November 16, 2008
by intelNews
Ever since the United States began to engage in systematic military incursions and airstrikes against perceived terrorist targets in Pakistan, the Pakistani government has been vocally criticizing the Bush Administration for its “counterproductive” methods, which do not help “meet the objectives of the war on terror”, in the words of Mohammed Sadiq, Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry spokesman.
Now a new report by The Washington Post has disclosed that the US airstrikes and military incursions are in fact covered under a secret US-Pakistani high-level agreement, according to which “the US government refuses to publicly acknowledge the attacks while Pakistan’s government continues to complain noisily about the politically sensitive strikes”. Under the deal, the US government is said to have temporarily halted ground incursions, but regular airstrikes against targets in Pakistani territory have intensified.
Although this report will be denied by the Pakistani leadership, it rings accurate and is substantiated by the long and telling history of US-Pakistani security relations. It essentially signifies the continuation of the fundamentals of these relations, which appears to have remained untouched despite the recent change of guard in Islamabad.
The obvious ironic element in this development is highlighted by the recent comments of Pakistan’s President, Asif Ali Zardary, who candidly —and accurately— stated that the US strikes on Pakistani soil are “not good for our position of winning the hearts and minds of people”. Time magazine reports that “[o]pinion polls routinely show that an overwhelming majority of ordinary Pakistanis oppose US actions inside their country”. Yet “[t]he government has to respond to public sentiment, leading to harsh, uncompromising language from political and military leaders”.
This new development must not terminate the debate about the legality of the US military actions inside Pakistan. Even if the Pakistani government has authorized these actions, they still constitute extrajudicial assassinations. The latter are not justified by their reported sanctioning by the country’s elected regime. Nevertheless, this latest repot strengthens the increasing consensus of observers that, despite the recent change of guard in Islamabad, it is still business as usual in Pakistan’s relations with Washington. [JF]
.
Brennan withdraws from intelligence post consideration
November 26, 2008 by intelNews Leave a comment
On November 16, 2008, we reported that John Brennan, former head of the National Counterterrorism Center and supporter of so-called “enhanced interrogation techniques”, was said to be “a potential candidate for a top intelligence post” (the CIA) under Barack Obama. On November 22, a group of 200 psychology professionals issued an open letter to the US President-Elect, expressing strong concerns about the possibility of Brennan heading the CIA. Three days later, Brennan sent Obama a letter [pdf] requesting that his “name be withdrawn from consideration for a position within the Intelligence Community”. An Obama spokesman has confirmed that the President-Elect has accepted Brennan’s request. An ABC News commentator has correctly pointed out that “Brennan […] continues to work on the Obama Transition Team and though he removed his name from consideration for an Intelligence job, there’s nothing to say he won’t land a spot in the Obama administration”. [IA]
.
Filed under Expert news and commentary on intelligence, espionage, spies and spying Tagged with Barack Obama, CIA, John Brennan, News, United States