But those weren’t chickens coming home, they were Apache attack helicopters. And the roost wasn’t their own, it was the Taliban’s.
Unfortunately for members of the Pakistani Frontier Corps, that roost was also at one of their outposts:
NATO helicopters and fighter jets attacked two military outposts in northwest Pakistan near the Afghan border on Saturday, killing as many as 28 troops and plunging U.S.-Pakistan relations deeper into crisis.
Pakistan retaliated by shutting down vital NATO supply routes into Afghanistan, used for sending in nearly half of the alliance’s shipments by land.
The attack is the worst incident of its kind since Pakistan uneasily allied itself with Washington immediately following the September 11, 2001 attacks on U.S. targets.
Relations between the United States and Pakistan, its ally in the war on militancy, have been strained following the killing of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden by U.S. special forces in a raid on the Pakistani garrison town of Abbottabad in May, which Pakistan called a flagrant violation of sovereignty.
Ugly on its face, and certain to further inflame the ever-combustible Pakistani body politic and their military masters. But the invaluable Bill Roggio at the Long War Journal provides some much needed context:
The US has also conducted several cross-border attacks while in “hot pursuit” of Taliban forces. ISAF has maintained that it has the right to pursue retreating Taliban forces “after following the proper rules of engagement under inherent right of self defense.” [See LWJ report, Pakistan closes NATO supply route after latest US cross-border attack]
The US has pursued Taliban fighters across the border multiple times in the past. Two of the most high-profile incidents occurred in 2008, and three others took place in 2010. The first took was in June 2008, when US troops pursued a Taliban force from Kunar into Mohmand, and killed 11 fighters. The Pakistani government claimed that the US killed Frontier Corps troops, but the US released video of the incident showing the Taliban being targeted as they fled from Kunar into Mohmand. Pakistan’s paramilitary Frontier Corps is known to support the Taliban in Afghanistan.
The second incident took place in Khyber in November 2008, when US forces launched rocket attacks and ground strikes into the Tirah Valley, a known haven for al Qaeda, the Taliban, and the Lashkar-e-Islam. Seven people were reported killed and three were wounded in the strikes.
The last three such incidents took place in the fall of 2010, when US helicopters attacked Haqqani Network fighters crossing back into the Pakistani tribal agencies of North Waziristan and Kurram after the terror group attacked US bases in Khost and Paktia provinces. More than 50 Haqqani Network fighters were reported killed in the Kurram attacks. Pakistan claimed two Frontier Corps troops were killed.
Kill our guys, or provide aid and comfort to those who do, and we’ll kill you right back, seems to be the message here. Claims of “sovereignty” being little more than a fig leaf to cover all but open hostilities.
But Pakistan needs US aid, and so long as we’ve got boots on deck in Afghanistan, the US will need the Pakistani logistics pipeline. Sadly, that’s about the entire extent of the overlap between the two nominal allies’ interests. When the clock runs out in Afghanistan, as it will someday soon, the US will no longer need that pipeline. The Pakistani army, having “successfully” asserted a position for itself in deciding whatever comes next in Afghanistan and “preserving strategic depth” against their Indian nemesis, should concern itself with whether it will still need US aid. They can play the China card of course, but once the US is out they may find that China’s renmimbi comes attached with more conditions than does the US dollar, and that the loss of sovereignty can have many meanings.
I suspect we’ll see more of this, rather than less, as NATO tries desperately to find an honorable exit.
Pakistan has just officially asked us to leave the drone base over there, the base they would neither confirm nor deny the existence of before. Looks like we’ll need to look for a new logistical pipeline and they’ll be out some military aid funding (God willing).
Yes, but is this merely for show…or a serious attempt to toss the US out?
I’m convinced that Pakistan is playing with dry nitrogen iodide…thinking it’s table salt. And they won’t realize the danger until India, the United States, and possibly Israel decide it’s time Pakistan was no longer a nuclear power.
Whacky Pakis are not the only method for getting supplies to AFGHN, just the shortest. Based on past issues, the military have developed other routes in case of this type of issue
” Encompassing multiple routes into Afghanistan from the north, the utilizes existing commercial routes. Coming through Eastern Europe and the Caucasuses, across the Black Sea, through Georgia and Azerbaijan, routes continue by land as well as across the Caspian Sea and through the Central Asian states before entering into Afghanistan via northern border crossings” – https://www.navsup.navy.mil/scnewsletter/2009/may-june/cover4
The Vactioner-in-Chief is poised to use an early retreat from AFGHN as one of his strongest salvos in the 2012 campaign. This isn’t about what’s right or needed, it will be all about politics.
From a AP article yesterday – Gen. James F. Amos, commandant of the Marine Corps, said in an Associated Press interview that the number of Marines in Helmand province will drop “markedly” in 2012, and the role of those who stay will shift from countering the insurgency to training and advising the Afghan security forces.
The change suggests an early exit from Afghanistan for the Marine Corps, even as the prospects for solidifying their recent successes are uncertain.
“Am I OK with that? The answer is ‘yes,’” Amos said. “We can’t stay in Afghanistan forever.”
He added: “Will it work? I don’t know.”
Translated, that is MARINE SPEAK for ” I’m not allowed to say what I really think.” Those in command who have done so have been given a ticket to retirement.
The only other logical explaination for this marked change in plan is fiscal pressure. While that too is a valid reason, I see the timing of this shift in policy all too advantageous for the Vactioner-in-Chief’s personal goals.
Pakistan is overplaying its hand yet again, it would seem. Tough to do against the junior varsity (Donilon, Clinton, Obama, et. al.) but they are managing.
Play the China card? China wants less than nothing to do with Pakistan. Seems the Great Game South holds no interest or inherent strategic or operational advantage for the wily Chinee.
Say what you want about Musharraf, he knew what side his bread was buttered on. This gang? Not so much. They are working their way to being Half-Life-istan.
I understand the Red Chinks are building a Naval Base in Pakistan. They do have a use for the Paks, but if they want anything from the Chinese, they won’t be able to act as they have with us. Or it will be as Mojo says below.
Our immediate response to the burning of 150 NATO transports should be the reduction in aid to the Paks by the amount of the damages.
At some point we will have to cut off all aid and shift to sanctions — and to make a hard turn toward India, including working together with that government to install anti-ballistic missile defenses to protect India as well as our assets in the region.
There are so many areas where the current administration is dropping the ball — foreign policy, energy policy, domestic policy, fiscal policy, monetary policy. I begin to wonder on whose side The Won is on. It all begins to hang together as either mind-boggling incompetence or careful strategy.
Re: China connection:
The Han would eat them alive, with plum sauce.
Good kills under hot pursuit, and their should be no (real) apology from our side.
However, we are wasting our time, blood and treasure in Afghanistan and need to get the heck out ASAP. Then, we need to cut the money we are wasting bribing our frenemies in Pocki-stahn.
Declare victory and bring our forces and their gear home.
Short of annihilation, there is little that can be done to fix the jihad tendencies of the adherents of “the religion of peace” in that region.
If they threaten U.S. vital interests, (but not their interminable internal tribal warfare) then we go squash those particular bugs in a brutal fashion and leave.
Whoever rules Pakistan and Afghanistan deserve what they get.
OK, now I know for sure. The One went book shopping today … and their choice of reading matter seals the deal:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_OBAMA_SHOPPING?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-11-26-15-17-01
The Obamas walked out with a selection of books including “The Invention of Hugo Cabret,” “Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Cabin Fever” and “Descent into Chaos: The U.S. and the Disaster in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Central Asia.”
He doesn’t have a clue, so he has got to read up on how to create the defeat and blame it on Bush.
Greetings:
There’s something to be said for that pursuit stuff. T.R. Fehrenbach seems to think that the Comanches didn’t enjoy it at all.
I’m wondering what American politics would look like if the news media was as astute and informative as your blog, Lex. Maybe you should go on like Lt. Col Ollie North and become a news commentator.
While we would be much better off, I think it would result in less time for Lex to throw fighter jets through the air, resulting in him being worse off.
I’m wondering what American politics would look like if the news media was as astute and informative as your blog, Lex. Maybe you should go on like Lt. Col Ollie North and become a news commentator. It’d be a breath of fresh air to America – though I’m not sure Americans by the millions are ready for the harsh glare of enlightenment and truth to be thrown open on their eyes so quickly. It might be akin to asserting the earth revolved around the sun a few years ago pre-renaissance. Loving it though!
Just found this. Looks like the Taliban sucked us into a bad engagement, so we could hoist our forces on our own petard. I’m thinking very likely, what with all the videos out there that show such types attacks in detail, and the comms for the engagements. I think that allows a gathering of sufficient intell to allow you to plan the circumstances…I know they make cool entertainment, and show how rigidly we maintain ROE discipline, but I can’t help but think the adaptable enemy used such volumes of video to help seal this deal.