PESHAWAR: The Saddar and Qissa Khwani bazaars remained completely sealed again on Tuesday to avert any terrorist attack. Motorists were diverted to other routes and only pedestrians were allowed to enter Saddar Road and Qissa Khwani, causing hardships to customers, commuters and traders.
The offices of Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) on the Arbab Road in Saddar were closed Tuesday morning on the instructions of the police. There were reports that the PIA premises could be targetted by the terrorists. The offices were got vacated and security tightened to avert an attack. Way back in 1986, the PIA offices were bombed killing five people, including the airlines staffers and visitors, and injuring many others.
Police contingents have been deployed at over 100 check points to search vehicles entering the city limits. There are checkposts along the Ring Road, in the suburbs and within the urban limits.
Despite all precautionary measures, a suicide bomber once again succeeded in hitting his target in the most sensitive part of Peshawar where the Sessions Courts, the Home Department, MPAs Hostel, the Governor’s House, Civil Secretariat and the Central Prison are located.
“Why hundreds of policemen are posted at such a large number of security checkpoints when they could not stop the entry of suicide bombers due to absence of sophisticated gadgetry. Amid this so-called strictest security that only bothers the public, bombers have succeeded in striking targets thrice on Khyber Road, once in Meena Bazaar and once outside the Sessions Courts causing a huge loss of precious lives,” said Mohammad Idrees Bacha, a leader of the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz from Sakhakot who is running his business in Peshawar.
A senior officer of the police disclosed the force had only six detectors and 12 sniffers for the entire provincial metropolis that was why the terrorists succeeded in their designs.A detector can find explosives within a 100 meters radius when the cops handling the machine continue walking all over.
“We have requested for explosive detectors for at least half of the over 100 security checkpoints to ensure foolproof security. The lower quality of explosive-detector costs Rs2.2 million while a scanner costs Rs130 million,” the official said.
He admitted majority of the cops even don’t know how to handle explosive detectors and sniffers. “We are looking for other modern gadgetry and have talked to people abroad to look for more sophisticated scanners,” he added.
The Frontier Police chief Malik Naveed Khan told The News they had ordered explosive-detectors and other gadgets but import of the devices takes time. “We will soon be able to detect explosives in a car by getting the required gadgetry. We are looking for devices that can detect explosives even from 500 metres,” he said.
People are concerned over the hollow claims of senior government officials and security officials about improvement in the situation. “They just make these claims to get media coverage. Nothing really has been done to improve the situation,” said Engineer Suleman.
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Peshawar Police foil terror bid
Peshawar police on Tuesday foiled a terror bid in Bakhshupul area of the city when they defused four bombs weighing 40 kilogrammes each, a private TV channel reported.The channel said police, after receiving a tip off about a possible terror bid in Bakhshupul area, dispatched the Bomb Disposal Squad (BDS) to the area, which defused all four bombs planted in the area.BDS Inspector General Shafqat Malik said the bombs could have destroyed everything within a 100-kilometre radius had they not been defused.
Editorial: Countrywide threat
Daily Times
Pakistan is the target of terrorist attacks almost every day now. The spread and range of attacks seems to be widening with each passing day. On December 7 we saw two major cities — Peshawar and Lahore — being targeted and the very next day the office of a sensitive agency in Multan was also rocked by blasts. A suicide bomber blew himself up at the Peshawar Sessions Court while the twin blasts in Lahore occurred at the Moon Market, which is considered one of the busiest markets in the city.
Attacks in three major cities of Pakistan highlight the reach of the militants. The terrorist network seems not only to be strengthening, its choice of targets too is widening. In Peshawar they targeted the judiciary; in Lahore they targeted civilians, including women and children, while in Multan they targeted the security agencies. The militants have targeted the security forces time and again; the GHQ attack proved that they have the means to target one of the best guarded places in the country. Security checkposts, offices of intelligence agencies, the Naval Complex, police academies, etc., have been the target of the militants. To execute attacks against the high-profile security apparatus takes more time and planning while targeting civilians is a far easier task. Now there is a generalised terror campaign against the public. This is a serious threat for the entire country.
The government and the security agencies need to take stock of the situation and come up with new strategies to counter this rise in terrorist activity. They also need to stop living in denial about certain things. For terrorist attacks in Peshawar and surrounding areas, it can be said that there is an involvement of the local people or militants from FATA, but can the same thing be said about Lahore or Multan? For a long time now the authorities have not been very forthright about the seminaries in south Punjab. There is a strong presence of jihadi outfits in south Punjab and if we do not take steps to deal with them immediately, it would be too late and there might be another ‘South Waziristan’ on our hands very soon. It seems as if the nexus between other jihadi organisations and the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) is getting stronger. Intelligence reports have also warned of terrorist attacks in Karachi at the airport, hospitals, and against foreigners. Karachi is already a tinderbox waiting to explode. The ethnic divide in the city has led to many casualties in the past and if the terrorists manage to give an ethnic colouring to the attacks, the situation could become serious. After the Lahore attack, the authorities said that since it is a large city, it is hard to monitor activities citywide. These remarks apply with greater force in Karachi.
One of the inherent difficulties in countering terrorism is devising a mechanism to prevent these attacks. For that we need good intelligence and police work so that pre-emptive action could be taken. Only then can a terrorist attack be stopped. Once the attack is launched, it is very difficult to stop it. The terrorists have launched a campaign to paralyse state institutions and intimidate the public. There is a dire need to launch a public awareness campaign about suspicious characters, vehicles and objects and to persuade the public to report these to the concerned authorities. The state’s security agencies cannot be present everywhere. In order to prevent catastrophes, the state needs to mobilise the public. The public can be the eyes and ears of the state. A political consensus is needed to launch this campaign. Rehman Malik’s efforts to bring the ulema on board are commendable, but now it is time that all political parties come together and launch a countrywide campaign against terrorism.
Pakistan is the target of terrorist attacks almost every day now. The spread and range of attacks seems to be widening with each passing day. On December 7 we saw two major cities — Peshawar and Lahore — being targeted and the very next day the office of a sensitive agency in Multan was also rocked by blasts. A suicide bomber blew himself up at the Peshawar Sessions Court while the twin blasts in Lahore occurred at the Moon Market, which is considered one of the busiest markets in the city.
Attacks in three major cities of Pakistan highlight the reach of the militants. The terrorist network seems not only to be strengthening, its choice of targets too is widening. In Peshawar they targeted the judiciary; in Lahore they targeted civilians, including women and children, while in Multan they targeted the security agencies. The militants have targeted the security forces time and again; the GHQ attack proved that they have the means to target one of the best guarded places in the country. Security checkposts, offices of intelligence agencies, the Naval Complex, police academies, etc., have been the target of the militants. To execute attacks against the high-profile security apparatus takes more time and planning while targeting civilians is a far easier task. Now there is a generalised terror campaign against the public. This is a serious threat for the entire country.
The government and the security agencies need to take stock of the situation and come up with new strategies to counter this rise in terrorist activity. They also need to stop living in denial about certain things. For terrorist attacks in Peshawar and surrounding areas, it can be said that there is an involvement of the local people or militants from FATA, but can the same thing be said about Lahore or Multan? For a long time now the authorities have not been very forthright about the seminaries in south Punjab. There is a strong presence of jihadi outfits in south Punjab and if we do not take steps to deal with them immediately, it would be too late and there might be another ‘South Waziristan’ on our hands very soon. It seems as if the nexus between other jihadi organisations and the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) is getting stronger. Intelligence reports have also warned of terrorist attacks in Karachi at the airport, hospitals, and against foreigners. Karachi is already a tinderbox waiting to explode. The ethnic divide in the city has led to many casualties in the past and if the terrorists manage to give an ethnic colouring to the attacks, the situation could become serious. After the Lahore attack, the authorities said that since it is a large city, it is hard to monitor activities citywide. These remarks apply with greater force in Karachi.
One of the inherent difficulties in countering terrorism is devising a mechanism to prevent these attacks. For that we need good intelligence and police work so that pre-emptive action could be taken. Only then can a terrorist attack be stopped. Once the attack is launched, it is very difficult to stop it. The terrorists have launched a campaign to paralyse state institutions and intimidate the public. There is a dire need to launch a public awareness campaign about suspicious characters, vehicles and objects and to persuade the public to report these to the concerned authorities. The state’s security agencies cannot be present everywhere. In order to prevent catastrophes, the state needs to mobilise the public. The public can be the eyes and ears of the state. A political consensus is needed to launch this campaign. Rehman Malik’s efforts to bring the ulema on board are commendable, but now it is time that all political parties come together and launch a countrywide campaign against terrorism.
Peace rally denounces terrorism in country
PESHAWAR: A protest rally organised by Amn Tehreek (AT) against terrorism was held here on Tuesday. Large number of people from all walks of life participated in the rally to condemn recent wave of terrorism in the country. The rally demanded of the government to bring the perpetrators to justice. The rally was led by Convener Amn Tehreek Muhammad Idrees Kamal. Other who participated in the rally included Peshawar Press Club President Shamim Shahid, Dr. Syed Alam Mehsood, member of Tajir Itehad Khalid Ayub, members of Women Action Forum Rakhshanda Naaz, Samina Afridi, Nusrat Bibi. The participants of the rally were holding placards and banners inscribed with slogans 'no to suicide attacks, no to terrorism'. The rally started from Peshawar Press Club and peacefully ended at Sessions Court's gate where a huge suicide explosion occurred on Monday last. They laid down floral wreath at the gate of sessions court to express solidarity with the members of bereaved families and paid tribute to the martyrs. The participants chanted slogans against suicide bomb blasts and demanded for exposing elements behind these coward acts of terrorism. They urged Ulema and Masaik-e-Kiram to openly speak up against suicide attacks and supported the government’s stance in fight against militancy and terrorism. The protestors demanded the government to arrest real culprits and award exemplary punishment to masterminds of the suicide and bomb blasts to avoid such attacks in future.
No room for false moves in Pakistan
www.guardian.co.uk
Immensely problematic though Afghanistan has become, Pakistan is emerging as a far bigger, potentially more dangerous challenge to western security interests, officials and analysts in Kabul say. The west's central dilemma is how to obtain Islamabad's full support in "degrading" al-Qaida, Taliban and other militant Islamist groups on both sides of the Durand line – the British-designated de facto Afghan-Pakistani border – without fatally undermining the Pakistani government's legitimacy in the eyes of its own people.
"Pakistan is the big coming problem," one analyst here said. "The US and Nato countries have to convince the Pakistanis that they are not going to cut and run in Afghanistan [as happened after Soviet troops withdrew in 1989 and again, arguably, after the Taliban regime was overthrown in 2001].
"Three-quarters of Pakistan's borders are contested, by the Iranians in the west, along the Durand line, by India in Kashmir, by China. Pakistan would prefer an unstable Afghanistan to a hostile one. It worries what India might do there. If we want their help, we have to be able to offer Pakistan geopolitical stability," the analyst said.
Speaking before Barack Obama unveiled his revamped Af-Pak strategy last week, US officials described Pakistani co-operation as essential to achieving western objectives. "We can't succeed [in Afghanistan] without Pakistan," one official said. "And if you don't win in Afghanistan, then Pakistan will automatically be imperilled, and that will make Afghanistan look like child's play."
Yet Obama's speech was notable for its vagueness about Pakistan's role. "We will strengthen Pakistan's capacity to target those groups that threaten our countries, and have made it clear that we cannot tolerate a safe haven for terrorists," he said.
Obama gave no new indications as to how this might be achieved, beyond the additional economic and development aid and intelligence assistance already offered, or what the US would do if its wishes were ignored.
Washington is ostensibly worried that public admonitions or hectoring could backfire. But General James Jones, Obama's national security adviser, reportedly exhibited no such inhibitions during a private visit to Islamabad last month. Jones is said to have warned that if Pakistan did not deliver, the US might be impelled to use "any means at its disposal" to secure the border region. This implied a threatening escalation in a country that already feels its sovereignty is under assault from American drone attacks.
The area in question, known historically as Pashtunistan, was deliberately divided by Henry Durand and the British in 1893. It is home to about 15 million Pashtuns on the Afghan side and 28 million on the Pakistan side. They do not see themselves as belonging to either state; nearly all the Taliban forces come from there. It is the quintessential "ungoverned space".
Yet despite all this, western officials say Pakistani leaders, preoccupied with the strategic challenge posed by their old enemy, India, have still to make a "strategic shift" away from the Afghan Taliban, who it sponsored in the 1990s.
In particular, tougher Pakistani action is sought against the so-called Quetta shura, the Taliban's ideological headquarters, and militant groups bent on provoking confrontation with India.
"For the Pakistanis, the Afghan Taliban are still an insurance policy. We have to persuade them that the Taliban are a threat, not an ally, and that the result of [the US-led surge] will be stable, friendly Afghanistan," one official said. Trying to provide such reassurance, Obama has offered to facilitate an India-Pakistan rapprochement, a demarche that has met with a deafening silence on both sides.
One possible consequence, should the US over-reach, could be the collapse of President Asif Ali Zardari's weak and unpopular administration. Conspiracy theorists say this may be Washington's intention; that it may prefer to deal with the Pakistani military, as during the era of former strongman General Pervez Musharraf.
Maleeha Lodhi, a Pakistani former diplomat and influential columnist, says frenetic western cajoling is fraught with risks for Pakistan, where anti-American sentiment is widespread and extremists are pursuing a daily campaign of terror attacks to destabilise the country.
"Intensified fighting in Afghanistan, far from diminishing the threat of more instability in Pakistan, will enhance it. The military escalation on Pakistan's border could produce a spillover of militants," Lodhi said. "It will enhance the vulnerability of US-Nato ground supply routes … Protecting these supply lines will overstretch Pakistani forces at present engaged in quashing the Pakistani Taliban.
"The surge could also lead to an influx of more Afghan refugees. It could also provoke a spike in violent reprisals in Pakistan … It is therefore imperative for Islamabad to try to persuade the US to modify its strategy," she said.
Trouble is, Obama, like Gordon Brown, is a man in a hurry with a war to win. One political shove too hard, one cross-border drone attack too many, or another Mumbai-style attack by Pakistani-based groups on an Indian target, and Pakistan could swiftly join the descent into chaos.
Immensely problematic though Afghanistan has become, Pakistan is emerging as a far bigger, potentially more dangerous challenge to western security interests, officials and analysts in Kabul say. The west's central dilemma is how to obtain Islamabad's full support in "degrading" al-Qaida, Taliban and other militant Islamist groups on both sides of the Durand line – the British-designated de facto Afghan-Pakistani border – without fatally undermining the Pakistani government's legitimacy in the eyes of its own people.
"Pakistan is the big coming problem," one analyst here said. "The US and Nato countries have to convince the Pakistanis that they are not going to cut and run in Afghanistan [as happened after Soviet troops withdrew in 1989 and again, arguably, after the Taliban regime was overthrown in 2001].
"Three-quarters of Pakistan's borders are contested, by the Iranians in the west, along the Durand line, by India in Kashmir, by China. Pakistan would prefer an unstable Afghanistan to a hostile one. It worries what India might do there. If we want their help, we have to be able to offer Pakistan geopolitical stability," the analyst said.
Speaking before Barack Obama unveiled his revamped Af-Pak strategy last week, US officials described Pakistani co-operation as essential to achieving western objectives. "We can't succeed [in Afghanistan] without Pakistan," one official said. "And if you don't win in Afghanistan, then Pakistan will automatically be imperilled, and that will make Afghanistan look like child's play."
Yet Obama's speech was notable for its vagueness about Pakistan's role. "We will strengthen Pakistan's capacity to target those groups that threaten our countries, and have made it clear that we cannot tolerate a safe haven for terrorists," he said.
Obama gave no new indications as to how this might be achieved, beyond the additional economic and development aid and intelligence assistance already offered, or what the US would do if its wishes were ignored.
Washington is ostensibly worried that public admonitions or hectoring could backfire. But General James Jones, Obama's national security adviser, reportedly exhibited no such inhibitions during a private visit to Islamabad last month. Jones is said to have warned that if Pakistan did not deliver, the US might be impelled to use "any means at its disposal" to secure the border region. This implied a threatening escalation in a country that already feels its sovereignty is under assault from American drone attacks.
The area in question, known historically as Pashtunistan, was deliberately divided by Henry Durand and the British in 1893. It is home to about 15 million Pashtuns on the Afghan side and 28 million on the Pakistan side. They do not see themselves as belonging to either state; nearly all the Taliban forces come from there. It is the quintessential "ungoverned space".
Yet despite all this, western officials say Pakistani leaders, preoccupied with the strategic challenge posed by their old enemy, India, have still to make a "strategic shift" away from the Afghan Taliban, who it sponsored in the 1990s.
In particular, tougher Pakistani action is sought against the so-called Quetta shura, the Taliban's ideological headquarters, and militant groups bent on provoking confrontation with India.
"For the Pakistanis, the Afghan Taliban are still an insurance policy. We have to persuade them that the Taliban are a threat, not an ally, and that the result of [the US-led surge] will be stable, friendly Afghanistan," one official said. Trying to provide such reassurance, Obama has offered to facilitate an India-Pakistan rapprochement, a demarche that has met with a deafening silence on both sides.
One possible consequence, should the US over-reach, could be the collapse of President Asif Ali Zardari's weak and unpopular administration. Conspiracy theorists say this may be Washington's intention; that it may prefer to deal with the Pakistani military, as during the era of former strongman General Pervez Musharraf.
Maleeha Lodhi, a Pakistani former diplomat and influential columnist, says frenetic western cajoling is fraught with risks for Pakistan, where anti-American sentiment is widespread and extremists are pursuing a daily campaign of terror attacks to destabilise the country.
"Intensified fighting in Afghanistan, far from diminishing the threat of more instability in Pakistan, will enhance it. The military escalation on Pakistan's border could produce a spillover of militants," Lodhi said. "It will enhance the vulnerability of US-Nato ground supply routes … Protecting these supply lines will overstretch Pakistani forces at present engaged in quashing the Pakistani Taliban.
"The surge could also lead to an influx of more Afghan refugees. It could also provoke a spike in violent reprisals in Pakistan … It is therefore imperative for Islamabad to try to persuade the US to modify its strategy," she said.
Trouble is, Obama, like Gordon Brown, is a man in a hurry with a war to win. One political shove too hard, one cross-border drone attack too many, or another Mumbai-style attack by Pakistani-based groups on an Indian target, and Pakistan could swiftly join the descent into chaos.
MQM observes black day across Pakistan
KARACHI: Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM), Chief Altaf Hussain on Tuesday said each and every citizen of Pakistan must come out and play a role in telling the world that we are brave and oppose all types of terrorism.
The MQM chief said that disappointment was not the cure for terrorism and the nation must struggle against it with courage.
Altaf Hussain was addressing, via telephone from London, participants of rallies, protests and meetings arranged by the MQM in different parts of the country including Karachi, Hyderabad, Lahore and other districts of Punjab.
Hussain said that terrorists were enemies of the country and innocent citizens were losing their lives in acts of terror.
The MQM chief called upon the people to constitute committees against terrorism in their respective areas and convey reports about suspicious activities to security agencies.
He also repeated his suggestion about the formulation of a National Counter Terrorism Policy (NCTP) and the establishment of a permanent institution to stop militancy.
He called upon the electronic media to present effective programs against terrorism and boycott all those who provide direct or indirect support to the Taliban.
Altaf Hussain saluted personnel of the security forces who were sacrificing their lives in the fight against terrorism. He also paid tributes to the mothers of the martyred personnel of the security forces.
He also called for settlement of the Balochistan situation in accordance with the aspiration of the people of the province. He was of the opinion that it was the need of the hour that the people of Balochistan are awarded their due rights.
The MQM chief said that he will come back to Pakistan if the people give him permission to return to the country.
Fear grips Pakistan’s cultural capital after attacks
LAHORE: ‘Nobody knows whether they will come home alive or not,’ said Khalid Mahmood, a 52-year-old taxi driver in Lahore, after the latest bloody strike on Pakistan’s once peaceful cultural capital.
Residents are living in fear after the deadliest attack yet on Lahore — twin bomb blasts on a busy market in the heart of the city at nightfall on Monday that left 49 people dead and scores more wounded.
Home to ancient Mughal monuments and grand colonial buildings, Lahore residents like to think their city is a cut above the rest of Pakistan — a hallowed centre of education, intellectual thought and a cultural bellwether.
Students mill around cafes and galleries and flock to the theatre at night, but Pakistan’s second biggest city had recently found itself in the Taliban’s cross-hairs, with six militant strikes this year killing about 133 people.
‘Bloodshed is spreading in the city, people are afraid and worry about their future,’ Mahmood said.
‘Life is becoming miserable, there is fear and threats to our life everywhere... We are very worried about our children — we feel restless until they come back from school.’
On Monday, two bombs planted 30 metres (yards) apart blew up within seconds of each other at the bustling Moon Market in central Lahore, engulfing the area in flames as people were milling around the shops and restaurants.
Police and rescue officials have put the death toll at 49 with 150 others injured, and government officials have blamed Taliban militants avenging a military offensive against them in the northwest.
‘You never know when the curse, the terror will hit and where. I lost several friends in the Moon Market bombing. Just 15 minutes before the blasts, I passed through that market,’ said Suhail Iqbal, a 48-year-old filmmaker.
‘Now the militants are targetting women and children. They want to destroy our families and it makes me more worry, everybody is worried.’
Residents have watched in recent months as road blocks, sand bags and blast walls have sprung up around the city, backing up already congested traffic where land cruisers compete for space with horse-and-carts.
Tahir Kamran, who heads the history department at Lahore’s Government College University, told AFP in an interview last month that militants wanted to destabilise Pakistan, and thus targeted Lahore.
‘Lahore is very, very important. In many ways it’s more important than Islamabad and Karachi because of culture, because now it has become the knowledge centre — opinion is formed mostly from Lahore,’ he said.
Many of the nation’s senior military figures also hail from Punjab province, of which Lahore is the capital.
In March, masked gunmen opened fire on the visiting Sri Lankan cricket team in Lahore, killing eight people, wounding six players and destroying Pakistan’s hopes of hosting international cricket.
Similar commando-style assaults hit three police centres on October 15. Forty people were killed after gunmen attacked with suicide vests and grenades.
Although most Taliban attacks hit the northwest and are plotted in the tribal belt near Afghanistan, analysts say extremism has taken root in Punjab, the most populous province in Pakistan.
Its residents are taking no chances. Taxi driver Mahmood has already lost a friend and a relative in bombings, and he says he must protect his family.
‘My wife and family members are avoiding bazaars and markets. We are living a restless life, a life of fear,’
Peshawarites live in fear of attacks
PESHAWAR: The provincial capital has become one of the most dangerous cities in the world to live in due to regular suicide attacks that have killed hundreds of innocent people in recent weeks.
The latest attack killed at least 11 people outside sessions courts here Monday.
Talking to BBC, dwellers of the city were of the view that those who have been living in the provincial metropolis for past many years are reluctant to leave the city despite uncertain security situation.
"Those who are financially strong enough are migrating from here. I am staying because I have to. I am unmarried and depend on my brothers.
I worry about the violence," said Rehana Saman.
"Once, on a Friday, I was walking to the bus stop on my own. I heard the noise of a blast and that sound was terrible. I almost fell down and was scared. I went home and asked my brother to accompany me to the bus stop. While we were waiting for the bus, we heard news that there was another blast so we had to go back home. Now, I avoid going out. We cannot plan to visit our relatives because there are so many uncertainties all around us," she maintained.
The residents said the recent spate of terrorism has completely changed life in the city where people avoid visiting bazaars owing to fear of suicide attacks.
"We have all changed our way of life in the city. Everyone is trying to avoid going to the bazaars. After every blast, we have to inform our relatives that we are safe and sound," said Majeed, a local trader.
Even some of the locals who witnessed blasts with their own eyes said that they have been finding it hard to come out of the trauma caused after seeing horrific scenes at the site of the incidents.
"It is a risky type of life in the city. I have witnessed many blasts and the scenes of blood and charred bodies still haunt me", said Muhammad Arif Afridi, a local student.
Once, I was studying in my room at about midday. I heard a huge blast. I went to the spot where the security forces had cordoned off the whole area. I looked around and there were many casualties there. After that, I went to the hospital to donate blood, he added.
Every person living in the city is psychologically in depression.
The latest attack killed at least 11 people outside sessions courts here Monday.
Talking to BBC, dwellers of the city were of the view that those who have been living in the provincial metropolis for past many years are reluctant to leave the city despite uncertain security situation.
"Those who are financially strong enough are migrating from here. I am staying because I have to. I am unmarried and depend on my brothers.
I worry about the violence," said Rehana Saman.
"Once, on a Friday, I was walking to the bus stop on my own. I heard the noise of a blast and that sound was terrible. I almost fell down and was scared. I went home and asked my brother to accompany me to the bus stop. While we were waiting for the bus, we heard news that there was another blast so we had to go back home. Now, I avoid going out. We cannot plan to visit our relatives because there are so many uncertainties all around us," she maintained.
The residents said the recent spate of terrorism has completely changed life in the city where people avoid visiting bazaars owing to fear of suicide attacks.
"We have all changed our way of life in the city. Everyone is trying to avoid going to the bazaars. After every blast, we have to inform our relatives that we are safe and sound," said Majeed, a local trader.
Even some of the locals who witnessed blasts with their own eyes said that they have been finding it hard to come out of the trauma caused after seeing horrific scenes at the site of the incidents.
"It is a risky type of life in the city. I have witnessed many blasts and the scenes of blood and charred bodies still haunt me", said Muhammad Arif Afridi, a local student.
Once, I was studying in my room at about midday. I heard a huge blast. I went to the spot where the security forces had cordoned off the whole area. I looked around and there were many casualties there. After that, I went to the hospital to donate blood, he added.
Every person living in the city is psychologically in depression.
No Talks with Terrorists.......Bilour
PESHAWAR: NWFP Senior Minister Bashir Ahmed Bilour on Tuesday ruled out talks with terrorists and militants and said the government is committed to establishing durable peace in the province’s restive areas.
Talking to reporters the ANP leader said there was no question of holding talks with the terrorists.
He said the ANP government after coming into power had brokered an agreement with the sole objective to establish peace in Swat. However, the militants did not reciprocate the goodwill gesture, he added.
Bilour said involvement of foreign hands in terror incidents could not be ruled out.
He said that Pakistani nation and government were united against terrorism, adding that, negotiations can only be possible if militants lay down their arms and accept the government’s writ.
Talking to reporters the ANP leader said there was no question of holding talks with the terrorists.
He said the ANP government after coming into power had brokered an agreement with the sole objective to establish peace in Swat. However, the militants did not reciprocate the goodwill gesture, he added.
Bilour said involvement of foreign hands in terror incidents could not be ruled out.
He said that Pakistani nation and government were united against terrorism, adding that, negotiations can only be possible if militants lay down their arms and accept the government’s writ.
US Defence Secretary Robert Gates in Kabul to meet with Karzai
US Defence Secretary Robert Gates flew into Kabul on Tuesday for talks with Afghan President Hamid Karzai and commanders about Washington's new strategy to send 30,000 extra troops to fight the Taliban.
His arrival marks the first official visit by the US administration since President Barack Obama last week announced he would raise to 100,000 the US deployment in Afghanistan to counter a rising Taliban insurgency.
The Pentagon has announced the first wave of 1,500 extra US Marines will begin arriving in southern Afghanistan next week as the top military officer said they had a short window to seize back the initiative from the Taliban.
"We want to talk with President Karzai and (defence) Minister Wardak about the president's decision and the implementation of that decision, how we will use our troops and the additional troops from our allies in partnership with the Afghan national security forces," Gates told journalists on the plane.
The Pentagon chief said he would also raise the issue of stepping up the training and retention of Afghanistan's fledgling army and police, a cornerstone of Obama's strategy which hopes to bring a quick end to the war.
In an interview with CNN, Karzai said Afghans wanted to be in charge of security "sooner, rather than later" but said it would take two years to train Afghan forces to the point where they can lead operations in many areas.
Gates said he was seeking to reassure Kabul of the United States' long-term commitment, despite Obama's plan to start drawing down US troops in July 2011, which has raised concerns in Afghanistan and neighbouring Pakistan.
"Another major message will be the importance of a long-term relationship between the United States, ISAF (the NATO-run multinational force based in the country) and Afghanistan," he told reporters.
With Karzai poised to unveil his cabinet after a fraud-tainted re-election, under Western pressure to crack down on graft, Gates emphasised "the importance for us of capable, honest ministers in areas that are critical for our success, such as defence and interior".
He said both the current defence minister and Interior Minister Hanif Atmar "are very capable people".
Gates will also hold talks with top US and NATO commanders, but not the overall commander on the ground, US General Stanley McChrystal, who is due to testify before Congress in Washington later Tuesday.
With military commanders Gates is due to discuss the logistical challenges facing the influx of reinforcements after signing deployment orders for the first wave of 17,000 more US troops that will arrive early next year.
"It's going to require a lot of efforts," Gates told reporters.
He will also meet US troops to "tell them we're in this to win".
Speaking to young Marines preparing to head off to war, Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the clock was ticking and that US-led forces had to break the momentum of the Islamist insurgents.
"We've got about 18 to 24 months," Mullen told a gathering of Marines at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina.
Gates' visit to Kabul comes four days after more than 1,000 US Marines, British troops and Afghan forces launched a major offensive in the southern province of Helmand, a Taliban heartland and primary opium-growing area.
Most of the first wave of extra US troops will be going to Helmand and neighbouring province Kandahar, the spiritual capital of the Taliban and the scene of the worst fighting eight years after the 2001 US-led invasion ousted the Taliban.
Soaring violence has made this year the deadliest since the Taliban fell from power, killing record numbers of civilians, Afghan and foreign troops.
His arrival marks the first official visit by the US administration since President Barack Obama last week announced he would raise to 100,000 the US deployment in Afghanistan to counter a rising Taliban insurgency.
The Pentagon has announced the first wave of 1,500 extra US Marines will begin arriving in southern Afghanistan next week as the top military officer said they had a short window to seize back the initiative from the Taliban.
"We want to talk with President Karzai and (defence) Minister Wardak about the president's decision and the implementation of that decision, how we will use our troops and the additional troops from our allies in partnership with the Afghan national security forces," Gates told journalists on the plane.
The Pentagon chief said he would also raise the issue of stepping up the training and retention of Afghanistan's fledgling army and police, a cornerstone of Obama's strategy which hopes to bring a quick end to the war.
In an interview with CNN, Karzai said Afghans wanted to be in charge of security "sooner, rather than later" but said it would take two years to train Afghan forces to the point where they can lead operations in many areas.
Gates said he was seeking to reassure Kabul of the United States' long-term commitment, despite Obama's plan to start drawing down US troops in July 2011, which has raised concerns in Afghanistan and neighbouring Pakistan.
"Another major message will be the importance of a long-term relationship between the United States, ISAF (the NATO-run multinational force based in the country) and Afghanistan," he told reporters.
With Karzai poised to unveil his cabinet after a fraud-tainted re-election, under Western pressure to crack down on graft, Gates emphasised "the importance for us of capable, honest ministers in areas that are critical for our success, such as defence and interior".
He said both the current defence minister and Interior Minister Hanif Atmar "are very capable people".
Gates will also hold talks with top US and NATO commanders, but not the overall commander on the ground, US General Stanley McChrystal, who is due to testify before Congress in Washington later Tuesday.
With military commanders Gates is due to discuss the logistical challenges facing the influx of reinforcements after signing deployment orders for the first wave of 17,000 more US troops that will arrive early next year.
"It's going to require a lot of efforts," Gates told reporters.
He will also meet US troops to "tell them we're in this to win".
Speaking to young Marines preparing to head off to war, Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the clock was ticking and that US-led forces had to break the momentum of the Islamist insurgents.
"We've got about 18 to 24 months," Mullen told a gathering of Marines at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina.
Gates' visit to Kabul comes four days after more than 1,000 US Marines, British troops and Afghan forces launched a major offensive in the southern province of Helmand, a Taliban heartland and primary opium-growing area.
Most of the first wave of extra US troops will be going to Helmand and neighbouring province Kandahar, the spiritual capital of the Taliban and the scene of the worst fighting eight years after the 2001 US-led invasion ousted the Taliban.
Soaring violence has made this year the deadliest since the Taliban fell from power, killing record numbers of civilians, Afghan and foreign troops.
Bomb blast in Multan leaves 12 dead
MULTAN: A bomb explosion at a security check post in Multan Tuesday killed at least 12 people and injured 18 others.
The explosion took place at the security post in the Qasim Bela area of Multan cantonment and damaged several buildings.
‘We have recovered 12 dead bodies and more than 18 injured. Most of the dead are civilians,’ said emergency services official doctor Kaleemullah, who was at the site of the blast.
‘There were also some security men among the dead. This building belongs to the army. It's badly damaged.’
Multan's police chief Saood Aziz told AFP the explosives appeared to have been planted in a small pick-up truck, but it was not immediately clear if it was a suicide attack, while the exact target was also unknown.
Multan is in Punjab province, which is still reeling from twin bomb blasts in its capital Lahore on Monday that killed at least 49 people and wounded 150 more at a busy market in the centre of the city.
This is also the first time Multan has been hit during a surge of violence that began in October and has already killed more than 400 people.
The explosion took place at the security post in the Qasim Bela area of Multan cantonment and damaged several buildings.
‘We have recovered 12 dead bodies and more than 18 injured. Most of the dead are civilians,’ said emergency services official doctor Kaleemullah, who was at the site of the blast.
‘There were also some security men among the dead. This building belongs to the army. It's badly damaged.’
Multan's police chief Saood Aziz told AFP the explosives appeared to have been planted in a small pick-up truck, but it was not immediately clear if it was a suicide attack, while the exact target was also unknown.
Multan is in Punjab province, which is still reeling from twin bomb blasts in its capital Lahore on Monday that killed at least 49 people and wounded 150 more at a busy market in the centre of the city.
This is also the first time Multan has been hit during a surge of violence that began in October and has already killed more than 400 people.
Pakistan Told to Ratchet Up Fight Against the Taliban
NEWYORKTIMES
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is turning up the pressure on Pakistan to fight the Taliban inside its borders, warning that if it does not act more aggressively the United States will use considerably more force on the Pakistani side of the border to shut down Taliban attacks on American forces in Afghanistan, American and Pakistani officials said.
The blunt message was delivered in a tense encounter in Pakistan last month, before President Obama announced his new war strategy, when Gen. James L. Jones, Mr. Obama’s national security adviser, and John O. Brennan, the White House counterterrorism chief, met with the heads of Pakistan’s military and its intelligence service.
United States officials said the message did not amount to an ultimatum, but rather it was intended to prod a reluctant Pakistani military to go after Taliban insurgents in Pakistan who are directing attacks in Afghanistan.
For their part the Pakistanis interpreted the message as a fairly bald warning that unless Pakistan moved quickly to act against two Taliban groups they have so far refused to attack, the United States was prepared to take unilateral action to expand Predator drone attacks beyond the tribal areas and, if needed, to resume raids by Special Operations forces into the country against Al Qaeda and Taliban leaders.
A senior administration official, asked about the encounter, declined to go into details but added quickly, “I think they read our intentions accurately.”
A Pakistani official who has been briefed on the meetings said, “Jones’s message was if that Pakistani help wasn’t forthcoming, the United States would have to do it themselves.”
American commanders said earlier this year that they were considering expanding drone strikes in Pakistan’s lawless tribal areas, but General Jones’s comments marked the first time that the United States bluntly told Pakistan it would have to choose between leading attacks against the insurgents inside the country’s borders or stepping aside to let the Americans do it.
The recent security demands followed an offer of a broader strategic relationship and expanded intelligence sharing and nonmilitary economic aid from the United States. Pakistan’s politically weakened president, Asif Ali Zardari, replied in writing to a two-page letter that General Jones delivered from Mr. Obama. But Mr. Zardari gave no indication of how Pakistan would respond to the incentives, which were linked to the demands for greatly stepped-up counterterrorism actions.
“We’ve offered them a strategic choice,” one administration official said, describing the private communications. “And we’ve heard back almost nothing.” Another administration official said, “Our patience is wearing thin.”
Asked Monday about the exchange, Tommy Vietor, a White House spokesman, said, “We have no comment on private diplomatic correspondence. As the president has said repeatedly, we will continue to partner with Pakistan and the international community to enhance the military, governance and economic capacity of Afghanistan and Pakistan.”
The implicit threat of not only ratcheting up the drone strikes but also launching more covert American ground raids would mark a substantial escalation of the administration’s counterterrorism campaign.
American Special Operations forces attacked Qaeda militants in a Pakistani village near the border with Afghanistan in early September 2008, in the first publicly acknowledged case of United States forces conducting a ground raid on Pakistani soil.
But the raid caused a political furor in Pakistan, with the country’s top generals condemning the attack, and the United States backed off what had been a planned series of such strikes.
During his intensive review of Pakistan and Afghanistan strategy, officials say, Mr. Obama concluded that no amount of additional troops in Afghanistan would succeed in their new mission if the Taliban could retreat over the Pakistani border to regroup and resupply. But the administration has said little about the Pakistani part of the strategy.
“We concluded early on that whatever you do with Pakistan, you don’t want to talk about it much,” a senior presidential aide said last week. “All it does is get backs up in Islamabad.”
During his speech at West Point last week, Mr. Obama said that “our success in Afghanistan is inextricably linked to our partnership with Pakistan.” But for the rest of the speech he referred to the country in the past tense, talking about how “there have been those in Pakistan who’ve argued that the struggle against extremism is not their fight, and that Pakistan is better off doing little or seeking accommodation with those who use violence.”
He never quite said how his administration views the Pakistanis today, and two officials said that Mr. Obama used that construction in an effort not to alienate the current government or the army, led by Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani.
Even before Mr. Obama announced his decision last week, the White House had approved an expansion of the C.I.A.’s drone program in Pakistan’s lawless tribal areas. A missile strike from what was said to be a United States drone in the tribal areas killed at least three people early Tuesday, according to Pakistani intelligence officials, The Associated Press reported.
Pakistani officials, wary of civilian casualties and the appearance of further infringement of national sovereignty, are still in discussions with American officials over whether to allow the C.I.A. to expand its missile strikes into Baluchistan for the first time — a politically delicate move because it is outside the tribal areas. American commanders say this is necessary because Mullah Omar, the Taliban leader who ran Afghanistan before the 2001 invasion, and other Taliban leaders are hiding in Quetta, the capital of Baluchistan Province.
Pakistani officials also voice concern that if the Pakistani Army were to aggressively attack the two groups that most concern the United States — the Afghan Taliban leaders and the Haqqani network based in North Waziristan — the militants would respond with waves of retaliatory bombings, further undermining the weak civilian government.
Publicly, senior American officials and commanders take note of that concern. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton arrived in Pakistan in late October with offers of a strategic partnership. But General Jones followed Mrs. Clinton two weeks later carrying more sticks than carrots, American officials said.
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is turning up the pressure on Pakistan to fight the Taliban inside its borders, warning that if it does not act more aggressively the United States will use considerably more force on the Pakistani side of the border to shut down Taliban attacks on American forces in Afghanistan, American and Pakistani officials said.
The blunt message was delivered in a tense encounter in Pakistan last month, before President Obama announced his new war strategy, when Gen. James L. Jones, Mr. Obama’s national security adviser, and John O. Brennan, the White House counterterrorism chief, met with the heads of Pakistan’s military and its intelligence service.
United States officials said the message did not amount to an ultimatum, but rather it was intended to prod a reluctant Pakistani military to go after Taliban insurgents in Pakistan who are directing attacks in Afghanistan.
For their part the Pakistanis interpreted the message as a fairly bald warning that unless Pakistan moved quickly to act against two Taliban groups they have so far refused to attack, the United States was prepared to take unilateral action to expand Predator drone attacks beyond the tribal areas and, if needed, to resume raids by Special Operations forces into the country against Al Qaeda and Taliban leaders.
A senior administration official, asked about the encounter, declined to go into details but added quickly, “I think they read our intentions accurately.”
A Pakistani official who has been briefed on the meetings said, “Jones’s message was if that Pakistani help wasn’t forthcoming, the United States would have to do it themselves.”
American commanders said earlier this year that they were considering expanding drone strikes in Pakistan’s lawless tribal areas, but General Jones’s comments marked the first time that the United States bluntly told Pakistan it would have to choose between leading attacks against the insurgents inside the country’s borders or stepping aside to let the Americans do it.
The recent security demands followed an offer of a broader strategic relationship and expanded intelligence sharing and nonmilitary economic aid from the United States. Pakistan’s politically weakened president, Asif Ali Zardari, replied in writing to a two-page letter that General Jones delivered from Mr. Obama. But Mr. Zardari gave no indication of how Pakistan would respond to the incentives, which were linked to the demands for greatly stepped-up counterterrorism actions.
“We’ve offered them a strategic choice,” one administration official said, describing the private communications. “And we’ve heard back almost nothing.” Another administration official said, “Our patience is wearing thin.”
Asked Monday about the exchange, Tommy Vietor, a White House spokesman, said, “We have no comment on private diplomatic correspondence. As the president has said repeatedly, we will continue to partner with Pakistan and the international community to enhance the military, governance and economic capacity of Afghanistan and Pakistan.”
The implicit threat of not only ratcheting up the drone strikes but also launching more covert American ground raids would mark a substantial escalation of the administration’s counterterrorism campaign.
American Special Operations forces attacked Qaeda militants in a Pakistani village near the border with Afghanistan in early September 2008, in the first publicly acknowledged case of United States forces conducting a ground raid on Pakistani soil.
But the raid caused a political furor in Pakistan, with the country’s top generals condemning the attack, and the United States backed off what had been a planned series of such strikes.
During his intensive review of Pakistan and Afghanistan strategy, officials say, Mr. Obama concluded that no amount of additional troops in Afghanistan would succeed in their new mission if the Taliban could retreat over the Pakistani border to regroup and resupply. But the administration has said little about the Pakistani part of the strategy.
“We concluded early on that whatever you do with Pakistan, you don’t want to talk about it much,” a senior presidential aide said last week. “All it does is get backs up in Islamabad.”
During his speech at West Point last week, Mr. Obama said that “our success in Afghanistan is inextricably linked to our partnership with Pakistan.” But for the rest of the speech he referred to the country in the past tense, talking about how “there have been those in Pakistan who’ve argued that the struggle against extremism is not their fight, and that Pakistan is better off doing little or seeking accommodation with those who use violence.”
He never quite said how his administration views the Pakistanis today, and two officials said that Mr. Obama used that construction in an effort not to alienate the current government or the army, led by Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani.
Even before Mr. Obama announced his decision last week, the White House had approved an expansion of the C.I.A.’s drone program in Pakistan’s lawless tribal areas. A missile strike from what was said to be a United States drone in the tribal areas killed at least three people early Tuesday, according to Pakistani intelligence officials, The Associated Press reported.
Pakistani officials, wary of civilian casualties and the appearance of further infringement of national sovereignty, are still in discussions with American officials over whether to allow the C.I.A. to expand its missile strikes into Baluchistan for the first time — a politically delicate move because it is outside the tribal areas. American commanders say this is necessary because Mullah Omar, the Taliban leader who ran Afghanistan before the 2001 invasion, and other Taliban leaders are hiding in Quetta, the capital of Baluchistan Province.
Pakistani officials also voice concern that if the Pakistani Army were to aggressively attack the two groups that most concern the United States — the Afghan Taliban leaders and the Haqqani network based in North Waziristan — the militants would respond with waves of retaliatory bombings, further undermining the weak civilian government.
Publicly, senior American officials and commanders take note of that concern. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton arrived in Pakistan in late October with offers of a strategic partnership. But General Jones followed Mrs. Clinton two weeks later carrying more sticks than carrots, American officials said.
Pakistan Told to Ratchet Up Fight Against the Taliban
NEWYORKTIMES
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is turning up the pressure on Pakistan to fight the Taliban inside its borders, warning that if it does not act more aggressively the United States will use considerably more force on the Pakistani side of the border to shut down Taliban attacks on American forces in Afghanistan, American and Pakistani officials said.
The blunt message was delivered in a tense encounter in Pakistan last month, before President Obama announced his new war strategy, when Gen. James L. Jones, Mr. Obama’s national security adviser, and John O. Brennan, the White House counterterrorism chief, met with the heads of Pakistan’s military and its intelligence service.
United States officials said the message did not amount to an ultimatum, but rather it was intended to prod a reluctant Pakistani military to go after Taliban insurgents in Pakistan who are directing attacks in Afghanistan.
For their part the Pakistanis interpreted the message as a fairly bald warning that unless Pakistan moved quickly to act against two Taliban groups they have so far refused to attack, the United States was prepared to take unilateral action to expand Predator drone attacks beyond the tribal areas and, if needed, to resume raids by Special Operations forces into the country against Al Qaeda and Taliban leaders.
A senior administration official, asked about the encounter, declined to go into details but added quickly, “I think they read our intentions accurately.”
A Pakistani official who has been briefed on the meetings said, “Jones’s message was if that Pakistani help wasn’t forthcoming, the United States would have to do it themselves.”
American commanders said earlier this year that they were considering expanding drone strikes in Pakistan’s lawless tribal areas, but General Jones’s comments marked the first time that the United States bluntly told Pakistan it would have to choose between leading attacks against the insurgents inside the country’s borders or stepping aside to let the Americans do it.
The recent security demands followed an offer of a broader strategic relationship and expanded intelligence sharing and nonmilitary economic aid from the United States. Pakistan’s politically weakened president, Asif Ali Zardari, replied in writing to a two-page letter that General Jones delivered from Mr. Obama. But Mr. Zardari gave no indication of how Pakistan would respond to the incentives, which were linked to the demands for greatly stepped-up counterterrorism actions.
“We’ve offered them a strategic choice,” one administration official said, describing the private communications. “And we’ve heard back almost nothing.” Another administration official said, “Our patience is wearing thin.”
Asked Monday about the exchange, Tommy Vietor, a White House spokesman, said, “We have no comment on private diplomatic correspondence. As the president has said repeatedly, we will continue to partner with Pakistan and the international community to enhance the military, governance and economic capacity of Afghanistan and Pakistan.”
The implicit threat of not only ratcheting up the drone strikes but also launching more covert American ground raids would mark a substantial escalation of the administration’s counterterrorism campaign.
American Special Operations forces attacked Qaeda militants in a Pakistani village near the border with Afghanistan in early September 2008, in the first publicly acknowledged case of United States forces conducting a ground raid on Pakistani soil.
But the raid caused a political furor in Pakistan, with the country’s top generals condemning the attack, and the United States backed off what had been a planned series of such strikes.
During his intensive review of Pakistan and Afghanistan strategy, officials say, Mr. Obama concluded that no amount of additional troops in Afghanistan would succeed in their new mission if the Taliban could retreat over the Pakistani border to regroup and resupply. But the administration has said little about the Pakistani part of the strategy.
“We concluded early on that whatever you do with Pakistan, you don’t want to talk about it much,” a senior presidential aide said last week. “All it does is get backs up in Islamabad.”
During his speech at West Point last week, Mr. Obama said that “our success in Afghanistan is inextricably linked to our partnership with Pakistan.” But for the rest of the speech he referred to the country in the past tense, talking about how “there have been those in Pakistan who’ve argued that the struggle against extremism is not their fight, and that Pakistan is better off doing little or seeking accommodation with those who use violence.”
He never quite said how his administration views the Pakistanis today, and two officials said that Mr. Obama used that construction in an effort not to alienate the current government or the army, led by Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani.
Even before Mr. Obama announced his decision last week, the White House had approved an expansion of the C.I.A.’s drone program in Pakistan’s lawless tribal areas. A missile strike from what was said to be a United States drone in the tribal areas killed at least three people early Tuesday, according to Pakistani intelligence officials, The Associated Press reported.
Pakistani officials, wary of civilian casualties and the appearance of further infringement of national sovereignty, are still in discussions with American officials over whether to allow the C.I.A. to expand its missile strikes into Baluchistan for the first time — a politically delicate move because it is outside the tribal areas. American commanders say this is necessary because Mullah Omar, the Taliban leader who ran Afghanistan before the 2001 invasion, and other Taliban leaders are hiding in Quetta, the capital of Baluchistan Province.
Pakistani officials also voice concern that if the Pakistani Army were to aggressively attack the two groups that most concern the United States — the Afghan Taliban leaders and the Haqqani network based in North Waziristan — the militants would respond with waves of retaliatory bombings, further undermining the weak civilian government.
Publicly, senior American officials and commanders take note of that concern. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton arrived in Pakistan in late October with offers of a strategic partnership. But General Jones followed Mrs. Clinton two weeks later carrying more sticks than carrots, American officials said.
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is turning up the pressure on Pakistan to fight the Taliban inside its borders, warning that if it does not act more aggressively the United States will use considerably more force on the Pakistani side of the border to shut down Taliban attacks on American forces in Afghanistan, American and Pakistani officials said.
The blunt message was delivered in a tense encounter in Pakistan last month, before President Obama announced his new war strategy, when Gen. James L. Jones, Mr. Obama’s national security adviser, and John O. Brennan, the White House counterterrorism chief, met with the heads of Pakistan’s military and its intelligence service.
United States officials said the message did not amount to an ultimatum, but rather it was intended to prod a reluctant Pakistani military to go after Taliban insurgents in Pakistan who are directing attacks in Afghanistan.
For their part the Pakistanis interpreted the message as a fairly bald warning that unless Pakistan moved quickly to act against two Taliban groups they have so far refused to attack, the United States was prepared to take unilateral action to expand Predator drone attacks beyond the tribal areas and, if needed, to resume raids by Special Operations forces into the country against Al Qaeda and Taliban leaders.
A senior administration official, asked about the encounter, declined to go into details but added quickly, “I think they read our intentions accurately.”
A Pakistani official who has been briefed on the meetings said, “Jones’s message was if that Pakistani help wasn’t forthcoming, the United States would have to do it themselves.”
American commanders said earlier this year that they were considering expanding drone strikes in Pakistan’s lawless tribal areas, but General Jones’s comments marked the first time that the United States bluntly told Pakistan it would have to choose between leading attacks against the insurgents inside the country’s borders or stepping aside to let the Americans do it.
The recent security demands followed an offer of a broader strategic relationship and expanded intelligence sharing and nonmilitary economic aid from the United States. Pakistan’s politically weakened president, Asif Ali Zardari, replied in writing to a two-page letter that General Jones delivered from Mr. Obama. But Mr. Zardari gave no indication of how Pakistan would respond to the incentives, which were linked to the demands for greatly stepped-up counterterrorism actions.
“We’ve offered them a strategic choice,” one administration official said, describing the private communications. “And we’ve heard back almost nothing.” Another administration official said, “Our patience is wearing thin.”
Asked Monday about the exchange, Tommy Vietor, a White House spokesman, said, “We have no comment on private diplomatic correspondence. As the president has said repeatedly, we will continue to partner with Pakistan and the international community to enhance the military, governance and economic capacity of Afghanistan and Pakistan.”
The implicit threat of not only ratcheting up the drone strikes but also launching more covert American ground raids would mark a substantial escalation of the administration’s counterterrorism campaign.
American Special Operations forces attacked Qaeda militants in a Pakistani village near the border with Afghanistan in early September 2008, in the first publicly acknowledged case of United States forces conducting a ground raid on Pakistani soil.
But the raid caused a political furor in Pakistan, with the country’s top generals condemning the attack, and the United States backed off what had been a planned series of such strikes.
During his intensive review of Pakistan and Afghanistan strategy, officials say, Mr. Obama concluded that no amount of additional troops in Afghanistan would succeed in their new mission if the Taliban could retreat over the Pakistani border to regroup and resupply. But the administration has said little about the Pakistani part of the strategy.
“We concluded early on that whatever you do with Pakistan, you don’t want to talk about it much,” a senior presidential aide said last week. “All it does is get backs up in Islamabad.”
During his speech at West Point last week, Mr. Obama said that “our success in Afghanistan is inextricably linked to our partnership with Pakistan.” But for the rest of the speech he referred to the country in the past tense, talking about how “there have been those in Pakistan who’ve argued that the struggle against extremism is not their fight, and that Pakistan is better off doing little or seeking accommodation with those who use violence.”
He never quite said how his administration views the Pakistanis today, and two officials said that Mr. Obama used that construction in an effort not to alienate the current government or the army, led by Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani.
Even before Mr. Obama announced his decision last week, the White House had approved an expansion of the C.I.A.’s drone program in Pakistan’s lawless tribal areas. A missile strike from what was said to be a United States drone in the tribal areas killed at least three people early Tuesday, according to Pakistani intelligence officials, The Associated Press reported.
Pakistani officials, wary of civilian casualties and the appearance of further infringement of national sovereignty, are still in discussions with American officials over whether to allow the C.I.A. to expand its missile strikes into Baluchistan for the first time — a politically delicate move because it is outside the tribal areas. American commanders say this is necessary because Mullah Omar, the Taliban leader who ran Afghanistan before the 2001 invasion, and other Taliban leaders are hiding in Quetta, the capital of Baluchistan Province.
Pakistani officials also voice concern that if the Pakistani Army were to aggressively attack the two groups that most concern the United States — the Afghan Taliban leaders and the Haqqani network based in North Waziristan — the militants would respond with waves of retaliatory bombings, further undermining the weak civilian government.
Publicly, senior American officials and commanders take note of that concern. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton arrived in Pakistan in late October with offers of a strategic partnership. But General Jones followed Mrs. Clinton two weeks later carrying more sticks than carrots, American officials said.