hip deep with the ISI and the ISI giving Billions of American taxpayer dollars to the Taliban who are using that free money to kill Americans. This explains how the Taliban were able to afford and obtain shoulder fired heat seeking missiles to destroy US Helicopters in Afghanistan. The Taliban simply couldn't afford them and wouldn't have access to them, but with free Billions of American taxpayer dollars to the ISI, the Taliban obtained them. Mission Accomplished Bush-Cheney!


Wikileaks also exposes the ISI connection leading to a Proxy War between Pakistan and India for the future outcome of Afghanistan. I suspect the Wikileaks documents also reveal the depth of involvement between the Pakistiani ISI and the horrific violent attack in Mumbai, India which murdered a hundred Indian civilians.

My question is why is America's CIA even legally allowed it's close ties and support to the Pakistani ISI, and why has the Republican administration along with the CIA turned their back on India, a long term supporter of America? Why are they actively working to destroy India?


US Soldiers have died in Afghanistan BECAUSE they weren't told heat seeking missiles supplied by the Pakistani ISI were being used by the Taliban.

Keeping that critical information 'silent' was wrong for the Soldiers Familys and wrong for the American people. Kudo's to Wikileak for exposing that to the public.


And some ignoramous calling it treason:

Wikileaks has published unit equipment lists that can be used to identify armor and weapons systems. They have shown a disregard for the safety and security of US Soldiers. This is a "WAR CRIME"!!!!! Ever hear of a crime punishable by death? TRY TREASON!!!!!!!!!! Freedom of the press is one thing publishing information that can get American citizens killed is another!!!!!!!!!!!!


All these details were public knowledge because of your dear "ally" Pakistan years ago!

abhischekcc
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4277
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
Contact:

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby abhischekcc » 27 Jul 2010 09:32

These are my comments on the topic from Af Pak thread:

There is more to the revelation of the logs than meets the eye. Here is a low down:

1. The timing of the leaks is highly circumspect, coinciding as it does with incredibly increased American pressure on Paki to toe its line. As such, the leak has unwritten offical sanction.
2. The 'intelligence' released is low level data, something that soldiers collect. Hence, if US govt wants to spin its interpretation later, that door has been left open. No long term harm done.
3. This leak is another sordid saga in the sad tale of US involvement in Afghanistan, since the late 70s.
4. The policy of 'war management' by news leaks shows how bereft of ideas AND influence the US has become. If they cannot even stand up to its vasal pakistan, you can imagine how little influence they have in that country. This is despite the billions of dollars of official bribes the US gives to that country.
5. Read this latest step from Washington as a continuation of the policy drift that also saw the axe fall on McChrystal. In that episode, the civilians took control of the war from the generals. In this episode, you see the shallowness of the understanding that US civilian leadership has of the pakistani leadership. At least, the generals had some level of understanding due to long association and similar background (paki leadership being military).
6. Towards the end of Obama's tenure, people will miss George W Bush. At the very least, he stopped the terror campaign of the Islamists cold. Obama will leave presidentship with America more insecure than when he inherited it.
7. Pakis do not know the pressure that will be brought to bear on them. They see the US troops leaving, and think they have won a victory. They are wrong, US is simply cutting its losses, and expects pakis to die for them.
8. Kiyani's extension is part of the same policy. The US likes to have generals in command in the countries that are their allies.
9. Indo Pak relations will get worse, and may lead to war or war like situation. This is because of typical Paki short term positive thinking that is induced whenever US needs them and plies them with weapons.
10. We may even see a fresh wave of terror attacks.
11. The failure of India's pro-US policies will be felt immediately in the MRCA contest. Do no expect any american firm to win. They *might* be molified with a couple of sops here and there. But the fighters are gone.
12. One thing about MMS's recent offer to mediate between Iran and US - he *may have* merely fending off the pressure by western nations to sanction Iran. Now, he can claim that his offer to mediate peace was not taken up by western countries, and India can merrily trade with Iran. If this hypothesis is true, then MMS may yet prove to be able to defend Indian interests against US.

-------------
Added later, Gul is wrong when he says US is looking for scape goats. It is looking for scrificial lambs, and you are it. Just like they supported Saddam the Hussein, and later killed him - now it is pakistan's turn. I think I will purchase a popcorn maker.

-------------

Added much later, I think I will reserve my judgement on Obama. He is trying very hard, and his inexperience in not his fault. There are still many throws of the dice still left in this game, and he may yet trun out to be a winner.



PS
Some posts ago (in another thread?) I had said that America is running out of options. This leak merely illucidates how few the options are if they have to resort to unofficial leaks to put pressure on pak.



RESPONSE TO LALMOHAN

^^ Lal mullah, since when has unkil needed causus belli to cause war? They are the only hold out that has not signed the Geneva convention.

abhischekcc
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4277
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
Contact:

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby abhischekcc » 27 Jul 2010 09:52

One of the most important factors that show that current US govt is behind these leaks is the fact that the period of leaks is only from January 2004 to December 2009 - before Obama strategy took charge.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23294
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby chetak » 27 Jul 2010 09:59

abhischekcc wrote:One of the most important factors that show that current US govt is behind these leaks is the fact that the period of leaks is only from January 2004 to December 2009 - before Obama strategy took charge.



Ex ISI chappie gul is wetting his pants predicting this leak as the precursor to an US attack on pakiland.

Hope that they take out this joker in the first wave.

abhischekcc
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4277
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
Contact:

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby abhischekcc » 27 Jul 2010 10:29

I hope all pakis are wetting their pants, they have had a free lunch for far too long, at our cost. Time for the final show.

I think I will start watching TV again from now on to catch news on this :)

Dilbu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6461
Joined: 07 Nov 2007 22:53
Location: Deep in the badlands of BRFATA

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby Dilbu » 27 Jul 2010 10:39

Public opinion is being moulded. For what?

shravan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2201
Joined: 03 Apr 2009 00:08

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby shravan » 27 Jul 2010 10:46

enqyoob wrote:they could go to jail for the rest of their lives?


N3,

The site owner says it legal to publish leaks....American Government was really pissed at wikileaks when the published text messages sent from government personnel in the hours after the terrorist attacks of 9/11.

Vivek Raghuvanshi
BRFite
Posts: 149
Joined: 08 Apr 2010 22:50
Location: Noida, National Capital Region
Contact:

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby Vivek Raghuvanshi » 27 Jul 2010 13:45

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... tacks.html

Wikileaks Afghanistan: Iran accused of supporting Taliban attacks

niran
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5426
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 16:01

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby niran » 27 Jul 2010 13:47

Dilbu wrote:Public opinion is being moulded. For what?

(a)- get a public opinion against the War in Afghanistan, and
withdraw with H&D intact.
(b)- Emir O wants a Golf course in Bakistan.

(c)- Attack Eyran

partha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4005
Joined: 02 Jul 2010 15:25

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby partha » 27 Jul 2010 14:51

Dilbu wrote:Public opinion is being moulded. For what?

If moulding public opinion was the goal, then why "leak" the documents? Why not officially publish them?

Dilbu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6461
Joined: 07 Nov 2007 22:53
Location: Deep in the badlands of BRFATA

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby Dilbu » 27 Jul 2010 15:46

^^
Because nowadays leaks have more credibility than potus. :D

abhischekcc
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4277
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
Contact:

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby abhischekcc » 27 Jul 2010 16:56

People, please note the period the leaks cover - only before the start of Obama's strategy.

This is being done to distance current administration from the mistakes/baises of the previous.

We have not idea of how Obama's strategy is faring - could be good or bad. But I am keeping my fingers crossed.

NOTE: Added word 'Obama' in the sentence above.
Last edited by abhischekcc on 27 Jul 2010 18:47, edited 1 time in total.

Klaus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2168
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 12:28
Location: Cicero Avenue

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby Klaus » 27 Jul 2010 17:40

Notice how the Ombaba administration is installing safety plugs. Installing an American as chair of BP is a ploy to create a diversion for all the pressure building up in public domain. This Wikileaks is also probably an authorised act designed to act as a safety valve.

Consequences of this could be that Iran could come across as the main terrorist sponsoring state and the reason for instability in the ME. It will be accused of sponsoring Hamas to its west and North west and Taliban.Al Queda to its east and north eastern flanks (this might even be proved true to some extent).

My hunch is that KSA will get Pukeland out of the woods this time around. India should be ready for a backflip by KSA and UAE in the near future, considering all the mushy overtures and flying kisses emanating from Riyadh and Abu Dhabi over the last few days!

Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7181
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Wiki Leaks on Af-Pak

Postby Amber G. » 27 Jul 2010 21:30

enqyoob wrote:So who leaked 90,000 Pentagon documents on an ongoing war to the "media", knowing fully well that if it wasn't authorized, they could go to jail for the rest of their lives? ....
.

They are saying that the documents (most if not virtually all), (even if they are labelled 'secret'), are NOT 'classified' (or 'unauthorized' kind which sends people to jail)


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: saip, srin, suryag and 48 guests