Popular Posts

Showing posts with label military. Show all posts
Showing posts with label military. Show all posts

Tuesday, June 28, 2011

UK military trainers withdrawn

27 June 2011 Last updated at 13:24 GMT Pakistan Frontier Corps paramilitaries Pakistan's Frontier Corps is often targeted by militants British military trainers working with security forces in Pakistan have been withdrawn at the request of the Pakistani government.

The trainers, believed to number about 20, were working with Pakistan's frontier constabulary - a paramilitary force on the front line of the fight against the Taliban and al-Qaeda.

The Ministry of Defence said it was due to "security concerns".

But it added that the withdrawal was temporary.

Strained relations

A spokeswoman said: "The UK has been asked to withdraw some of its training support teams on a temporary basis by the Pakistan government in response to security concerns.

"We are providing training support at the invitation of the Pakistan government and welcome their advice on these matters.

"The training teams will continue their own training and will be ready to redeploy at the first possible opportunity."

The United States has already had to bring home more than 100 military trainers.

The BBC's Orla Guerin, in Islamabad, said the £15m training programme looks like another casualty of the strained relations between Pakistan and its Western allies since US special forces killed Osama Bin Laden on 2 May.

Quick return

Pakistan is still smarting from the raid which it views as an attack on its sovereignty, she said.

It is understood some of the trainers remain in the region, so they could make a quick return.

The MoD said it was "not as if the relationship has come to a sour end".

Another British training programme covering improvised explosive devices has not been affected.

British military trainers have been training and assisting Pakistan's Frontier Corps in military operations as part of a three-year programme which started in 2010.

Sunday, June 26, 2011

Afghan drawdown creates risk, U.S. military warns (Reuters)

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. military warned on Thursday that President Barack Obama's faster-than-expected drawdown in Afghanistan created new risks, even as commanders said they backed the strategy to start winding down the unpopular, nearly decade-old war.

Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the U.S. military's Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the U.S. Congress that Obama's plans to withdraw nearly a third of the some 99,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan by the end of next summer was a riskier plan than he had wanted. Obama announced the withdrawal timetable on Wednesday.

"The president's decisions are more aggressive and incur more risk than I was originally prepared to accept," Mullen told a House of Representatives committee hearing in his first comments on Obama's plan.

Mullen later said the risks were still manageable and would not by themselves jeopardize the overall military mission.

His comments, while carefully phrased, were an unusually public expression of the Pentagon's initial unease with Obama's aggressive Afghan drawdown. In the run-up to Obama's decision, military leaders lobbied privately for more time, and outgoing Defense Secretary Robert Gates publicly said any troop withdrawal should be modest.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton acknowledged "lots of competing opinions coming at (Obama) from all sides." She, too, said she supported his decision.

In Kabul, Afghan President Hamid Karzai, Washington's ally in a relationship made tense by allegations of incompetence and corruption, welcomed the plan for a gradual pullout and said Afghans increasingly trusted their security forces.

European nations that have contributed troops to the military effort against the Afghan Taliban insurgency said they would also proceed with already-planned phased reductions.

But the Taliban, resurgent a decade after being toppled from power by U.S.-led forces following the September 11 attacks, dismissed the announcement and said only a full, immediate withdrawal of foreign forces could stop "pointless bloodshed."

They rejected any suggestion of U.S. military gains.

'RUSH TO THE EXITS'?

In a prime-time televised appearance on Wednesday, Obama said he would withdraw 10,000 troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2011, and a further 23,000 by the end of next summer. Remaining troops would be steadily withdrawn after that.

Nearly 70,000 U.S. soldiers will, however, remain in Afghanistan even after the cuts announced by Obama, about twice the number when he took office in January 2009.

Obama's decision divided Congress, with some lawmakers demanding a more rapid pullout and others branding Obama's drawdown as a dangerous political move to appease his Democratic base ahead of the 2012 presidential election.

Senator John McCain, a Republican who lost to Obama in the 2008 election, said "I think we're taking a huge unnecessary risk."

Republican Senator Charles Grassley called the pullout pace "very dangerous" and said he understood that General David Petraeus, the overall commander in Afghanistan, had recommended a slower withdrawal than the one Obama announced.

"The president's only consideration in all of this should be what is best for our national security, not finding some halfway point" with war critics, Grassley told Reuters.

But Undersecretary of Defense Michele Flournoy, appearing at the committee hearing alongside Mullen, said, "Clearly, this is not a 'rush to the exits' that will jeopardize our security gains."

Mullen also played down the possibility that security gains could be easily reversed. Bringing home troops offered some benefits, he said, including reinforcing the goal of putting Afghans in control of their own security by the end of 2014.

"The truth is, we would have run other kinds of risks by keeping more forces in Afghanistan longer. We would have made it easier for the Karzai administration to increase their dependency on us," Mullen said.

The Taliban has been pushed out of some areas of their southern heartland, but the insurgency has intensified along Afghanistan's eastern border with Pakistan and U.S. commanders have wanted to shift their focus to that area.

Still, Clinton, appearing separately before a Senate committee, acknowledged there was no military solution to the conflict and said the United States had a broad range of contacts in search of a political resolution.

Asked by Senator Jeanne Shaheen, a Democrat, if there was a possibility for a peace agreement with the Taliban, Clinton said, "I think there is, but I think that we're a long way from knowing what the realistic elements of such an agreement would be."

"I can only stress that we are committed to pursuing it, because it is the only path forward, there is no other path forward. Nobody is strong enough to really assert control," she said.

In another sign of the challenges ahead in transferring control to Afghan authorities, an Afghan court on Thursday overturned a quarter of the results from last year's fraud-tainted parliamentary election -- potentially plunging the country into a new political crisis.

Afghanistan has been in a state of political paralysis since the September 18 election, with a full cabinet still not in place after weeks of squabbling.

EUROPEANS CALL FOR GRADUAL PULLOUT

As the U.S. withdraws, so will its allies. France, Germany, Poland and Spain said they would proceed with a gradual drawdown.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy, like Obama seeking re-election next year, said in a statement that he would oversee a pullout "in a proportional manner and in a calendar comparable to the withdrawal of American reinforcements." France's 4,000-strong contingent is the fourth largest in Afghanistan.

German Defense Minister Guido Westerwelle said his country, with 4,800 troops in the increasingly violent north, hoped "to be able to reduce our own troop contingent for the first time" by the end of the year.

(Additional reporting by David Alexander, Susan Cornwell, Missy Ryan and Jim Wolf in Washington; David Brunnstrom in Brussels and Paul Tait and Hamid Shalizi in Kabul; editing by Sanjeev Miglani and Mohammad Zargham)

Thursday, June 23, 2011

Pakistani support for military action against militants drops - poll - Reuters India

 Volunteers help injured men to an ambulance from the site of a suicide attack during a Shi'ite procession in Quetta September 3, 2010. REUTERS/Rizwan Saeed/Files

Volunteers help injured men to an ambulance from the site of a suicide attack during a Shi'ite procession in Quetta September 3, 2010.

Credit: Reuters/Rizwan Saeed/Files

By Zeeshan Haider


ISLAMABAD | Wed Jun 22, 2011 12:49pm IST


ISLAMABAD (Reuters) - Domestic support for the Pakistani military's campaign against Islamist militant groups has waned in recent years, a poll by a U.S. group has found, showing deep-rooted opposition among the Pakistani public to the United States.


The findings of two Pew Research Center surveys will be disappointing for the United States, which wants its ally to deal forcefully with militants, particularly those fighting U.S.-led foreign forces across the border in Afghanistan who take refuge in northwestern Pakistani border enclaves.


The survey of 3,221 Pakistanis found that just 37 percent of them supported using the army to fight militants, which was 16 percent lower than two years ago, according to Pew.


For more Pakistan stories, click link.reuters.com/kac58m


Pakistan blog, click blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/


The surveys also showed that most Pakistanis -- 63 percent -- disapproved of the secret U.S. raid in May that killed Osama bin Laden, with 55 percent describing it as a "bad thing".


It was not clear if the respondents disapproved of the killing of the al Qaeda leader, who has not been popular in the country in recent years, or the secret U.S. raid which many people saw as a violation of Pakistan's sovereignty.


Only 12 percent of respondents had a positive view of the United States and only 8 percent had confidence in President Barack Obama "to do the right thing in world affairs", Pew said.


"Most Pakistanis see the United States as an enemy, consider it a potential military threat and oppose American-led anti-terrorism efforts," Pew said.


The overwhelming rejection of U.S. goals and efforts in the region puts Pakistan's U.S.-allied government and military in a difficult position in trying to please its people while working with the United States.


Although Pakistan said the death of bin Laden was a positive step in the battle against militancy, his killing by U.S. Navy SEALs in his Pakistani hideout seriously damaged already strained ties between the uneasy allies.


After the raid, the Pakistan army cut back the number of U.S. troops stationed in the country and ended their role in training Pakistani soldiers involved in fighting militants.


The Pakistan military also faced rare criticism at home for its failure to discover that the al Qaeda chief had been living in the country, apparently undetected, for years.


"OVERWHELMINGLY POPULAR"


But Pew said despite criticism after the bin Laden raid, the military remained "overwhelmingly popular", with 79 percent of respondents saying it had a good influence on the country.


The ratings for military chief General Ashfaq Kayani saw a slight decrease after the bin Laden raid with 52 percent of people favourable and 21 percent unfavourable.


Previously, Kayani was viewed positively by 57 percent, with 18 percent seeing him in a negative light.


Militants have stepped up attacks in recent weeks to avenge bin Laden's killing.


Pew said 55 percent of people surveyed were "very or somewhat worried" that the militants might take over Pakistan, though that fear was down from 69 percent two years ago.


Still, 63 percent considered Islamic extremism a problem although that was a decline from two years ago, when 79 percent said they were worried.


Views of al Qaeda and the Pakistani Taliban as threats have fluctuated over the years.


In 2009, 61 percent of Pakistanis viewed al Qaeda as a threat, dropping to 38 percent in 2010 and rising to 49 percent after bin Laden's death. The Taliban were seen as a very serious threat by 73 percent in 2009, but that had dropped to 54 percent.


Worryingly for the United States, 26 percent of respondents saw the Taliban regaining control in Afghanistan as good for Pakistan while 21 percent said it would be bad.


In 2010, 18 percent believed it would be good for Pakistan.


(Editing by Chris Allbritton and Robert Birsel)