Pakistan Security Brief – May 10, 2012

Northern Pakistan (Photo credit: Imran…)

U.S. to deny $800 million in aid to Pakistan; Prime Minister Gilani says there is “trust deficit” between Pakistan and U.S.; ISAF in talks with Pakistan about reopening NATO supply routes; India adopts tougher stance on Siachen; Al Qaeda leader Ayman al Zawahiri gives speech on Qur’an burning in Afghanistan; Gilani denies Pakistani authorities knew of bin Laden’s presence in Pakistan; Commission investigating Bannu jailbreak implicates government officials,police and jail staff; Pakistan successfully tests short range ballistic missile; Red Cross suspends most of its work in Pakistan.

U.S.-Pakistan Relations

• On Wednesday, a U.S. House of Representatives panel moved to cut the foreign aid budget by about 9 percent, denying the $800 million that the Obama administration “requested for training and equipping Pakistan’s military in counterinsurgency tactics.”[1]
• Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani told CNN that there is a “trust deficit” between Pakistan and the U.S., which is why Pakistan is attempting to negotiate “new terms of engagement and cooperation” with the U.S. In response to U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s remarks that Pakistan needs to do more to combat terrorism, Gilani said that Pakistan and its Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) Directorate were “already working” with the CIA and the U.S., and he questioned what more the U.S. wants.[2]

International Relations

• International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) Deputy Commander and British Army Lt. Gen. Adrian Bradshaw stated that the ISAF is in talks with Pakistan about reopening the NATO supply routes. The deputy commander said that even though ISAF was managing without the routes, it would be “extremely helpful” for ISAF and also financially beneficial for Pakistan if they were reopened.[3]
• British Home Secretary Theresa May and Prime Minister Gilani said on Thursday that Pakistan and the UK had a strong relationship and were working together to counter extremism and terrorism. Gilani said that the two countries were also cooperating on how to eliminate the threat of improvised explosive devices.[4]

India-Pakistan Relations

• During his third visit to the Siachen Glacier on May 3 to review the search and rescue operation at the avalanche site, Army Chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani told reporters that India had adopted a tougher stance on Siachen than in 1989. According to Kayani, India was now talking about redefining border lines and re-determining positions on the glacier.[5]

Where Do We Go From Here?

The Association of the United States Army (AUSA) emblem hangs in the Washington Convention Center in Washington D.C., on Oct 7, 2008. AUSA is a private, non-profit educational organization that supports America’s Army – Active, National Guard, Reserve, Civilians, Retirees and family members. Army photo by D. Myles Cullen (released) See more at Army.mil (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

May 3, 2012 | COL Louis H. Jordan, Jr

On January 5, 2012, the President announced new strategic guidance for the Department of Defense titled “Sustaining U.S. Global Leadership: Priorities for the 21st Century” to support proposed cuts in defense spending that are the result of the drawdown of U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. Simultaneously, lawmakers discussed the need to cut forces and change the retirement system for our military in an effort to gain efficiencies in a sort of 21st century “peace dividend.” A key point of this leaner strategy is a move away from a focus on an era of persistent conflict, to one which emphasizes emerging challenges in the Pacific beyond the Korean peninsula.

An element of the new strategy that will have a profound effect on all of us is the abandonment of the “two war paradigm,” which formed the basis of our current force structure and is now the foundation of the “renewed” concept of Air-Sea Battle (ASB). The former was treated as a code of belief by which all budgets were developed, and the latter, a recurring theory since the days of Billy Mitchell, that suggests that machines can do all things all the time. The reality of the matter is that the “Two Major Regional Conflicts” strategy is not absolute dogma, and ASB does not obviate the need for landpower. Even though the ASB concept is not fiscally driven, it is “fiscally informed” and does fit nicely in our challenging economic situation.

So where does that leave the Army? Actually, not in such a bad place, due to the opportunity that the new strategy provides. Opportunity comes in many shapes and sizes as well as from many directions. This one is coming from the end of a long war and some fiscal realities with which we, as a nation, must soon deal.

We have been at this crossroads before. In fact, this institution, the U.S. Army War College, was established by seizing such an opportunity after the Spanish-American War to solve military failings discovered during that conflict. Opportunity was taken hold of once again at the end of World War II with the creation of the Defense Establishment in 1947 and the Department of Defense in 1949, a concept rejected by the Morrow Board a mere 22 years earlier. Ironically, the end of the Vietnam War provided another opportunity, which resulted in the development of Airland Battle Doctrine to counter the possibility of the Cold War going “hot” on the North German Plain. In each case, we were facing a changing threat and a challenging world.

We have the opportunity to reshape our Army into a force that can continue to fulfill the three roles that the American public expects from its profession of arms and to do so within the construct of the new strategy and fiscal reality. Our Army, as the Chief of Staff of the Army so clearly stated in the February 2012 edition of the Association of the United States Army News, must be able to prevent conflict, enable allies and contain enemies, and ultimately win decisively and dominantly. At the same time, our working environment is changing to one which requires land forces to accomplish many nonconventional missions. There are a number of things we can do across the force, and it really means going back to our uniquely American philosophy found in our Constitution of maintaining a navy and raising an army. The American philosophical psyche has always been shy of a large standing army. It is one of the reasons we fought our revolution. So the natural tendency is to reduce the size of the Army after the end of hostilities. Navies however, maintain free access to trade routes. The Air Force falls into a similar category as the Navy by protecting interests of commerce in and from the air. The biggest difficulty that ground forces will face in the new challenging threat environment will be “anti-access” and “area denial” or A2/AD. New threats in the cyber world will require us to look at “terrain” differently. ASB addresses A2/AD. We can re-tool the Army to take advantage of ASB in several ways.

Yemen Crisis Situation Reports: Update 138

The unfolding terrorist plot is a reminder that al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), which has a sanctuary in Yemen, remains determined to attack the United States. Though targeted strikes have killed key AQAP leaders, the strikes have not fully disrupted its external operations. AQAP has benefitted from the successes of its insurgent arm, Ansar al Sharia, which is fighting to regain control of territory in the south.

Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) attempted to attack the United States. U.S. officials reported that a plot to detonate a bomb aboard a U.S.-bound airplane has been thwarted. The explosive device, seized in the last ten days outside of Yemen, is a more sophisticated version of the 2009 underwear bomb built by AQAP’s top bomb maker, Ibrahim al Asiri. Authorities allegedly detected the plot in April.

Ansar al Sharia militants are contesting the Yemeni military’s control of territory in Abyan governorate, despite reports that Yemeni troops had secured areas of Zinjibar. Militants attacked an army base southwest of Zinjibar Monday morning, killing at least 20 Yemeni soldiers and injuring dozens more. The militants also captured over two dozen troops. Two months ago, an attack killed over 100 soldiers. Last Thursday, Ansar al Sharia attacked a Yemeni military position near Bajdar, outside of Zinjibar. Clashes are also occurring outside of Lawder in Abyan, where militants continue to attack Yemeni army positions.

An airstrike reportedly killed AQAP operative Fahd al Quso Sunday. Quso, who was connected to the USS Cole bombing, was killed in Wadi Rafad in Shabwah governorate along with his companion, Nasser Lakdam. Ansar al Sharia confirmed Quso’s death. Popular Resistance Committees of civilian pro-government fighters reportedly killed AQAP member Bassam al Sayed in the Radfan area of Lahij governorate on May 7. Yemeni airstrikes have targeted militant positions in Lawder in Abyan governorate, killing five militants Saturday. Airstrikes also reportedly targeted militant positions Jaar on May 2 and in Mudia in Abyan on April 26.

Mystery death on Skype: What killed US captain in Afghanistan?

The captain, a chief nurse who deployed to Afghanistan in March, was speaking with his wife via Skype when he pitched forward. The Army is investigating but does not suspect foul play.

By Anna Mulrine, Staff writer / May 7, 2012

It is a mystery gripping the US military: What caused a US soldier at a base in Afghanistan to die during a video chat with his wife?

Capt. Bruce Kevin Clark, of Spencerport, N.Y., is pictured in an undated U.S. Army photo obtained by Reuters May 7.

Courtesy of U.S. Army/Reuters

 

Enlarge

Capt. Bruce Kevin Clark was speaking via Skype with his wife Susan Oreliana-Clark on May 1 when he was “suddenly knocked forward,” according to statement released by his wife on Sunday.

“There was no sign that CPT Clark was in any discomfort, nor did he indicate any alarm,” her statement noted.

Yet she did notice a disturbing detail after her husband collapsed forward out of the view of the computer’s video camera: “The closet behind him had a bullet hole in it.”

Afghanistan: 5 areas of concern after the US leaves

Oreliana-Clark promptly called family members and tried to reach military officials as the Skype chat feed continued and her husband did not respond to her voice.

“The Skype link continued for approximately two hours as CPT Clark’s family and friends stateside and in theater worked feverishly to send help.”

After two hours, military officials and Mrs. Clark say, two military personnel arrived in Clark’s room in Afghanistan “and appeared to check his pulse,” according to the Clark family statement.

His wife, who had been working “feverishly” to reach military officials, was “provided no details about his condition” by the troops who arrived on the scene.

Al-Qaida Presents Video Of American Hostage | Jih@d

by Florian Flade

Ever since Al-Qaida´s leader Dr.Ayman az-Zawahiri has claimed responsibility for holding an American citizen hostage in December 2011, experts and intelligence officials have been debating wether or not Al-Qaida´s claim was in fact true. Is the American director for “J.E. Austin Associates” in Pakistan, Warren Weinstein, who has kidnapped in Lahore (Pakistan) in August 2011 really held by Al-Qaida?

On Monday the terror network´s media outlet “As-Sahab” has released a video message by Weinstein, in which he urges the US government to fulfill the demands of Al-Qaida for his release.

“I would like to talk to President Obama and ask him and beg him to accept and respond to the demands of the Mujahidin”, Weinstein says in the video sitting at a table with food and books on it, “My life is in your hands Mr President. If you don´t accept the demands, then I die. It is important that you accept the demands.”

Pakistani sources have claimed Weinstein, who hails from Rockville (Maryland) was abducted from his home in Lahore by armed gunmen belonging to terrorist group “Lashkar e-Jhangvi”. The American was then allegedly transferred to the tribal region of North Waziristan and probably handed over to the Tehrik e-Taliban (TTP), a group known to cooperate with Al-Qaida.

Bin Laden documents at a glance

 (US Military Academy at West Point/ Associated Press ) – This handout document provided by the U.S. Military Academy at West Point shows page three , of four, of a handwritten document by Osama bin Laden. Letters from Osama bin Laden’s last hideaway, released by U.S. officials intent on discrediting his terror organization, portray a network weak, inept and under siege _ and its leader seemingly near wit’s end about the passing of his global jihad’s glory days.

• 
• 
• 
• 

• CAPTION
• FULLSCREEN

By Associated Press, Published: May 4

U.S. officials Thursday released a small sampling of the documents captured when U.S. special operations forces killed al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden last year in Pakistan. Some highlights:

ATTACK AMERICA: Bin Laden wanted al-Qaida to focus on the U.S. and not waste time and resources attacking other enemies such as Britain or trying to overthrow governments in the Muslim world.

Gallery

Images after Osama bin Laden’s death: As the anniversary of the May 2, 2011, death of Osama bin Laden approaches, here are images showing the compound where he was killed as well as Americans’ reactions to the news.

“Even though we have the chance to attack the British, we should not waste our effort to do so but concentrate on defeating America, which will lead to defeating the others, God willing,” reads one letter, which scholars believe was written by bin Laden or a top deputy. “We want to cut this tree at the root. The problem is that our strength is limited, so our best way to cut the tree is to concentrate on sawing the trunk of the tree.”

FEAR OF DRONES: The CIA’s unmanned aircraft had al-Qaida looking toward the sky. In one letter, bin Laden suggested getting most of al-Qaida’s members out of Waziristan, the lawless frontier area along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border that has been beset by U.S. drone airstrikes.

“The brothers who can keep a low profile and take the necessary precautions should stay, but move to new houses on a cloudy day” when visibility for U.S. drones is reduced, bin Laden wrote.

He also encouraged al-Qaida’s leaders to stay far from their troops to reduce the likelihood of being killed.

ON THE U.S. MEDIA: Like any public figures, bin Laden and his advisers were mindful of the media. Adam Gadahn, one of bin Laden’s spokesmen, provided a summary of his view of U.S. TV cable news.

“From the professional point of view, they are all on one level except (Fox News) channel which falls into the abyss as you know, and lacks neutrality too,” he wrote.

CNN seemed to be closely collaborating with the U.S. government, but its Arabic version was better, Gadahn wrote.

After Chávez, the Narcostate

Venezuelan leader Hugo Chávez has tried for 10 months to conceal the fact that he is losing his bout with cancer, determined to appear in command of his revolutionary regime and the nation’s future. This past Holy Week, however, television cameras captured him pleading for his life before a crucifix in his hometown church, his mother looking on without the slightest glint of hope on her face. Chávez’s raw emotion startled his inner circle and led some to question his mental health. As a result, according to my sources inside the presidential palace, Minister of Defense Gen. Henry Rangel Silva has developed a plan to impose martial law if Chávez’s deteriorating condition causes any hint of instability.

Pretty dramatic stuff. So why isn’t anyone outside Venezuela paying attention? Some cynics in that country still believe Chávez is hyping his illness for political advantage, while his most fervent followers expect him to make a miraculous recovery. The democratic opposition is cautiously preparing for a competitive presidential election set for Oct. 7 — against Chávez or a substitute. And policymakers in Washington and most regional capitals are slumbering on the sidelines.

In my estimation, the approaching death of the Venezuelan caudillo could put the country on the path toward a political and social meltdown. The military cadre installed by Chávez in January already is behaving like a de facto regime determined to hold onto power at all costs. And Havana, Tehran, Moscow, and Beijing are moving to protect their interests. If U.S. President Barack Obama were to show some energetic engagement as Chávez fades, he could begin to put the brakes on Venezuela’s slide, reverse Chávismo‘s destructive agenda, and reclaim a role for the United States in its own neighborhood. But if he fails to act, there will be hell to pay.

Sources close to Chávez’s medical team tell me that for months, his doctors have been doing little more than treating symptoms, trying to stabilize their workaholic patient long enough to administer last-ditch chemo and radiation therapies. In that moment of Chávez’s very public prayer for a miracle, he set aside his obsession with routing his opposition or engineering a succession of power to hardline loyalists. Perhaps he knows that his lieutenants and foreign allies are behaving as if he were already dead — consolidating power, fashioning a “revolutionary junta,” and plotting repressive measures.

Sri Lanka: Reactions to US Resolution at UNHRC

Filed under: Global Voices by Rezwan on Thursday, 12 April 2012

Image by indi/Flickr.

On 22 March, 2012, 24 countries voted in favour of a US resolution at a UN Human Rights Council meeting on Sri Lanka seeking to encourage the government to implement the recommendations made by the Lessons Learned and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) and also to credibly investigate allegations of human rights violations during the country’s long lasting civil war against the LTTE.

The move was vehemently opposed by Sri Lanka right from the start and the netizens also voiced their opinions.

Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka at Groundviews called the US resolution a big lie:

“One of the rankest untruths in the public domain today is that the US resolution is innocuous and unobjectionable because it only seeks to commit the government of Sri Lanka to implement its own LLRC report within a reasonable time frame.”

The boomerang effect: Could American cyberweapon be turned against us?

Written By Jeremy A. Kaplan, Alec Liu Published March 31, 2012

FoxNews.com

The 1983 movie “Wargames” depicted a dystopian vision of a computer-controlled armageddon. Today, cyberwar is very much a reality. (United Artists)

Viruses like Stuxnet and Duqu are the atom bombs of cyberwarfare, experts say, a key tool in U.S. and foreign military arsenals. But some worry that this new generation of digital weapons could be co-opted by enemy forces — and used against their creators.

After the Stuxnet virus hit Iran‘s nuclear power plants in 2010, it was collected and disseminated, falling into the hands of hackers and code-crafters worldwide. Richard Clarke, the former counterterrorism chief, is confident that the U.S. wrote the code — and may have allowed the U.S.’s greatest cyberweapon ever to leak into enemy hands.

“It got loose because there was a mistake,” Clarke said in an interview with the Smithsonian. ”And if you’re a computer whiz you can take it apart and you can say, ‘Oh, let’s change this over here, let’s change that over there.’ Now I’ve got a really sophisticated weapon. So thousands of people around the world have it and are playing with it.”

SUMMARY

The Stuxnet malware was the culmination of a vast technical and espionage effort that had one target in mind: Iran’s nuclear plans. Its success set back the Iranian program for years.

July 13, 2010: Stuxnet is discovered, though few realize what exactly it is.

Nov. 26, 2010: Experts begin to fully understand the implications of the malware.

Oct. 14, 2011: Duqu, the first clone of the Stuxnet virus, is discovered by Symantec researchers.

Feb. 14, 2012: Iran finally disables the Stuxnet virus, experts say.

“And if I’m right, the best cyberweapon the United States has ever developed, it then gave the world for free.”

Call it the boomerang effect — the weapon you designed to hit others can come right back at you.

And while many still disagree that the U.S. was responsible for Stuxnet, often citing Israel as a prime suspect, the software is now unquestionably out in the wild. What if someone used it against us? Can viruses in general be turned against their masters?

Yes and no, explained Liam O Murchu, a manager of operations at Symantec Security Response, where the firm has tirelessly analyzed Stuxnet and variants such as Duqu.

“From a practical view of what you can actually do, it would be very hard to take Stuxnet, reimage it, and target someone new without the source code,” O Murchu told FoxNews.com. “So from that point of view, it’s not so dangerous to have Stuxnet out in the wild right now. Even if you get your hands on it, you don’t have the source code to refashion it to do something else.”

Retired general and former CIA chief Michael Hayden thinks the issue is far more black and white.

“There are those out there who can take a look at this … and maybe even attempt to turn it to their own purposes,” he said in an interview with the CBS television show “60 Minutes” earlier this month.

“The best cyberweapon the US has ever developed, it then gave the world for free.”

The Iran Conflict Comes To The Caucasus

Mourners carry the coffin of Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan during his funeral in Tehran on January 13. Roshan is the fourth Iranian nuclear scientist to be assassinated in two years. Iran accuses Azerbaijan of colluding with Israel in the killings.

By Brian Whitmore

February 17, 2012

When police in Tbilisi discovered and defused a bomb on the car of an employee of the Israeli Embassy on February 13, it marked the second time in less than a month that the Jewish state’s diplomats had become the target of an attack in the South Caucasus.The other incident came in late January when Azerbaijani security officials said they had foiled an Iranian plot to assassinate the Israeli ambassador, a local rabbi, and other prominent Jews in that country. Police arrested two Azerbaijani nationals in connection with that plot.

In both cases, Iran has been named as the suspected mastermind. Israel publicly accused Tehran of being behind the aborted Tbilisi attack. And officials in Baku said the two Azerbaijani suspects arrested in January had collaborated on the alleged assassination plot with an Iranian citizen connected to that country’s security services.

Iran has denied involvement in either incident. But analysts say the two cases illustrate how Georgia and Azerbaijan — due to their proximity to Iran and their close relations with Israel and the United States — risk being drawn deeper into the quickly escalating conflict between Tehran on one side and Israel and the West on the other.